A presentation by Martin Klein, scientist, Los Alamos National Laboratory, and Herbert Van de Sompel, Chief Innovation Officer, Data Archiving and Networked Services.
“In 2019, eLife appointed UC Berkeley geneticist Mike Eisen as the new Editor-in-Chief. His role is to drive the on-going development of eLife and steer the journal through the evolving landscape of science publishing. Ever since his institutional library thwarted his efforts, over 20 years ago, to download papers for his research project, Eisen has been a powerful proponent of the value of the open access movement. Chris Smith went to see him to hear his views on how science publishing needs to change, what he has planned for eLife, and how he almost became a radio sports commentator….”
“A reflection upon Culturico’s interview with Professor Randy Schekman about the growing open-access movement in the biological sciences, and what it means for the future of scientific publishing.
On Friday, 5thApril 2019, I had the unexpected honour of conducting a long-distance video interview with Nobel Prize winner in Physiology and Medicine Professor Randy Schekman. This interview is carried out in conjunction with Federico Germani’s in-depth Culturico article on open-access science publishing, and it provides valuable insight into the opinions of one of the open-access movement’s most ardent disciples….”
” “For research to be really impactful, the public has to be involved. They need to understand the research and we need to help to connect the research to what people care about,” says Imran Khan, Head of Public Engagement at Wellcome Trust in the UK, one of the world’s largest research funders. But do the public wish to be involved in science? The German and Swedish Science Barometers, the EU-project ORION Open Science European public attitudes survey and the Wellcome Trust Global Monitor have all asked this question….
After the presentations, the participants discussed in smaller groups why and how the public should be involved in science. They then shared their thoughts both orally and by using an online tool. According to the workshop participants, the public should be involved in science because:
- Science will have an impact on their lives.
- We need the views of the public.
- Knowledge gives insights and increases trust. It’s a base for democracy.
- It can improve quality and broaden perspectives.
- They pay for it!
But how can we interest the public to get involved? Some suggestions from the participants in the workshop included:
- Must depart from their own interest and relevance.
- The wow effect – science is fun!
- Create arenas for connection between researchers and the public.
- Show how research affects society and how you can contribute.
- Make participating fun and giving….”
“On Thursday, the University of California announced its separation with Elsevier, one of the world’s largest — and most profitable — publishers of academic research.
After months of negotiations, the publisher had refused to meet UC’s core demands: universal open access to UC research and a subscription plan that would account for open access publishing fees. So UC walked away.
In the days since, messages of support and congratulations have come pouring in from around the world. Here is a sample of the responses, by turns fiery, joyous, and heartwarming….”
“Perhaps the paper itself is to blame. Scientific methods evolve now at the speed of software; the skill most in demand among physicists, biologists, chemists, geologists, even anthropologists and research psychologists, is facility with programming languages and “data science” packages. And yet the basic means of communicating scientific results hasn’t changed for 400 years. Papers may be posted online, but they’re still text and pictures on a page.
What would you get if you designed the scientific paper from scratch today? …
Software is a dynamic medium; paper isn’t. When you think in those terms it does seem strange that research like Strogatz’s, the study of dynamical systems, is so often being shared on paper …
I spoke to Theodore Gray, who has since left Wolfram Research to become a full-time writer. He said that his work on the notebook was in part motivated by the feeling, well formed already by the early 1990s, “that obviously all scientific communication, all technical papers that involve any sort of data or mathematics or modeling or graphs or plots or anything like that, obviously don’t belong on paper. That was just completely obvious in, let’s say, 1990,” he said. …”