Reading a scientific paper isn’t such a daunting task when you break it down into manageable steps.
Marcos Paulo Prado/Unsplash
Dear Diary, keeping a daily journal of these pandemic times can help us process them and follow in some great literary footsteps.
Many African researchers feel they should do research that would be acceptable for publication in Western outlets.
Oleksandr Rupeta/NurPhoto via Getty Images
The desire of scholars and universities in Africa to fit into a model imposed from elsewhere may hinder development in Africa.
There has been a rapid redirection of resources towards COVID-19-related research. In the long term, this resource reallocation is likely to result in budget cuts in all research areas.
Scientific results are being rushed out quicker than ever to fight coronavirus. Here’s what you need to know about preprints, peer review and the difference between the two.
There were eerie similarities between Pepys’ time and our own.
Justin Sullivan/Getty Images
Sure, there were no Zoom calls or ventilators. But thanks to a prolific diarist, we can see some striking similarities, from daily death counts to quack remedies.
Nigerian universities should ensure their journals are of a high standard.
Pius Utomi Ekpei/AFP via Getty Images
The proliferation of sub-standard journals may be attributed to the proliferation of universities in Nigeria and this demands urgent attention.
Australia’s Chief Scientist Alan Finkel.
Australia’s top scientist Alan Finkel says too many poor quality research papers are being published in Australia, and the system may inadvertently encourage academics to behave badly.
For now, it’s going to be trickier for the University of California community to access some academic journals.
The UC libraries let their Elsevier journal subscriptions lapse and now the publisher has cut their online access. It’s a painful milestone in the fight UC hopes may transform how journals get paid.
Open access journals come with hidden costs.
An urgent discussion is needed around the cost of research publications.
If passed as is, the South African Copyright Amendment Bill will lead to revenue and job losses in the publishing industry.
If South Africa’s Copyright Amendment Bill is accepted as is, it will be detrimental to academic content production.
Libraries subscribe digitally to academic journals – and are left with nothing in the stacks when the contract expires.
Digital publishing hasn’t resulted in the free and open access to information many envisioned. Universities are increasingly fed up with a system they see as charging them for their own scholars’ labor.
‘Say cheese so I can show all my friends how cute you are – and unwittingly show corporations your age, race and gender!’
Parents have engaged in forms of ‘sharenting’ for generations. The digital age has complicated things, but while critics make some valid points, they’re not seeing the forest for the trees.
There’s huge societal value in opening up access to knowledge resources.
Globally, the scholarly publishing system is in dire need of financial and legislative change.
Literature reviews can help to synthesise a lot of information, but there are pitfalls.
Researchers should try to make their literature reviews as reliable as possible and adhere to strict standards.
There is a huge appetite for science and other research - so why aren’t more academic publications truly ‘open access’?
Could the real open access please stand up? If more research was published according to true open access principles, we’d see better application of evidence for everyone’s benefit.
Many academics are falling prey to predatory journals.
Everything you need to know about predatory publishers.
What is the best way to return ‘Africa’ to African Studies?
African Studies remains a colonised space rife with misrepresentation, homogenisation and essentialising about Africa.
Scientists themselves may be the key to finding the right balance.
Scales image via www.shutterstock.com.
The public loses when their only choices are inaccessible, impenetrable journal articles or overhyped click-bait about science. Scientists themselves need to step up and help bridge the divide.
More medical experts should contribute to Wikipedia to ensure its health pages are accurate.
The academic medical community largely views Wikipedia with suspicion. But some traditional journals are starting to take the site more seriously – and some journals work very closely with it.