What does paul usually do every week what is he doing now

What does paul usually do every week what is he doing now the expert, can

Open Access Perspective Perspective The Perspective pavlov s theory provides experts with a forum to comment on topical or controversial issues of broad interest. Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this work.

Abbreviations: CV, curriculum vitae; DOI, digital object identifier; HHMI, Howard Hughes Medical What does paul usually do every week what is he doing now JIF, journal impact factor; ORCID, open researcher and contributor IDProvenance: Not commissioned; externally peer-reviewed. Introduction An outdated publishing process that is costly and delays access to knowledge Most scientific work in the life sciences is still disseminated using a process inaugurated by the Royal Society in the 17th century, with the notable addition of peer review in the middle of the 20th century.

Journal branding stifles discoverable and article-level evaluations of scientific work in the following ways: Most journals keep peer reviews confidential among editors, reviewers, and authors. This secrecy gives editors more flexibility to decide what to publish, but it leaves the community with the publishing decision as the only visible outcome of the peer review process and thus the journal brand and the JIF as the only evident indicators of quality and significance.

Journal branding conflicts with the correction of publication errors. Although journals clay papers with serious flaws, most erroneous publishing decisions are not corrected by journals. They are discounted among experts, whereas the flawed, misinterpreted, or overinterpreted articles continue to appeal to unsuspecting funding what does paul usually do every week what is he doing now hiring panels.

RecommendationsTo drive scientific publishing forward, we propose several long-term changes. Change peer review to better recognize its scholarly contribution. Shift the publishing decision from editors to authors.

Shift curation from before to after publication. Publishing peer review reports and author responses for a manuscript, anonymously or with attribution, would reveal the rigor of the peer review process and open up to interested readers the scholarly exchange that accompanies the publication of an article. Shift the publishing decision from editors to authors The independence of scientists is at the heart of the research enterprise.

Publishing the peer review reports increases visibility of quality control, keeps authors honest, and motivates constructive feedback. In an author-driven publishing process, article selection (curation) would happen after publication (see below). Shift curation from before to after publication How could scientists find work of interest in a sea of primary articles posted by authors and improved by peer reviewers. Post-publication curation can leverage the community of expert usersscientists who actually use, reproduce, and build on the published data.

Peer review before publication has become a serious challenge because life sciences research is increasingly interdisciplinary with data analysis, not data generation, as the rate-limiting step. Post-publication curation can continue over time and highlight many different features of articles, unlike a one-time, thumbs-up publishing decision at journals.

Post-publication curation can in principle cover the entire published literature, beyond articles submitted to a particular journal. Effective post-publication curation offers the promise of alternatives to journal-based metrics like the JIF.

Implementation Publishing platforms Author-driven dissemination in the life sciences already exists on publishing platforms. Post-publication curation could be multidimensional, with articles selected based on different criteria.

Post-publication curation should what does paul usually do every week what is he doing now full advantage of the internet and community input. Post-publication curation journals confront at least two significant challenges. Alternatives to the JIF One way to dissuade the use of journal-level metrics like the JIF in the evaluation of scientists is to develop better proxies that reflect quality features of articles.

Acknowledgments We thank Boyana Konforti, Kathryn Brown, Rebecca Lawrence, Andrew Murray, and William Wells for thought-provoking discussions and helpful comments on this document. Neylon C, Wu S. Article-Level Metrics and the Evolution of Scientific Impact. Lariviere V, Kiermer V, J. MacCallum C, McNutt M, Patterson M, Pulverer B, Swaminathan S, Taylor S, Curry S. A simple proposal for the publication of journal citation distributions. Kravitz D and Baker C.

Toward a new model of scientific publishing: discussion and a proposal. Accelerating scientific publication in biology. Pulverer B, Transparency showcases strength of peer review. What is v 0 peer review.

Polka J, Kiley R, Konforti B, Stern B, Vale R. Scientific Publishing: Room at the top. Peer reviews are open for registering at Crossref. How do I get a DOI for my review. PLOS roche cobas Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Enter Agreement to Enable Preprint Posting on bioRxiv.

Open Science Badges enhance openness, a core value of scientific practice. Center for Open Science services. What does paul usually do every week what is he doing now to Acknowledge Open Practices: A Simple, Low-Cost, Effective Method for Increasing Transparency.

Nosek B, Ebersole C, DeHaven A, and Mellor D. Publish houses of brick, not mansions of straw. Nature 545, 387; 2017 May 23. Tracz V and Lawrence R. Towards an open science publishing platform. F1000Res 2016 Feb 3;5:130. Wellcome Open Research platform. Gates Open Research platform. BioRxiv preprint server gets funding from Chan Zuckerberg Initiative.

Patterson M and Schekman R. Scientific Publishing: A new twist on peer review. APPRAISE (A Post-Publication Review and Assessment In Science Experiment), guest post on ASAPbio. Reflections following the ASAPbio peer review conference.

Further...

Comments:

11.01.2021 in 10:40 Douk:
You have kept away from conversation