For scientists, accessing what others publish is essential for research progress. Similarly, publishing our research results in high-impact scientific journals is a priority in our careers, especially in the early stages of our professional development . Publishing in these journals contributes to increasing our academic prestige, based on the visibility and impact of our publications. But, above […] … learn more→
Tag Archives: publishing

The financial trap of open science

Lawmakers worldwide want to talk to the Meta insider whose memoir is a US bestseller – after Zuckerberg took her to court
Ironically, Mark Zuckerberg’s attempts to muzzle his former employee, Sarah Wynn-Williams, once director of global public policy at Meta, seem to have created a bestseller. While Meta’s legal action successfully prevented Wynn-Williams (who worked there from 2011–17) from promoting her memoir, Careless People, her publisher has continued to promote it without her. In the week of its release, the […] … learn more→

Black Inc has asked authors to sign AI agreements. But why should writers help AI learn how to do their job?
Melbourne-based publisher Black Inc Books is seeking to partner with an unnamed AI company or companies and wants its authors to allow their work to be used to train artificial intelligence. Writers were reportedly asked to permit Black Inc the ability to exercise key rights within their copyright to help develop machine learning and AI systems. This includes using […] … learn more→

Bogus scientific papers are enriching fraudsters and slowing lifesaving medical research
Over the past decade, furtive commercial entities around the world have industrialized the production, sale and dissemination of bogus scholarly research. These paper mills are profiting by undermining the literature that everyone from doctors to engineers rely on to make decisions about human lives. It is exceedingly difficult to get a handle on exactly how big the […] … learn more→

Can you publish too many papers?
Competition for jobs and grants in academia has never been tougher. The constant drive to “publish or perish” can make you feel like your career will end unless your output is superhuman. Sometimes, it’s even before graduation as some programs demand publication before awarding a PhD. Adding to those worries are people whose output is […] … learn more→

Publishing in top ranked journals
Doctoral and emerging researchers often believe that they must, from the very get go, publish in highly ranked journals. Where does this idea come from. Well sometimes word of mouth. Sometimes universities may try to point researchers in the top ranked journal direction. Some universities actually offer clear instructions about what journals to choose via […] … learn more→

When is a paper published?
When a paper is published could seem obvious but this is not a trivial question. For some time now, a research article can display several different dates that can prove confusing when trying to work out when a scholarly publication is actually released. In the hardcopy print era, before the Web shook up the academic […] … learn more→

Making Australian research free for everyone to read sounds ideal. But the Chief Scientist’s open-access plan isn’t risk-free
Chief Scientist Cathy Foley is leading an open access strategy for Australia. Foley estimates the Australian government invests A$12 billion a year of public money in research and innovation only for most of the publications that eventuate to be locked behind a paywall, inaccessible to industry and the taxpayer. At the same time, Australian universities and […] … learn more→

Open access at no cost? Just ditch academic journals
Plan S is clear: science must be public and publicly funded research must be accessible by anyone. Like many colleagues, I am keen to see this happening. How to make it happen is, however, a different story. In an effort to liberalise the market, Plan S asked the publishers to disclose the price for open access […] … learn more→

Another journal rejection? Put on your helmet
I had two papers rejected this week: one by a psychiatry journal, the other by a business ethics journal. The former was a “desk rejection”, communicated via the usual cut-and-pasted paragraphs from an “associate editor”, whatever that is. The latter enclosed two reviews: one lukewarm, the other distinctly chilly. That paper had been rejected before. […] … learn more→