About us | About Scoope | Contact us

 Sponsor Links
| Articles | White Papers | Presentations 

Articles                                                                                                  TOP

Who cares about scholarly communication?

Is there really anything that everyone needs to know about scholarly communication? At first blush, the answer might seem to be no. Scholars typically communicate mostly with each other: they create articles, books, white papers, and other scholarly products, not usually expecting that those writings will reach millions of people and directly affect the public's collective mind and discourse, but more often with the hope that their colleagues will read what they have written and that their ideas and discoveries will shape the discourse within their fields, and will eventually make the world a better place in that way.
Click here

Do Academic Journals Favor Researchers from Their Own Institutions?

A recent study found that two international relations (IR) journals favour articles written by authors who share the journal's institutional affiliation. In-group bias is a well-known phenomenon that is widely documented in the psychological literature. People tend to favour their group, whether it is their close family, their hometown, their ethnic group, or any other group affiliation. Before the study, the evidence regarding academic in-group bias was scarce, with only one study finding academic in-group bias in law journals. Studies from economics found mixed results. The report provides evidence of academic in-group bias in IR journals, showing that this phenomenon is not specific to law. It also provides tentative evidence which could potentially resolve the conflict in economics, suggesting that these journals might also exhibit in-group bias.
Click here

Rethinking the communication of clinical trial results

Results from clinical trials are shared for two fundamental reasons - to enable clinicians to use the knowledge gained to advance clinical care, and because patients take part in clinical trials with the expectation that the results will be used to improve treatments for themselves and others. Clinical data therefore need to be communicated quickly and openly. Publishing them in scientific journals will continue to play a key part in this process, but it is important to consider any limitations and how to overcome them.
Click here

Researchers debate whether journals should publish signed peer reviews

Scientific journals should start routinely publishing the text of peer reviews for each paper they accept. But there was little consensus on whether reviewers should have to publicly sign their critiques, which traditionally are accessible only to editors and authors. An informal poll of meeting attendees found overwhelming support for publishing reviews and making them easily searchable online by assigning them the digital object identifier (DOI) tracking numbers that other scientific publications receive. And that result aligned with views reported in a much larger survey of some 3000 authors, reviewers, and editors published in PLOS ONE in December 2017. The survey found 60 percent of respondents supported publishing reviews.
Click here

Should access to scientific literature be free?

In an age where a vast amount of scientific literature is accessed online, whether or not this information is available for free becomes a pertinent issue. Many prominent journals are accessible only after purchasing subscriptions, and they are protected by copyright. Other journals are open access, meaning their articles are free and have no restrictions on use. This article presents one piece that discusses when and why open access is important, and a counter-piece that explains why paywalls are a necessary evil.
Click here

For banner ads click here