Replicability is a central issue when discussing the reliability of scientific research that renews itself in the promotion of open science. A second researcher’s attempt to replicate an earlier study is an effort to determine whether applying the same methods to the same scientific question yields similar results. … Read More →
Mapping output in content analysis in SciELO Brazil indicates a technique that is caught in a time warp
A scientometric review on the use of content analysis in SciELO Brasil showed a notable concentration of citations from Laurence Bardin’s manual, whose use continues to grow. As the work has not had updates in the last two decades, we can say that the use of the technique may be caught in a time warp. … Read More →
It takes a body to understand the world – why ChatGPT and other language AIs don’t know what they’re saying [Originally published in The Conversation in April/2023]
Large language models can’t understand language the way humans do because they can’t perceive and make sense of the world. … Read More →
Rethink peer review to make it sustainable
A recently published article discusses the need for a profound overhaul of peer review, as the current model proves to be no longer sustainable. Journal editors have difficulties finding reviewers willing to evaluate submitted articles, researchers discuss greater recognition or even remuneration to act as reviewers. Among the numerous proposed alternatives, the opening of peer review is presented as the most feasible alternative. … Read More →
Preprint review should be part of doctoral and postdoctoral training programs
Considering the significant growth of preprints in scholarly communication, as well as the emergence of preprint servers in all areas of knowledge, Richard Sever, assistant director of CSHL Press, proposes that (post-publication) evaluation of preprints be used to complement doctoral and postdoctoral training at academic institutions. … Read More →
Lack of sustainability plans for preprint services risks their potential to improve science [Originally published in the LSE Impact blog in March/2023]
During the COVID-19 pandemic, preprint servers became a vital mechanism for the rapid sharing and review of vital research. However, discussing the findings of a recent report, Naomi Penfold finds much of the infrastructure supporting non-commercial preprint publications is precariously governed and at risk of being acquired by commercial publishers. … Read More →
Shuffle the cards and deal again
Research must be well planned, carried out correctly and reported in a clear and transparent way, as the reliability of the results depends on the rigor of the experimental design. However, in the published reports, there seems to be a lack of commitment by those responsible for assessing the quality of the research. Experts pointed out that the current incentive structures in research institutions do not sufficiently encourage researchers to invest in solidity and transparency, instead encouraging them to optimize their aptitude in the fight for publications and grants. Over the past decade, large-scale replication studies have shown that reproducibility is far from favorable in many scientific fields, and questionable research practices are becoming more prevalent. Clearly something is not working in the scientific enterprise. … Read More →
Researchers engaging with policy should take into account policymakers’ varied perceptions of evidence [Originally published in the LSE Impact blog in January/2023]
There is often an assumption in evidence based policy, that evidence means the findings of quantitative studies or randomised control trials. However, in practice evidence is often understood differently. Drawing on a study of Welsh policy actors, Eleanor MacKillop and James Downe highlight four different approaches to evidence in policymaking and suggest how researchers and policy organisations might use these findings to engage differently with policy. … Read More →
Why is it important to support open infrastructure for preprints?
The importance of preprints in scholarly communication has been increasing, as well as their credibility and use in every discipline. However, the preprint ecosystem is not yet financially sustainable, and most preprints are not shared using open infrastructure. A report by the Invest in Open Infrastructure initiative examines the current preprint landscape in detail and makes important recommendations that aim at making a system for open infrastructure services for preprints viable, robust, and reliable. … Read More →
Open Access and Closed Research. Who benefits from the APC?
Recent research published in Scientometrics raises questions about unforeseen consequences of the spread of Open Access scientific publishing that have to do with the growth of total expenditures and who would be the economic beneficiaries of this paradigm shift. … Read More →
Research assessment should go beyond comparing impact metrics
The assessment of research results that mainly relies on citation-based metrics has limitations that lead to distortions in the management of human and financial resources in research institutions around the world. The innovative Agreement on Reforming Research Assessment, created by the initiative of the European Commission and organizations from this continent with the support of 350 public and private organizations from more than 40 countries, has just been published, and establishes criteria that value qualitative assessment and limit the use of quantitative indicators. … Read More →
Data papers… and FAIR [Originally published in the Road to FAIR blog in June/2022]
In a scientific ecosystem increasingly oriented towards the perspective of Open Science, data papers are a new species of scholarly publication, especially in the social sciences and humanities (SSH). … Read More →
Scholarly publishing and electric cars: A comment on “The big idea: should we get rid of the scientific paper?”
The big idea: should we get rid of the academic paper?, published in the Guardian, argues that because scholarly publishing is an old practice and because it’s flawed, it should be replaced by something more “modern”. Glenn Hampson, Executive Director of the Science Communication Institute (SCI) and Program Director of the Open Scholarship Initiative (OSI) comments on the article. … Read More →
A comment on “The big idea: should we get rid of the scientific paper?”
In The big idea: should we get rid of the scientific paper?, published in The Guardian, Stuart Ritchie argues for a radical action: scientists should abandon the current format of the scientific paper, which is static and not interactive. Adeilton Brandão, Editor in Chief of Memorias do Instituto Oswaldo Cruz and researcher at Fiocruz, comments on the article. … Read More →
Society has a strong demand for open access science
Analysis of more than 1.6 million comments left on downloads by the US National Academies shows that half are for academic use and the other half reveal adults across the country who seek highest quality information to improve the way they work, satisfy their curiosity, and learn. Knowing the importance of such information, policymakers should be encouraged to protect it. … Read More →
Recent Comments