Tag: Ethics In Scholarly Communication

Assessment of reproducibility in research results leads to more questions than answers

The ‘Reproducibility Project: Cancer Biology’ initiative that has the purpose of assessing the reproducibility of preclinical research in Oncology was launched in 2013 as the result of a collaboration between the Center for Open Science and Science Exchange. The first results of the replication studies have just been published, however, their interpretation requires a careful approach. Read More →

On the immediate rejection of manuscripts without external peer review

Not all texts received by scientific journals are sent to external evaluation. The arbitration process in the double blind system implies a high liability for editors and reviewers, and the burden of this process ends up expressed in a lengthy evaluation process, with direct effects on authors (who wait too long to receive a decision) and on readers (that may have access to delayed data). We used some data on the management of Revista de Sociologia e Política to think about the benefits and losses by rejecting original articles based on preliminary analysis by the editors (desk review evaluation), without requiring reviews issued by referees external to the editorial board. Read More →

Open Access reviewed: stricter criteria preserve credibility

The most comprehensive index of open access journals, the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), reviewed its inclusion criteria, in view of allegations of the presence of predatory journals. This restructuring will lead to more than 3,000 journals to be removed from the database. DOAJ, besides advocating Open Access, established, in collaboration with COPE, OASPA and WAME, a code of principles and good practices in scientific publishing. Read More →

Reproducibility in research results: the challenges of attributing reliability

Recently projects have been developed with the aim to reproduce published research results in psychology, biology and economics to verify their reliability. The results indicate different degrees of reproducibility in each area, however, they served to alert the scientific community about how fragile results considered irrefutable can be and reflect on the role of science in self-correcting. Read More →

May excessive transparency damage Science?

The scholarly community promoted and encouraged research transparency to curb the lack of reproducibility and scientific misconduct. However, this openness also opens room for attacks and harassment of researchers, often motivated by simple discrepancy between the results and even threats of physical and psychological violence. Learn how to recognize and protect yourself from attacks of this nature. Read More →

Taking open access one step further: The role of SciELO in the global publication landscape [originally published in Editage Insights]

In this conversation, Abel Packer traces SciELO Program’s growth and talks about the gap in publication standards and processes between developed and developing countries. He also emphasizes the importance of establishing sustainable open access publication models. [Available only in English] Read More →

France prepares bill to regulate open access

France is preparing a bill to regulate open access to scientific research results financed with public funds. The text of the law, however, does not agree with what the National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS) believes it benefits the scientific community, the French and the world society. The project is available for public consultation and any Internet user can suggest changes that will impact on the way research is conveyed digitally. Your feedback is very important, vote you too. Read More →

The BMJ requires data sharing to publish clinical trials

Increased publication of clinical trial outcomes has been promoted by regional and global initiatives in order to increase transparency, reproducibility and reliability of the assays. The BMJ follows this movement, becoming the first journal to require availability of individual patient data, anonymously and upon request, as a prerequisite for publication. Read More →

Rebuttal to the blog post “Is SciELO a Publication Favela?” authored by Jeffrey Beall

Editors of scientific journals sign note of rejection to Mr. Jeffrey Beall’s attempt of freely depreciate the successful image of SciELO. Read the note here http://peloscielo.org/#en. Read More →

Open Access in Latin America: a paragon for the rest of the world [Originally published in the SPARC blog]

Manifesto signed by scholars and representatives of pro-open access associations, published on the website of the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition – SPARC, repudiates the ideas advocated by Jeffrey Beall disqualifying SciELO (and Redalyc) in favor of control over journals by large commercial publishers. The manifesto states that open access is exemplary in Latin America. Read More →

Unpublished results from clinical trials distort medical research

The ClinicalTrials.gov initiative was created with the purpose to establish a platform for recording information on clinical trials conducted by public organizations (research institutes and government agencies) and private (pharmaceutical companies). A recent study published in the New England Journal of Medicine, however, shows a worrying scenario. Despite the requirement to register clinical trials in a publicly accessible base, a small fraction of them are published in scientific journals, compromising the transparency and applicability of the discoveries. Read More →

Jeffrey Beall and Blacklists

Jeffrey Bell, the author of the list of predatory publishers and journals widely expresses his unfavorable opinion about the open access movement in general and the academic publishing in developing countries. His latest attack was directed to SciELO, that he called on his blog “A publication favela”, in another sad attempt to discredit both open access and scholarly publication in the developing world. His opinions are personal, unfounded and biased, and do not deserve any credit. Read More →

Motion to repudiate Mr. Jeffrey Beall’s classist attack on SciELO

By the Brazilian Forum of Public Health Journals Editors and the Associação Brasileira de Saúde Coletiva (Abrasco, Brazilian Public Health Association) Read More →

The fenced-off ‘nice’ publication neighbourhoods of Jeffrey Beall

Jeffrey Beall, librarian at the University of Colorado, describes SciELO as a ‘publication favela’ and commercial publishers as ‘nice neighbourhoods for scholarly publications’. The only way for us to understand that is if we consider his anti-open access, anti-subsidy, and anti-non-western attitudes, which are so clearly visible in his writings. It is a pity a university librarian of an otherwise reputable university thinks like this. He is wrong, and that has to be exposed. Read More →

Science Publishing: the Transition to Open Access Going Dutch

The negotiations between the Dutch universities (VSNU – the Association of Universities in The Netherlands) and three large publishers (Springer, Wiley, Sage) have been concluded and significant steps to include open access in the deals with those publishers have been made. With Elsevier, however, the negotiations are in deadlock, according to the VSNU. They have called for a boycott, but the real question is, of course, why it is that Elsevier, the largest, and Dutch (!) academic publisher, can’t – or won’t – do what other large publishers can – and will. I have no answer to that, but in trying to sketch the situation in some detail, I hope to add some clarity to it. The outcome of the negotiations is surely going to influence other countries. Read More →