395
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0
shares
    • Review: found
    Is Open Access

    Review of 'The five deadly sins of science publishing'

    Bookmark
    5
    The five deadly sins of science publishingCrossref
    xxx
    Average rating:
        Rated 5 of 5.
    Level of importance:
        Rated 5 of 5.
    Level of validity:
        Rated 5 of 5.
    Level of completeness:
        Rated 5 of 5.
    Level of comprehensibility:
        Rated 5 of 5.
    Competing interests:
    None

    Reviewed article

    • Record: found
    • Abstract: found
    • Article: found
    Is Open Access

    The five deadly sins of science publishing

    Science cannot progress without scientists reporting their findings. And yet researchers have given control of this central pillar of the scientific process to science publishers, who are in the business of serving the interests of their journals; these are not always the same as the interests of science. This editorial describes the problems with the process of preparing and publishing research findings, and with judging their veracity and significance, and then explains how we at Faculty of 1000 are starting to tackle the ‘deadly sins’ of science publishing.
      Bookmark

      Review information

      10.14293/S2199-1006.1.SOR-UNCAT.A4457117.v1.RLOJNY
      This work has been published open access under Creative Commons Attribution License CC BY 4.0, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Conditions, terms of use and publishing policy can be found at www.scienceopen.com.

      open access,open data,open peer review,f1000,life sciences,publishing
      Keywords:

      Review text

      Comments

      Comment on this review

      Version and Review History