Blogs selected for Week March 2 to March 8, 2020 -



1. Open Access Directory – A resource for making sense of the open access landscape

The Open Access Directory (OAD) is a wiki of factual lists on the subject of open access. Designed to make sense out of the chaos of different information about open access, in this post Nancy Pontika recounts why the OAD was created and outlines how it forms an important knowledge base for anyone seeking to learn about open access and its development.

The full entry can be read: Here.

2. Is it Finally the Year of Research Data? – The STM Association Thinks So

Practices around open research data are gaining traction. In 2019’s The State of Open Data Report, 64% of respondents claimed that they made their data openly available in 2018. That’s a rise of 4% from the previous year. Comprehensive information on the prevalence of open data policies is hard to come by, but there is a general sense that publishers, funders, and institutions alike are all moving towards firstly having data policies and then steadily strengthening those policies over time. Phill Jones recently attended the 2nd STM association research data workshop. In this post he discusses what he learned about the progress being made and the challenges ahead in making data sharable, open, and maybe even FAIR.

The full entry can be read: Here.

3. Are the Findings in Academic Economic Journals to be Trusted?

There has been increasing evidence in the social sciences that publication bias, p-hacking, and lack of reproducibility are real concerns. Publication bias occurs if papers that have certain characteristics (statistically significant or surprising) are more likely to be published, whereas p-hacking would occur if a researcher is consciously manipulating data in a way that produces a desired p-value. P-value is a measure of the statistical likelihood that the hypothesis being tested is true. If the p-value is low, an effect is highly unlikely to be due to luck. An example of p-hacking is a situation in which a researcher selects data or statistical analyses until her/his nonsignificant results become significant. The issues of publication bias and p-hacking make published research less credible to policymakers and citizens, notes Abel Brodeur in this post.

The full entry can be read: Here.

4. Guest Post — How China’s New Policy May Change Researchers’ Publishing Behavior

Last week, China’s Ministry of Science and Technology and Ministry of Education announced two policy documents which triggered wide discussion among researchers across the country. According to these documents, the Journal Impact Factor (JIF) and Science Citation Index (SCI) should not be used as the most important criteria when recruiting and promoting personnel. Universities and research institutes are not allowed to provide monetary incentives for publishing in SCI-indexed journals. SCI-related metrics are prohibited from being used for university or discipline rankings. Dr. Jie Xu from the Wuhan University of China offers a view of how Chinese researchers are reacting and are likely to alter their behavior in response to new policies governing research evaluation.

The full entry can be read: Here.

5. Copyright Question: Do I Need Permission to Use a Previously Published Graphic or Figure in a New Publication or Presentation?

Let’s say you’re presenting a symposium at a scientific congress and one of your employees has already published a review article on the topic. This employee would like to use several figures from that paper in the slide deck that’s being created for the symposium. Because the employee created them, he or she does not need permission to include them in the presentation. The answer it turns out, isn’t a simple yes or no. It depends on the rights the author retained from the publisher. Keri Mattaliano, in this post, takes a look at such copyright concerns.

The full entry can be read: Here.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


sponsor links

For banner ads click here