Blog
About

293
views
1
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    5
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      End of Publication? Open access and a new scholarly communication technology

      Preprint

      ,

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          At this time, developers of research information systems are experimenting with new tools for research outputs usage that can expand the open access to research. These tools allow researchers to record research as annotations, nanopublications or other micro research outputs and link them by scientific relationships. If these micro outputs and relationships are shared by their creators publicly, these actions can initiate direct scholarly communication between the creators and the authors of the used research outputs. Such direct communication takes place while researchers are manipulating and organising their research results, e.g. as manuscripts. Thus, researchers come to communication before the manuscripts become traditional publications. In this paper, we discuss how this pre-publication communication can affect existing research practice. It can have important consequences for the research community like the end of publication as a communication instrument, the higher level of transparency in research, changes for the Open Access movement, academic publishers, peer-reviewing and research assessment systems. We analyse a background that exists in the economics discipline for experiments with the pre-publication communication. We propose a set of experiments with already existed and new tools, which can help with exploring the end of publication possible impacts on the research community.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 6

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          How Many Scientists Fabricate and Falsify Research? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Survey Data

          The frequency with which scientists fabricate and falsify data, or commit other forms of scientific misconduct is a matter of controversy. Many surveys have asked scientists directly whether they have committed or know of a colleague who committed research misconduct, but their results appeared difficult to compare and synthesize. This is the first meta-analysis of these surveys. To standardize outcomes, the number of respondents who recalled at least one incident of misconduct was calculated for each question, and the analysis was limited to behaviours that distort scientific knowledge: fabrication, falsification, “cooking” of data, etc… Survey questions on plagiarism and other forms of professional misconduct were excluded. The final sample consisted of 21 surveys that were included in the systematic review, and 18 in the meta-analysis. A pooled weighted average of 1.97% (N = 7, 95%CI: 0.86–4.45) of scientists admitted to have fabricated, falsified or modified data or results at least once –a serious form of misconduct by any standard– and up to 33.7% admitted other questionable research practices. In surveys asking about the behaviour of colleagues, admission rates were 14.12% (N = 12, 95% CI: 9.91–19.72) for falsification, and up to 72% for other questionable research practices. Meta-regression showed that self reports surveys, surveys using the words “falsification” or “fabrication”, and mailed surveys yielded lower percentages of misconduct. When these factors were controlled for, misconduct was reported more frequently by medical/pharmacological researchers than others. Considering that these surveys ask sensitive questions and have other limitations, it appears likely that this is a conservative estimate of the true prevalence of scientific misconduct.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Book Chapter: not found

            Semantic Enrichment of Research Outputs Metadata New CRIS Facilities for Authors

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

              Architecting the Future of Research Communication: Building the Models and Analytics for an Open Access Future

              As part of our Tenth Anniversary PLOS Biology Collection, PLOS' director of advocacy, Cameron Neylon, expounds on the need to improve and focus on our sharing infrastructure to maximize the reach of research communication.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                2016-08-19
                1608.05505

                http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/

                Custom metadata
                68U35
                8 pages, 3 figures
                cs.DL cs.CY

                Applied computer science, Information & Library science

                Comments

                Comment on this article