Dana Roth writes
> it is totally unrealistic to assume serious researchers have the
> time to wade thru anything more than a fraction of what is being
> published.
Sure.
> Is there really anything better than limiting current awareness to
> high quality peer reviewed journals,
Of course t
I agree with Chuck ... and feel it is totally unrealistic to assume serious
researchers have the time to wade thru anything more than a fraction of what is
being published. Is there really anything better than limiting current
awareness to high quality peer reviewed journals, and SciFinder, etc
Check out the new book by some of the best leaders of open access in
latin America:
http://www.clacso.org.ar/libreria-latinoamericana/contador/sumar_pdf.php?id_libro=906
The title is : Open Access Indicators and Scholarly Communications in
Latin America
The editors are Juan Pablo Alperín, Do
Le mercredi 24 septembre 2014 à 09:02 -0400, Stevan Harnad a écrit :
> No barriers to tear down other than those of incomprehension.
Stevan, I wish it were that simple. You argue the way philosophers of
language thought they could resolve the dilemmas of quantum physics
through a simple clarif
Here in France, librarians often are more or less unsatisfied with scientists
because of lacking awareness, motivation and enthusiasm for open access. In the
UK, some scientists seem unsatisfied with librarians because they do their job
too carefully. Why not swap them? (I am joking, yet...why n
I think that every article should be read on it’s own merits and it should not
have value assigned to it just because it has managed to get into a certain
club (journal). It is saddening to me that this suggestion should be
considered even vaguely radical.
When Science carried out its ‘Sting’
Thanks for defending the profession, Jean-Claude and I think you've made some
important points.
However, there is nothing with service. Providing good service does not make
one a servant. 20% of the work of an academic is commonly formally described as
"service". One could also describe teachin
Beware of categories such as "librarians" or "publishers" or even
"researchers". Let us remember also that librarians were behind the
creation of repositories back around 2003-4. Without them, their work
and, often, their money and resources, we simply would not have these
repositories. That some l
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 2:49 PM, Stacy Konkiel
wrote:
> +100 to what Richard said.
>
> >> they should not interfere with the process of self archiving on the
> basis of such considerations as scientific quality or any kind of personal
> judgement. <<
>
> Ah, but what about when the review step is
The additional difficulty I have with this as a uniform approach is very major
aggregators of literatures are including OA articles in their databases from
many of these predatory publishers. This serves as a marker to faculty and
students alike of legitimacy of the particular journals and web
So every article from every journal should be read under the assumption that
peer review markers are a poor way to make a preliminary decision point as to
whether the article merits attention?
It's going to be difficult to assume every one is expert enough to judge every
paper they read solely
Dear Rick,
Thanks for this. I love the fact that this forecast is from an
analyst that failed with his forecast three years ago, based on
assumptions that turned out to be wrong.
On this occasion we should remind ourselves that it is no so easy
to predict the future, no matter how beautiful the t
Of course, sharp practices such as passing yourself off for another company,
including the names of Nobel Price winners in your editorial board, repackaging
papers into fictitious journals at the behest of pharma companies, etc., etc.
are all to be be deplored. They are immoral at best and ill
It's also part of the reason for the development of new third-party "journal
selection" services (primarily aimed at researchers in emerging economies),
such as from Edanz, Research Square and elsewhere
-Mark
=
Mark Ware
m...@markwareconsulting.com
+44 117 959 3726
A new investment report on Elsevier has been published by BernsteinResearch
analyst Claudio Aspesi.
Extract:
When we downgraded Reed Elsevier to Underperform in 2011, we thought that
budget constraints would slow the growth of Elsevier's journal business
below consensus. At the time, th
15 matches
Mail list logo
