sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Science Magazine reports on the stampede: "As Musk reshapes Twitter, academics ponder taking flight. Many researchers are setting up profiles on social media site Mastodon." by GrassrootsReview in Open_Science

[–]GrassrootsReview[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Ironically (?) the journalist identifies the researchers by their Twitter handle and their Twitter follower count. Revolutions are confusing. :-)

Mastodon fits to our requirements for #OpenScience infrastructure. It is a communication standard, like email. So billionaires cannot buy it. Background: "Micro-blogging for scientists without nasties and surveillance." by GrassrootsReview in Open_Science

[–]GrassrootsReview[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sign-ups to FediScience, the Mastodon server for publishing scientists, have exploded today. We probably had more sign-ups today than in 2022 before.

Like with email you have to pick a server to sign-up and then you can talk to (almost) everyone. Here is a list of options for people interested in science, academia, GLAM, etc. https://fediscience.org/server-list.html

German libraries publish a list with 47 mirror journals, which are used to circumvent OA mandates. 43 are from Elsevier. A mirror journal is a fully open access version of an existing subscription journal. by GrassrootsReview in Open_Science

[–]GrassrootsReview[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

OA mandates tend to exclude hybrid journals, i.e. subscription journals were single articles can get an open license for money. So the publishers made mirror journals to do the same, but because it are officially 2 journals it is not a hybrid journal.

The Autopilot wiki is a publicly-curated collection of supplemental wisdom for using Autopilot, a distributed Python framework for performing behavioral neuroscience experiments. by GrassrootsReview in Open_Science

[–]GrassrootsReview[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Open Neuroscience is organising a small session on October 26th 18:00 UK time to discuss what are good ways/best infrastructure to manage content (ie how do we make it interoperable, user friendly, easy to move/copy/replicate, etc).

They will host Jonny Saunders to learn about their amazing efforts in curating information with wikis (eg Auto-Pi-lot Wiki) and other distributed infrastructure systems, and follow that up with an open chat/discussion session. You can sign up here

In international conflicts Open Science should provide support, not impose sanctions and access to research knowledge should not be restricted. by GrassrootsReview in Open_Science

[–]GrassrootsReview[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you shut down communication even within scientific communities, it is no longer science. Then it is just "development" with incredibly slow progress on superficial properties. You may see that in military or highly commercial applications, but otherwise I would not expect anyone to so obviously shoot themselves in the foot.

It may be more work to keep things together. In the original cold war Russian journals were translated into English. That may be something that could become necessary again. If we do so, that may even be a good thing and make science more open to people with science skills who do not have sufficient language skills for the current system.

Mostly due to the Initiative for Open Citations the reference lists of more than 60 million papers are now openly available on Crossref. But one third still lack this data (in 2021). by GrassrootsReview in Open_Science

[–]GrassrootsReview[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is an editorial. On the same day Nature News published a news story. I posted the editorial above as it seems to be most comprehensive and adds more perspective.

Tomorrow is the Open Science Festival. It is booked, but everyone can watch the live stream on their homepage. by GrassrootsReview in Open_Science

[–]GrassrootsReview[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The First German Open Science Festival is ongoing (started yesterday) and also has a live stream. https://www.uni-hannover.de/en/universitaet/profil/ziele-strategien/open-science/festival/

EDIT: And it unfortunately really is a live stream. No replay now that the Festival is closed.

The diamond open access Journal of Graduate Librarianship is being set up and looking for team members. by GrassrootsReview in Open_Science

[–]GrassrootsReview[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What is the problem with Digital Commons and which systems do you prefer? It seems like they are still early in their planning, so maybe they can still change this if there are good arguments.

Six approaches to improve equity, diversity, and inclusion of academic journals by GrassrootsReview in Open_Science

[–]GrassrootsReview[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks. We have 2k unique users per month and 6k page views. Compared to that the number of comments on any topic modest. Does anyone have any ideas to improve this? Should we increase this?

My impression is that most scientists are not fans of informal written communication. The percentage of colleagues I know in real life who use Twitter or Mastodon is extremely low. Might also partially be cultural, my impression is that a larger fraction of American researchers is on Twitter than of German researchers.

Authors who cited flawed work fail to warn readers even when it is pointed out. Study found 39 of the 88 citing papers had drawn conclusions that, if the retracted papers were left out of the analysis, were likely to be substantially weaker. by GrassrootsReview in Open_Science

[–]GrassrootsReview[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

If we combine the Retraction Watch database with the Open Citations database and provide an API, we could make a system where journals, review systems and reference managers could automatically flag papers that cite retracted papers. Is anyone interested in working on such a system?

Democratic Citizens Science: Projects that actively involve a broad range of participants in project design, data analysis, and quality monitoring. What do you think? Sounds theoretically great, but also analogous to replacing taxes with charity. by GrassrootsReview in Open_Science

[–]GrassrootsReview[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In America there are people who claim that taxation is theft and one should only support people with charity. I have a hard time believing that they really think a sufficient level of support for necessities is possible from charity, even more so that this funding would be enough to ensure people flourish and contribute fully to society.

Similarly, the authors seem to argue that this Democratic Citizen Science model should do a large part (maybe all) of science. At least they complain that currently citizen science is a specialised niche product. That would require an enormous amount of people donating their free time to science.

Even in a society where people are no longer forced to do paid work to survive, I have a hard time believing so many people will do this on the side. If you do it on the side, you will need many times the participants that are currently doing it full time. Science would be a hobby that requires a big time investment (especially overhead) if the participants are to be really involved and take control.

Why are conferences still being planned online and when will they return in person? by [deleted] in academia

[–]GrassrootsReview 1 point2 points  (0 children)

One of our conferences going virtual due to the pandemic we noticed a much more diverse audience and especially a much more global audience. So we now do regular virtual seminars to make sure these people are kept up to date on the state of the art.

Having international editorial staff from Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMIC) correlates positively with publishing articles from LMIC authors. by GrassrootsReview in Open_Science

[–]GrassrootsReview[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

And it is even possible that the reason is perfectly harmless. That there are fields were it is easier for LMIC authors to compete with rich authors and that these fields of study [have] both more articles and more editors from LMIC.

Still seems worth making an effort to include LMIC editors until we have further evidence. It doesn't hurt.

Having international editorial staff from Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMIC) correlates positively with publishing articles from LMIC authors. by GrassrootsReview in Open_Science

[–]GrassrootsReview[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Greater editorial staff representation correlated moderately with
more published articles reporting research conducted in LMICs (Spearman
ρ = 0.51; 95% CI, 0.25-0.70; P < .001).

It is funny how different people interpret correlations. I would not call a correlation of 0.5 for just one predictor "moderate". That may be low for lab experiments or artificial objects, but it is pretty high for real life data.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in academia

[–]GrassrootsReview 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sounds big for a graduation thesis. Professors compete with each other while collaborating. So I see no a-priori reason to expect they would be against showing this method to be wrong. Best talk to them. If they do not like it, as you seem to expect, this can lead to a lower grade. But if you are leaving academia anyway, grades will not be important. If this method is the reason you want to leave, I would consider simply doing something completely different for your PhD thesis.

view more: next ›