497 Matching Annotations
  1. Jan 2022
  2. Dec 2021
  3. Nov 2021
    1. I have no problem with publishers making a profit, or with peer reviewers doing their work for free. The problem I have is when there is such an enormous gap between those two positions.

      If publishers make billions in profit (and they do), while at the same time reviewers are doing a billion dollars worth of work for free, that seems like a broken system.

      I think there are parallels with how users contribute value to social media companies. In both cases, users/reviewers are getting some value in return, but most of the value that's captured goes to the publisher/tech company.

      I'd like to see a system where more of the value accrues to the reviewers. This could be in the form of direct payment, although this is probably less preferable because of the challenges of trying to convert the value of different kinds of peer review into a dollar amount.

      Another problem with simply paying reviewers is that it retains the status quo; we keep the same system with all of it's faults and redistribute profits. This is an OK option as it at least sees some of the value that normally accrues to publishers moving to reviewers.

      I also don’t believe that open access - in it’s current form - is a good option either. There are still enormous costs associated with publishing; the only difference is that those costs are now covered by institutions instead of the reader. The publisher still makes a heart-stopping profit.

      A more elegant solution, although more challenging, would be for academics to step away from publishers altogether and start their own journals, on their own terms.

  4. Oct 2021
    1. “Bring your attention back to the present moment, and make a deliberate choice to engage in the action that would reduce the gap separating your current life from your ideal life.”

      “You have set the intention. Now it's time to act.”

    1. Today, I noticed that Michal Korzonek has expanded on his concept of minimalist journaling.

      Michal’s Medium page has this in the masthead: One square = one day of your life. What will you draw in yours? ✨ https://infinitysquares.carrd.co/

  5. Sep 2021
    1. This project is an initial prototype of an application for a minimalist journaling system as conceived by Michal Korzonek.
    1. R E S E A R C H A R T I C L E

      Found on Wiley Journals Audience: Wiley Open Access journals are supported by a network of authoritative journals and societies as well as internationally renowned editorial board members. All research articles published in Wiley Open Access journals are immediately freely available to read, download and share. Wiley Open Access publishes a number of online journals across biological, chemical and health sciences.

    Tags

    Annotators

  6. Aug 2021
  7. Jul 2021
    1. Prof Nichola Raihani on Twitter: “Submitted a paper reporting null results to a mid tier journal. Guess how it went. I literally don’t care at this point but I do feel bad for the first author (who I won’t name here). Https://t.co/sX5lTcEl29” / Twitter. (n.d.). Retrieved July 16, 2021, from https://twitter.com/nicholaraihani/status/1415308025179656194

  8. Jun 2021
    1. the Wall Street Journal is over a century old newspaper daily (established on July 8, 1889) in the USA, its app version was launched in 2004 to allow smartphone users access information on the go.
    1. Persistent Identifiers (PIDs) beyond the DOI

      Research other persistent identifiers besides DOI.

    2. To get closer to attaining coveted “rich” metadata and ultimately contribute to a “richer” scholarly communication ecosystem, journals first need to have machine-readable metadata that is clean, consistent, and as interoperable as possible.

      What WordPress plugins provide structured metadata functionality for OpenPhysio.

    1. Publisher costs usually include copyediting/formatting and organizing peer review. While these content transformations are fundamental and beneficial, they alone cannot justify the typical APC (Article Publication Charge), especially since peer reviewers are not paid.

      But peer reviewers are largely responsible for generating the assertions you talk about in the next paragraph, and which apparently, justify the cost of publishing.

  9. May 2021
    1. There was no public forum for incremental advances.

      I've never thought of the academic paper as a format that enabled the documentation of incremental progress.

    1. Network science is now a mature research field, whose growth was catalysed by the introduction of the ‘small world’ network model in 1998. Networks give mathematical descriptions of systems containing containing many interacting components, including power grids, neuronal networks and ecosystems. This collection brings together selected research, comments and review articles on how networks are structured (Layers & structure); how networks can describe healthy and disordered systems (Brain & disorders); how dynamics unfold on networks (Dynamics & spread); and community structures and resilience in networks (Community & resilience).

      This is a great looking collection of articles on network science.

  10. Apr 2021
    1. Apidologie

      Translations :

      • French translation (title and keywords): <br/> La taille du corps mais non l’âge influence la phototaxis chez les bourdons (Bombus terrestris L.).

      activité locomotrice / division du travail / taille du corps / phototaxie / âge / Bombus

      • German translation (title and keywords): <br/> Die Körpergrösse und nicht das Alter beeinflusst das Phototaxisverhalten bei Arbeiterinnen der Hummel Bombus terrestris L.

      Bewegungsaktivität / Arbeitsteilung / Körpergrösse / Phototaxis / Alter / Bombus

    1. Species turnover and low stability in a community of euglossine bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae) sampled within 28 years in an urban forest fragment

      French translation (title and keywords):

      Turnover d’espèces et faible stabilité dans une communauté d’abeilles euglossine (Hymenoptera : Apidae) échantillonnée dans un fragment de forêt urbaine, pendant 28 ans.

      Euglossa cordata / Eulaema nigrita / abeille à orchidées / espèce résiliente.

      German translation (title and keywords):

      Artenwechsel und geringe Stabilität in einer Gemeinschaft von Euglossinen (Hymenoptera: Apidae), die über einen Zeitraum von 28 Jahren in einem urbanen Waldfragment gesammelt wurden.

      Euglossa cordata / Eulaema nigrita / Prachtbienen/ resiliente Arten.

  11. Mar 2021
  12. Feb 2021
  13. Jan 2021
    1. The submitted manuscript is a privileged communication; reviewers must treat it as confidential. It should not be retained or copied. Also, reviewers must not share the manuscript with any colleagues without the explicit permission of the editor. Reviewers and editors must not make any personal or professional use of the data, arguments, or interpretations (other than those directly involved in its peer review) prior to publication unless they have the authors' specific permission or are writing an editorial or commentary to accompany the article.

      Etika untuk Mitra Bestari

    2. The reviewer should have identified and commented on major strengths and weaknesses of study design and methodology The reviewer should comment accurately and constructively upon the quality of the author's interpretation of the data, including acknowledgment of its limitations. The reviewer should comment on major strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript as a written communication, independent of the design, methodology, results, and interpretation of the study. The reviewer should comment on any ethical concerns raised by the study, or any possible evidence of low standards of scientific conduct. The reviewer should provide the author with useful suggestions for improvement of the manuscript. The reviewer's comments to the author should be constructive and professional The review should provide the editor the proper context and perspective to make a decision on acceptance (and/or revision) of the manuscript.

      Poin-poin yang mejadi tolok ukur mitra bestari dalam melakukan review

    3. to provide written assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of written research, with the aim of improving the reporting of research and identifying the most appropriate and highest quality material for the journal

      Tujuan dari peninjauan sejawat (peer-review) adalah mengetahui kekuatan dan kelemahan naskah sehingga dapat dilakukan peningkatan mutu.

    4. Authorship

      semua orang yang berkontribusi secara substansial terhadap proses perencanaan, pengumpulan data, interpretasi hasil maupun penulisan dan merevisi naskah secara kritis dan menyetujui manuskrip versi akhir dan setuju untuk bertanggung jawab atas semua aspek pekerjaan. Setiap orang yang memenuhi kriteria pertama harus diizinkan berpartisipasi dalam penyusunan dan persetujuan manuskrip versi final (ICMJE 2017). Penulis pertama haruslah seseorang yang berkontribusi paling banyak.

      https://www.ease.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/doi.10.20316.ESE_.2018.44.e1.in_.pdf

    5. Animal experiments should require full compliance with local, national, ethical, and regulatory principles, and local licensing arrangements

      Demikian juga dengan penggunaan hewan sebayak objek kajian, harus mengikuti standar etika yang berlaku (Helsinki).

    6. Journals should have explicit policies as to whether these review board approvals must be documented by the authors, or simply attested to in their cover letter, and how they should be described in the manuscript itself

      Seminimal mungkin, penulis harus menyampaikan keputusan etik dari komisi etik dan lebih ideal lagi jika menyertakan surat keputusan bebas etiknya.

    7. For those investigators who do not have access to formal ethics review committees, the principles outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki should be followed

      Jika tidak memungkinkan untuk diperoleh hasil review etik, penulis seharusnya secara explisit menjelaskan apakah pelaksanaan kajian sesuai dengan Deklarasi Helsinki atau mereka memiliki pandangan lain.

    8. Documented review and approval from a formally constituted review board (Institutional Review Board or Ethics committee) should be required for all studies involving people, medical records, and human tissues

      Penulis harus menyertakan keterangan bebas review yang diterbitkan oleh komisi etik penelitian kesehatan.

    9. Fabrication, falsification, concealment, deceptive reporting, or misrepresentation of data constitute scientific misconduct

      Untuk mencapai kualitas terbaik pada ilmu pengetahuan yang diterbitkan, kajian harus terbebas dari permasalahan etika tersebut

  14. Dec 2020
    1. Following the model of open-source software, we can enter our ideas and expressions into public discourse

      This also isn't a well-aligned argument. Articles published in a for-profit journal are entered into the public discourse (although obviously not into the public domain). Unless public means "without cost", which I don't think it does.

      We might want to broaden this to include open-access, which is specific to publication models.

  15. Nov 2020
  16. Oct 2020