Send us a link
In academia, assessment of grant proposals is the forward‐looking review, the laying out and checking of your research plan, while peer reviews in journals are the final, consolidatory scrutiny before publication. An important difference between these academic checkpoints and my, admittedly somewhat forced fashionista analogy, is that in academia the two stages of review take place independently of each other.
Golden OA creates a conflict of interest: in a situation where the number of scientists is larger than the number of available positions, both journals and scientists benefit from publishing as many articles as possible.
As the trade of personal health and medical data expands, it becomes necessary to improve legal frameworks for protecting patient anonymity, handling consent and ensuring the quality of data
A variety of bibliometric measures has been developed to supplant the Impact Factor to better assess the impact of individual research papers
For centuries people have been asking, “Why is there something rather than nothing?” Science has not been able to give us an answer so far. We still have to live with the basic statement that “Everything that is is, and it is as long as it keeps its identity, that is, its onticity”, which we may call the “Strong Ontic Principle”.
Advertising science as a driver of economic growth is a long‐term losing strategy.
Bibliometrics has become an integral part of research quality evaluation and has been changing the practice of research.
I have a dream…. that one day top‐quality science will be practised all over the world. Yes, I know: it's just another of my silly dreams.
Something is rotten in the state of academic publishing. But even those of us in the thick of it find it hard to pinpoint exactly what is wrong.
Scientists could achieve more fulfilled professional lives by embracing the skills needed for effective interaction with the public.
A large fraction of academic scientists are obsessed with the issue of 'when will I have done enough to complete my PhD?'
NIH's initiative to support and implement fairer competition for minority students is a welcome step to redress the exploitation of African Americans by science.
1. Give all scientists an annual, unconditional fixed amount of funding to conduct their research. 2. All funded scientists are obliged to donate a fixed percentage of all of the funding that they previously received to other researchers: the funding circulates through the community, converging on researchers that are expected to make the best use of it.
