Could Distributed Peer Review Better Decide Grant Funding?
The landscape of academic grant funding is notoriously competitive and plagued by lengthy, bureaucratic processes, exacerbated by difficulties in finding willing reviewers. Distributed […]
Ludo Waltman and Jessica Polka make the case for a more contextualized approach to open access publishing and preprinting, and introduce the Publish Your Reviews initiative.
The question of what kinds of blogs were already being cited by academics, and what criteria they were using to guide their choice of blogs animated research by two urban planners.
In this post, Holly Slay Ferraro, an associate professor in the Villanova School of Business and Academic Director for DEI Research and […]
Patrick Dunleavy argues that there have already been three false starts in open science: focusing only on isolated bits of the open agenda in ways that don’t connect and so are not meaningful; loading researchers with off-putting, external bureaucratic requirements; and risking reopening ‘sectarian’ divides between quantitative and qualitative social scientists.
The authors – all journal editors -believe that feedback given in peer review should be rigorous, but will be more readily incorporated if kindly given, to the advancement of science.
Not one single metric can encapsulate the importance of a field, notes Digital Science’s Mike Taylor, and in fields where broader uptake is slower, this is especially true.
Organization studies professor Laura Rovelli, one of the advisory board members for the Declaration on Research Assessment, or DORA, discusses some of the components of impact beyond citation count and how we can harness those components.
‘Scholars from the periphery’ often pay a price — unintentional but no less real — for their geography. In this post, Amon […]