Sent from my iPhone
> On May 30, 2015, at 10:27 AM, "Michael Eisen" <mbei...@gmail.com> wrote: > > There is no evidence that post publication review can assure quality, I > agree. But there is a wealth of evidence that pre-publication review DOES NOT > assure quality, and it is absurd to spend $10b a year and delay the open > availability of typical papers by 10 months to achieve it Comment: this seems to overlap somewhat with my perspective that the current system has incentives to delay sharing what we know and even hoarding of research data. As a new professor on the tenure data I have found it a challenge to maintain my commitment to an open research approach, knowing that tenure committees as well as tenure and grant application reviewers may dismiss this work and focus solely on the traditional prestige measures of journals I publish. Because I realize people are struggling right now with the issues I am researching (economics of transition to open access), I have decided to prioritize knowledge sharing and the open research process. Open research to me starts with discussing the research questions. If we've got this wrong better to find out before you start the research, not a year or two later when the work is peer reviewed. Tell people what you are doing so we can avoid duplication where extreme accuracy and replication is less important. In pharmacy research, a small difference in dosage can make a difference between life or death. I doubt that anyone will die as a result of my currency calculation error earlier this week; on the contrary, comments from Dana, Jan and David have deepened my understanding of this issue. Let's share our data to the extent we can (given things like privacy rights), and just as soon as it's in a shape where others could use it. We will complete our capture of OA APC data for 2015 sometime today, but it takes months to process the raw data and enter it into a spreadsheet. If anyone is in a hurry and would like a copy of the approximately 2,000 files of various types that lie behind this project, please let me know. We are writing up our results and discussion as we go along, on the sustainingknowledgecommons.org blog and through this list. That's why I have been commenting rather frequently lately. Last year I found this helpful in writing up the article. To some extent, this reflects my style. Others should find ways of sharing that suit them. Some people like wikis. I detest wikis - the format and others editing the work, that is, not the idea. If you like the wiki style, then please wiki away. This kind of open research is a huge change and will be a learning curve for all of us. What works for one researcher or discipline may not work for another. Let's open our results, our processes and our hearts to those whose learning may curve in a different arc than our own. best, Heather _______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
