489 Matching Annotations
  1. Last 7 days
    1. A very different conclusion was reached by a careful meta-analysis of all the available twin data, recently published in a large review that Mayer and McHugh fail to even mention.

      Phew.. Dense read. M&M used a dataset that did not measure the traits they're addressing. A larger review of multiple datasets showed different results.

    2. Of the six studies using proper probability sampling methods that have been published in the peer-reviewed literature in the past 16 years, they include only one — and it just so happens to be the one with the lowest estimate of genetic influence of the entire set.

      McHugh & Mayer cherry-picked their data to fit their desired results.

  2. Nov 2019
    1. It seems to me that this failure of the economists to guide policy more successfully is closely connected with their propensity to imitate as closely as possible the procedures of the brilliantly successful physical sciences – an attempt which in our field may lead to outright error. It is an approach which has come to be described as the “scientistic” attitude – an attitude which, as I defined it some thirty years ago, “is decidedly unscientific in the true sense of the word, since it involves a mechanical and uncritical application of habits of thought to fields different from those in which they have been formed.”1
    1. Ina Schuppe Koistinen, Abhishek Krishnagopal, Sangeetha Kadur, Pooja Gupta etc gave me the inspiration to do what I wanted to do. Along the way I got exposed to more art and science creators like Gemma Anderson, Monica Zoppe, Drew Barry, Ina S. Koistinen, Christian Sardet, Sandra Black Culliton, Amanda Phingbodhipakkiya

      science communication - art + science

    1. Quantum Realism: A virtual reality would be subject to virtual time, where each processing cycle is one "tick." Every gamer knows that when the computer is busy the screen lags—game time slows down under load. Likewise, time in our world slows down with speed or near massive bodies, suggesting that it is virtual. So the rocket twin only aged a year because that was all the processing cycles the system busy moving him could spare. What changed was his virtual time.

      Thought exercise. Modern "Zen koan".

    1. created a Greek alphabet carefully honed to convey scientific meaning rather than typical Greek-language prose

      type design as a means to convey scientific meaning

    2. Science sorely needs best practices in visual communication as well as in information design, a mature field with quantitative methods.

      Visual communication has scientifically proven grounds; it is not just some obscur magic from an artistic genius

    3. Some assume that an aesthetically appealing presentation signals at best a lack of priorities, and at worst a lack of rigour.

      Traditional distinction between form and content

  3. Oct 2019
    1. Die Methoden der Ethik beziehungsweise der Philosophie werden daher zuweilen nicht als "wissenschaftlich" anerkannt, da TA insgesamt dazu tendiert, sich an einem naturwissenschaftlich geprägten Wissenschaftlichkeitsideal zu orientieren.[26] Deshalb wird in der TA oft zwischen der "wissenschaftlichen Seite" – Sammlung, Bewertung und Zusammenstellung von Forschungsevidenz – und der "Werteseite" unterschieden.

      Überlegen Sie, wie die Technikfolgenabschätzung durch die Perspektive der Science Fiction bereichert werden könnte!

    1. for many women and purple can induce soothing and calmness with the image of royalty

      purple colour

    2. Colours and emotion 

      Colours and emotion

    3. Both men and women have blue as their top colour

      Blue wins

    4. The colours black & white have opposing meaning in western and eastern cultures

      west culture:

      • black = finality, death, formality
      • white = purity, peace

      east culture:

      • white = death
      • black = wealth, health, prosperity
    5. Think of each colour in context of its environment, for example do you have a mostly grey, white or muted colours on your website then make your call to action button(s) green or red

      There is no universal guide in choosing website colours. Go with your own intuition

    6. our brain processes visuals 60,000x faster than text
    7. Colour is such a pervasive part of everything we encounter visually in our world, it evokes emotions which in turn drives decision making

      Effect of colour

    8. When creating or refining your brand identity think about pairing your main colour with a complimentary colour or use the 3 grouping guides below

      colour harmony

    9. We are using colour to communicate the value of our product or service
      • Red – Passionate, Aggressive, Important
      • Orange – Playful, Energetic, Cheap
      • Yellow – Happy, Friendly, Warning
      • Green – Natural, Stable, Prosperous
      • Blue – Serene, Trustworthy, Inviting
      • Violet – Luxurious, Mysterious, Romantic
      • Pink – Feminine, Young, Innocent
      • Black – Powerful, Sophisticated, Edgy
      • Brown – Earthy, Sturdy, Rustic
      • Grey – Neutral, Formal, Gloomy
      • White – Clean, Virtuous, Healthy
      • Beige – Accentuates surrounding colours
    10. our eyes can only pick up certain light wavelengths

      We can only pick up the visible spectrum Colors

    11. The theory of colour is a discipline that stretches back to at least the 15th century. It encompasses chemistry, physics and mathematics to effectively explain colour

      The theory of colour

    12. There are 2 primary colour systems (to reproduce colour) we use on a daily basis additive & subtractive. Anything that emits light (sun, screen or projector) uses additive and everything else reflects colour and uses subtractive colour

      2 primary colour systems: 2 primary colour systems

    13. The colour wheel is where you need to start when planning a colour scheme or branding for your business and for sales and marketing campaigns. The colour wheel consists of primary, secondary and tertiary colours.
      1. Primary: can not be made from any other colours
      2. Secondary: formed by mixing the primary colours
      3. Tertiary: formed by mixing primary and secondary colours colour wheel
    14. round shapes are more trustworthy & straight sharp edges are more striking
  4. Sep 2019
    1. Google Translate translation into English:

      Freedom of information. The movement behind Open Science will soften the academic evaluation culture and pull researchers out of the clutches of journals. Interview with one of the movement's front figures, the "detached paleontologist" Jon Tennant.

      All data is born free

      By RASMUS EGMONT FOSS

      More and more researchers are frustrated by the state of science in 2019. Academic journals have too much power over research, they say. Many test results cannot be reproduced. And they are tired of being measured and weighed with a wealth of numbers that quantify the fruits of their labor. In a revolt against the prevailing norms, a growing number of dissatisfied scientists are gathering in these years behind the Open Science movement. People are angry about many things: publishers' profit margins. The time it takes to publish in journals. The way they are evaluated. Open Science is a reaction to all that, a counter-movement that brings together the frustration of a big wave that no one really knows what stands for or where to go, says British Jon Tennant, one of the leading proponents of the movement. Tennant has paused a promising career in paleontology and travels around the world as a "looser" for years to spread the enthusiasm for an open science. In particular, he has been noted as the founder of Open Science MOOC, an online community and educational platform in the field. He is currently visiting the University of Southern Denmark. The broad group of supporters ranges from those who simply want scars to make all academic articles freely available on the web, to those who want to revolutionize the work of researchers. They strive to engage colleagues in every aspect of their work, for example, by exchanging ideas, releasing early data, or the crowdsource editing process. Several organizations and scientists are joining the cause in these years. The movement is particularly characterized by iniciacives such as Plan S, a project to release all government-funded research from 2021, which is, among other things, larger by the European Commission. Also, foundations such as the Gates Foundation have promoted the ideas by forcing all beneficiaries to share their data. Common to followers is that they will bring modern research closer to the real purpose of science, as they see it: to increase the knowledge base of society by working in groups rather than in silos. Several of them have now started pointing fingers at the universities' growing evaluation culture as the main obstacle to achieving that goal. It distorts researchers' motivation and creates an unhealthy environment, they say. The biggest problem today is how scientists are measured and who has control over that evaluation system, Jon Tennant believes. Researchers are to a greater extent measured by how much and how much they publish than what they publish. It gives wrong incentives. At the same time, the evaluation process itself is guided by the commercial interests of a narrow group of publishers who do not always share the researchers' interests. Today, scientists are not in control of systems, and that is a major problem, he elaborates.

      JON Tennant and the Open Science movement will do away with what German sociologist Steffen Mau has dubbed “the quantification culture of science. Over the past few decades, many universities have begun to adapt their culture to live up to the rankings and scoring systems that give prestige in the field. In the researchers' everyday life, factors such as circulation rates and h-indices (a measure of a researcher's influence) as well as the impact factors of journals, for example, have gained great importance for their career and reputation among colleagues. The voices behind Open Science want a new model. It must promote quality research and be responsible to the community rather than narrow interests. The first step is to expand access to academic articles. Researchers need to be able to build on everyone's work, and private publishers should not have the power over the product, they say. According to advocates like Jon Tennant, we should also open up the entire scientific process by using the Internet better. The journals must still have a place in the system, but today their old-fashioned model stands in the way of communicating our research effectively. We are not taking advantage of network technology opportunities well enough, he says. From a new idea arises, until the method is developed, data is obtained and the conclusions are available, everyone should be able to follow and propose improvements, the invitation reads. For example, researchers should publish their plans for new projects before they begin collecting data (a so-called pre-registration) and should be encouraged to share their results before the article is published (a micro-publication). But as long as publishers such as Elsevier and Springer Nature have power over researchers' careers, researchers lack the incentive to collaborate openly and inspire each other, Jon Tennant believes. A more open and free process could also solve the reproducibility crisis in science by making studies more transparent. At the same time, it has the potential to prevent large amounts of time wasting, as researchers will be able to see other people's failed projects before starting their own. OPEN Science is part of a larger modern movement, which, according to Israeli historian Yuval Noah Harari, is "the first since 1789 to invent a whole new freedom of value information. There is the idea that data has the right to be free and that humans should not restrict its movements. The mindset is the phloxof behind projects like Wikipedia, Google and Open Source in software programming. Based on that logic, the power must lie with the community and not a narrow group of editors when the quality of the researchers' work needs to be assessed (for it must, after all). We should not discard the peer review model, merely reform it, says Jon Tennant: We still need to evaluate the quality of research, but we should take advantage of opportunities in online community and networking. However, a new evaluation culture has its own pitfalls, and the biggest uncertainties about the Open Science agenda stem from this. Prestigious journals such as Nature and Science give scientists and lay people confidence that their articles are trustworthy. Everyone needs these kinds of pointers when navigating the academic world. At the same time, there is no guarantee that the quality of research will increase when the masses decide. The risk of a democratic evaluation system is that it creates a new and more intense quantification cult, where research articles are instead measured on colleagues' ratings, as we know it from services like Uber and Tripadvisor. Competition for prestige is an inevitable part of any industry, and today's race will simply be replaced by a new one - on other terms. Here, other studies will lose the battle, probably those with a narrower appeal. The established institutions have an ambivalent relationship with the Open Science movement. Leaders at universities and publishers positively mention it in closed forums, Jon Tennant says, but would rather stick to their existing benefits as long as they can. They also hesitate because the consequences of the new regime are unpredictable. Everyone is scared to move like the first, he says.

    2. Original content in Danish:

      Informationsfrihed. Bevægelsen bag Open Science vil mildne den akademiske evalueringskultur og trække forskerne ud af tidsskrifternes kløer. Interview med en af bevægelsens frontfigurer, den «løsgående palæontolog» Jon Tennant.

      Alle data er født frie

      Af RASMUS EGMONT FOSS

      Flere og flere forskere er frustrerede over videnskabens tilstand anno 2019. Udgiverne af akademiske tidsskrifter har for stor magt over forskningen, siger de. Mange forsøgsresultater kan ikke reproduceres. Og de er trætte af at blive målt og vejet med et væld af tal, som kvantificerer frugten af deres arbejde. I et oprør mod de herskende normer samler et stigende antal utilfredse forskere sig i disse år bag bevægelsen Open Science. Folk er vrede over mange ting: Udgivernes profitmargener. Tiden, der tager at publicere i tidsskrifter. Måden, de bliver evalueret på. Open Science er en reaktion mod alt det, en modbevægelse, der samler frustrationen i en stor bølge, som ingen rigtigt ved, hvad står for, eller hvor bevæger sig hen, fortæller britiske Jon Tennant, en af de førende fortalere for bevægelsen. Tennant har sat en lovende karriere inden for palæonrologien på pause og rejser verden rundt som «løsgænger« for ar udbrede begejstringen for en åben videnskab. Han har især gjort sig bemærket som stifter af Open Science MOOC, et online fællesskab og uddannelsesplatform på området. I disse måneder er han på besøg på Syddansk Universitet. Den brede gruppe af støtter spænder fra dem, der blot ønsker ar gøre alle akademiske artikler frit tilgængelige på nettet, til dem, som ligefrem vil revolucionere forskernes arbejde. De stræber efter at indvie kolleger i alle aspekter af deres arbejde, for eksempel ved at udveksle ideer, frigive tidlige data eller crowdsource redigeringsprocessen. Adskillige organisationer og videnskabsfolk slutter sig til sagen i disse år. Bevægelsen er især kendetegnet ved iniciaciver som Plan S, et projekt om at frigive al statsfinansieret forskning fra 2021, der blandt andet størres af EU-Kommissionen. Også fonde som Gates Foundation har fremmet ideerne ved at tvinge alle støttemodtagere til at dele deres data. Fælles for tilhængerne er, at de vil bringe den moderne forskning tættere på videnskabens ækte formål, som de ser der: at forøge samfundets vidensbase ved at arbejde i flok frem for i siloer. Flere af dem er nu begyndt at pege fingre ad universiteternes voksende evalueringskultur som den vigtigste hindring til at nå det mål. Den forvrænger forskernes motivation og skaber er usundt miljø, siger de. Det største problem i dag er, hvordan forskere bliver målt, og hvem der har kontrollen over det evalueringssystem, mener Jon Tennant. Forskere bliver i højere grad målt på, hvor og hvor meget de publicerer, end hvad de udgiver. Det giver forkerte incitamencer. Samtidig er selve evalueringsprocessen styret af kommercielle interesser hos en snæver gruppe udgivere, som ikke altid deler forskernes interesser. I dag er forskerne ikke i kontrol over systemer, og det er et stort problem, uddyber han.

      JON Tennant og Open Science-bevægelsen vil gøre op med det, som den tyske sociolog Steffen Mau har døbt "kvantificeringskulturen i videnskaben. Over de seneste årtier er mange universiteter begyndt ar tilpasse deres kultur for at leve op til de ranglister og pointsystemer, som giver prestige på feltet. l forskernes hverdag har faktorer som cirationsrater og h-indeks (en målestok for en forskers indflydelse) samt tidsskrifternes impact factors for eksempel opnået stor betydning for deres karriere og anseelse blandt kolleger. Stemmerne bag Open Science ønsker en ny model. Den skal fremme kvalitetsforskning og være ansvarlig over for fællesskabet frem for snævre interesser. Første skridt er ar udbrede adgangen til akademiske artikler. Forskere skal kunne bygge videre på alles arbejde, og private udgivere bør ikke have magten over produktet, siger de. I følge talsmænd som Jon Tennant bør vi også åbne hele den videnskabelige proces op ved at bruge internettet bedre. Tidsskrifterne skal fortsat have en plads i systemet, men idag står deres gammeldags model i vejen for at kommunikere vores forskning effektivt. Vi udnytter slet ikke netværksteknologiens muligheder godt nok, siger han. Fra en ny ide opstår, til metoden udvikles, data indhentes, og konklusionerne foreligger, skal alle kunne følge med og foreslå forbedringer, lyder opfordringen. Forskere bør for eksempel publicere deres planer for nye projekter, inden de går i gang med at indsamle data (en såkalt førregistrering) , og de skal opfordres til at dele deres resultater, før artiklen udkommer (en mikroudgivelse). Men så længe udgivere som Elsevier og Springer Nature har magt over forskernes karrierer, mangler forskerne incitamentet ril at samarbejde åbent og inspirere hinanden, mener Jon Tennant. En mere åben og fri proces vil også kunne løse reproducerbarhedskrisen i videnskaben ved at gøre studier mere transparente. Samtidig har det potentialet til at forhindre store mængder tidsspilde, da forskere vil kunne se andres fejlslagne projekter, før de begynder deres eget. OPEN Science er del af en større moderne bevægelse, som ifølge den israelske historiker Yuval Noah Harari er "den første siden 1789, der har opfundet en helt ny værdiinformationsfrihed. Der er ideen om, ar data har ret til at være frit, og at mennesker ikke bør begrænse dets bevægelser. Tankesættet udgør fllosofien bag projekter som Wikipedia, Google og Open Source inden for softwareprogrammering. Ud fra den logik skal magten ligge hos fællesskabet og ikke en smal gruppe af redaktører, når kvaliteten af forskernes arbejde skal vurderes (for der skal den trods alt). Vi skal ikke kassere peer review-modellen, blot reformere den, siger Jon Tennant: Vi skal stadig evaluere kvaliteten af forskningen, men vi bør udnytte mulighederne i online fællesskab og netværk. En ny evalueringskultur har dog sine egne faldgruber, og de største usikkerheder ved agendaen i Open Science stammer herfra. Prestigefyldte tidsskrifter som Nature og Science giver forskere og lægfolk tillid til, at deres artikler er troværdige. Alle har brug for den slags pejlemærker, når de skal navigere i den akademiske verden. Der er samtidig ingen garanti for, at forskningens kvalitet stiger, når masserne bestemmer. Risikoen ved et demokratisk evalueringssysrem er, at det skaber en ny og mere intens kvantificeringskult, hvor forskningsarcikler istedet måles på kollegernes ratinger, som vi kender det fra tjenester som Uber og Tripadvisor. Konkurrencen om prestige er en uundgåelig del af enhver branche, og dagens ræs vil blot erstattes af et nyt – på andre præmisser. Her vil andre studier tabe kampen, formentlig dem med en smallere appel. De etablerede institutioner har et ambivalent forhold til Open Science-bevægelsen. Ledere hos universiteter og udgivere omtaler den positivt i lukkede fora, fortæller Jon Tennant, men vil helst holde fast i deres eksisterende fordele, så længe de kan. De tøver også, fordi konsekvenserne af det nye regime er uforudsigelige. Alle er bange for ar flytte sig som de første, siger han.

    1. Find one of the best manufacturers of portable sinks to get portable sinks for classrooms. MONSAM Portable Sinks offer a wide range of portable sinks for the science lab workstations. Visit their website, to order one for your science lab.

    1. Eine neue wissenschaftliche Wahrheit pflegt sich nicht in der Weise durchzusetzen, daß ihre Gegner überzeugt werden und sich als belehrt erklären, sondern vielmehr dadurch, daß ihre Gegner allmählich aussterben und daß die heranwachsende Generation von vornherein mit der Wahrheit vertraut gemacht ist.A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.
    1. To further assist students in reading annotated articles, individual annotations are tagged according to a particular “learning lens,” including: glossary, for key terms; previous work; author’s experiments; results and conclusions; news and policy links; connections to learning standards; and also reference and notes.

      I once remarked on the evolution of scientific journal article titles and am surprised that they don’t mention visiting popular science journalism as a means of entering some journal articles from a broader perspective before delving into a journal article itself? They don’t always exist for all articles, but for those with interesting/broad impact they can be a more immediate way into the topic before getting in to the heavier jargon of a scientific article itself.

  5. Aug 2019
    1. This teacher’s guide contains a brief synopsis of each chapter

      this is funny

    1. The idea of historiology as a science implies that the disclosure of historical entities is what it has seized upon as its own task. Every science is constituted primarily by thematizing. That which is familiar prescientifically in Dasein as disclosed Being-in-the-world, gets projected upon the Being which is specific to it. With this projection, the realm of entities is bounded off. The ways of access to them get ‘managed’ methodologically, and the conceptual structure for interpreting them is outlined. If we may postpone the question of whether a ‘history of the Present’ is possible, and assign [zuweisen] to historiology the task of disclosing the ‘past’, then the historiological thematizing of history is possible only if, in general, the ‘past’ has in each case already been disclosed. Quite apart from the question of whether sufficient sources are available for the historiological envisagement of the past, the way to it must in general be open if we are to go back to it historiologically. It is by no means patent that anything of the sort is the case, or how this is possible.

      Heidegger: "Every science is constituted primarily by thematizing" || Just as Heidegger does not reject facticity outright he is equally careful in his critique of the limits of thematization. Indeed, the two discussions seem to correspond on many points. Is thematization a kind of meta-factualization? A factualization with a temporal component?

    1. Retrieval practice boosts learning by pulling information out of students’ heads (by responding to a brief writing prompt, for example), rather than cramming information into their heads (by lecturing at students, for example). In the classroom, retrieval practice can take many forms, including a quick no-stakes quiz. When students are asked to retrieve new information, they don’t just show what they know, they solidify and expand it. Feedback boosts learning by revealing to students what they know and what they don’t know. At the same time, this increases students’ metacognition — their understanding about their own learning progress. Spaced practice boosts learning by spreading lessons and retrieval opportunities out over time so that new knowledge and skills are not crammed in all at once. By returning to content every so often, students’ knowledge has time to be consolidated and then refreshed. Interleaving — or practicing a mix of skills (such as doing addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division problems all in one sitting) — boosts learning by encouraging connections between and discrimination among closely related topics. Interleaving sometimes slows students’ initial learning of a concept, but it leads to greater retention and learning over time.

      How can I build this into my curriculum?

  6. Jul 2019
    1. Science is part of culture, and how science is done depends on the culture in which it is practised. Consider how many medical studies were based on male mice and male patients, and so missed important biomedical insights.

      Blaming various cultures as being anti-science has come a long way for the western world. Their viewpoint however is based on the kind of socio-cultural backdrop of their own society and fails to understand or accommodate ideas from cultures that are different from theirs.

    1. The scientists were astonished by the results: selective noradrenaline release re-wired the connectivity patterns between different brain regions in a way that was extremely similar to the changes observed in humans exposed to acute stress. Networks that process sensory stimuli, such as the visual and auditory center of the brain, exhibited the strongest increase in activity. A similar rise in activity was observed in the amygdala network, which is associated with states of anxiety.
  7. Jun 2019
    1. Success ina data science project comes not from access to any one exotic tool, but from having quantifiablegoals, good methodology, crossdiscipline interactions, and a repeatable workflow.

    Tags

    Annotators

    1. So many people today – and even professional scientists – seem to me like somebody who has seen thousands of trees but has never seen a forest. A knowledge of the historic and philosophical background gives that kind of independence from prejudices of his generation from which most scientists are suffering.

      a nice way to put it

  8. May 2019
    1. Scientists can find the latest data and analysis on their areas of research, determine experiments that have already been performed that they don’t need to replicate and find new opportunities for investigation

      "Don't need to replicate"!!! A big part of science is the ability to exactly replicate and double check others' work! We need the ability to do more replication, not less!

    1. The first difficulty is that the robot’s utility function did not quite match our utility function. Our utility function is 1 if the cauldron is full, 0 if the cauldron is empty, −10 points to whatever the outcome was if the workshop has flooded, +0.2 points if it’s funny, −1,000 points (probably a bit more than that on this scale) if someone gets killed … and it just goes on and on and on.

      But it is very difficult to fully express these utility functions in code. The goal is to literally turn our ethics into code -- to translate them into coherent data structures, algorithms, and decision trees. We want to deduce our moral intuitions and more.

    1. People are rewarded for being productive rather than being right, for building ever upward instead of checking the foundations. These incentives allow weak studies to be published. And once enough have amassed, they create a collective perception of strength that can be hard to pierce.

      We desperately need to fix these foundations of science to focus on solid foundations and reproducibility...

    1. High-level bodies such as the US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and the European Commission have called for science to become more open and endorsed a set of data-management standards known as the FAIR (findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable) principles.
  9. Apr 2019
    1. Women in science are cited less than their male colleagues. They have a harder time getting work published in notable journals, including the flagships Science and Nature. They are likely paid less than their peers (a 2013 study found that women working in physics and astronomy were paid 40 percent less than men). And they are more likely to face workplace harassment.
    2. Researchers are protesting grant processes that overwhelmingly fund male-led projects, and scientific societies are reforming their sexual harassment policies.
    1. A Vision for Scholarly Communication Currently, there is a strong push to address the apparent deficits of the scholarly communication system. Open Science has the potential to change the production and dissemination of scholarly knowledge for the better, but there is no commonly shared vision that describes the system that we want to create.

      A Vision for Scholarly Communication

  10. Mar 2019
    1. Coral reefs are projected to decline by a further 70-90% at 1.5°C.

      How will that effect the species that rely on the reefs for shelter? Will some be able to survive?

    1. The main purpose of the Discovery IN is to provide interfaces and other user-facing services for data discovery across disciplines. We explore new and innovative ways of enabling discovery, including visualizations, recommender systems, semantics, content mining, annotation, and responsible metrics. We apply user involvement and participatory design to increase usability and usefulness of the solutions. We go beyond academia, involving users from all stakeholders of research data. We create FAIR and open infrastructures, following the FAIR principles complemented by the principles of open source, open data, and open content, thus enabling reuse of interfaces and user-facing services and continued innovation. Our main objectives are:
    1. To investigate whether and how user data are shared by top rated medicines related mobile applications (apps) and to characterise privacy risks to app users, both clinicians and consumers.

      "24 of 821 apps identified by an app store crawling program. Included apps pertained to medicines information, dispensing, administration, prescribing, or use, and were interactive."

    1. This page enables one to download the book "How People Learn" for free and allows one to link to related content. This book was not originally written for adult learning but is included here because it is a valuable resource, an entire book provided for free, with immediate relevance to adult learning even if every example, etc. is not based on adult learning. Rating 4/5

    1. This link is for the Association of Information Science and Technology. While many of the resources are available only to those who are association members, there are a great many resources to be found via this site. Among the items available are their newsletter and their journal articles. As the title suggests, there is a technology focus, and also a focus on scientific findings that can guide instructional designers in the presentation and display of visual and textual information, often but not exclusively online. Instructional designers are specifically addressed via the content of this site. A student membership is available. Rating 5/5

    1. Open science is the movement to make scientific research, data and dissemination accessible to all levels of an inquiring society.

      lavaylanda

      bioinformacion

      infovestigacion

      curso

      ciencia abierta

    1. Open Access publishing and Open Science MENU

      lavaylanda

      bioinformacion

      infovestigacion

      curso

      ciencia abierta

    1. Center for Open Science

      lavaylanda

      bioinformacion

      infovestigacion

      curso

      ciencia abierta