Open Access + Social Media = Competitive Advantage via MyScienceWork.com

Screen shot 2012-05-17 at 10.45.11 AM

In the push-and-pull between open access (OA) publishing models and that of traditional scientific journals, OA should not strive to prove it is as good as the latter; it can be better, and social media tools can give it that competitive edge. Learn how…

How whale hunting can improve scientific publishing

Minke-Whale-Hunting-Norway

Is it wrong for Norwegians to hunt whales? Is it unethical to do research on Minke whales killed for sale? If a researcher submits an article building on such data, is it wrong for an editor to publish it? These are just some of the questions raised in the story below. Click here to read more…

How journals manipulate the importance of research and one way to fix it

Böcker

Over 20% of researchers have been pressured by journal editors to modify their articles in ways that manipulate the reputation of the journal. Journals are ranked by the citation rates of the articles they publish. Editors can manipulate their journal’s ranking by asking authors to include more citations of other articles in that very journal…. Read More…

New approaches to quality control in publishing

There are four key components to publishing, and they’re all about to change. Ten years from now, publishing will be done in ways that we are only beginning to envisage. Politics and profit will of course compel these changes. But the specific innovations coming our way will be driven by a generation of tweeters, bloggers, status… Read More…

Publishing in the Adjacent Possible

The link below takes you to a video of my talk at the 6th Munin Conference, at which the theme was Enhancing Publications. In the talk, I explore Stuart Kauffman’s concept of the Adjacent Possible and imagine what it might mean in the context of thinking about the future of scientific publication. A very slightly… Read More…

Opacity in scientific publication: Do journals discriminate?

Watson & Crick’s 1953 article in Nature revealing the double-helix structure of DNA was not peer reviewed. Many scientists claim this paper presents the most important discovery of the 20th century. The peer review system is what gives science integrity. Yet this paper was published based on the evaluation of the editors that it was obviously true…. Read More…

Fix this blog!

What makes your blog successful? How can you get more readers and more comments? What leads someone to “subscribe” to your blog? How can you use your blog to feed your other activities ? I’ve been blogging for about 6 months, and these questions become more and more salient for me. I love generating the… Read More…

Negative results are important: Research Europe

“When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.” Sherlock Holmes in The Sign of the Four, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle Research fails. Almost always. Scientists discard hypotheses like so many untried drones, cast out to freeze before even getting a chance. This is the nature of research. It’s the… Read More…

Arsenic gives aspiration: Twitter and Open Access Publishing

Passionate researchers want to figure it out. We want to understand nature, to identify what is and why it is that way. We want to know. And when we know something, we want to tell others about it. But the way scientists communicate is outdated. The system is broken. And our attempts to fix it are… Read More…

Scientific publishing: Take a hike!

In Norway, we can freely and legally traverse uncultivated land, even it’s privately owned. Beaches, mountains, woods — all are open to anyone, anytime. Norwegians know about their Right of Access, and they know the responsibilities it implies. And, best of all, they use it!

We need a Scientific Right of Access.