Proud to announce a new collaboration with eLife and the Center for Open Science on a new project: Plaudit!
big news today in Europe for scholars... all publicly funded research must be published #openaccess as of 2020 https://www.volkskrant.nl/nieuws-achtergrond/11-eu-landen-besluiten-vanaf-2020-moet-alle-wetenschappelijke-literatuur-gratis-beschikbaar-zijn~be002c39/
Just realised that visually impaired users were not entirely catered for when I put search live just now. My apologies - a fix is now live. #Accessibility is important!
My recent tootstorm (sorry for the spam! I didn't know about the "Unlisted" option) in blog form: To fix scholarly publishing, decouple credentialing from publishing
My message to researchers is similar: find ways to promote your academic work that are independent of the journal it’s published in. I’m working on one such method with Flockademic: by bundling your research together on your academic profile, your research promotes you instead of the journal it’s published in.
For the scientific policy advisors at the OECD, my answer to that question is that we should decouple the evaluation of researchers from the publishing process. If researchers are evaluated on the quality of their research instead of the journal it was published in, that would remove their need to pay whatever amount of public money a publisher asks of them just to obtain career credentials.
Another example of this playing out is that, despite providing practically identical services at a higher price, Nature’s Scientific Reports has overtaken PLOS One as the largest journal. Its primary differentiator? The Nature brand.
In some disciplines, authors first share their work on arXiv. Fellow researchers can then immediately read this work, albeit with a critical eye — it has not been peer reviewed yet. If they notice potential improvements to the work, they can report it to the author, who then incorporates that in a new version uploaded to arXiv.
1. Unlike practically every other publishing industry (movies, music, etc.), the price of scholarly publishing has only increased with the advent of the internet.
2. The major scholarly publishers report profit margins of 30–40%, year after year. These numbers are typical (or even at the high end) of luxury brands — in other words, of exclusive goods, which are not inclusive by definition.
Scholar Social is meant for: researchers, grad students, librarians, archivists, undergrads, academically inclined high schoolers, educators of all levels, journal editors, research assistants, professors, administrators—anyone involved in academia who is willing to engage with others respectfully.
We strive to be a safe space for queer people and other minorities, recognizing that there can only be academic freedom where the existence and validity of interlocutors' identities is taken as axiomatic.
"A Mastodon profile you can be proud to put on the last slide of a presentation at a conference"
(Participation is, of course, optional)
Scholar Social features a monthly "official" journal club, in which we try to read and comment on a paper of interest.
Any user of Scholar Social can suggest an article by sending the DOI by direct message to @firstname.lastname@example.org and one will be chosen by random lottery on the last day of the month. We ask that you only submit articles that are from *outside* your own field of study to try to ensure that the papers we read are accessible and interesting to non-experts.