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 […]
How can organizations get their members to engage in sustainability practices? The authors outlines several mechanisms.
The development of scientific capacity in many parts of the world and the building of academic ties is critical when it comes to responding to a new virus or tracking changes in climate. And yet …
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.