Editorial: Preregistration and Open Science Practices in Hearing Science and Audiology The Time Has Come

“With this issue, Ear and Hearing annoujnces its decision to offer and promoge the use of open science practices (Pre-registration, Open Data, and Open Materials) in an effort to document and increase scientific rigor and transparency in our field.”

Écrits scientifiques: la fin du racket pour nos universités ? – La Libre

“Each year, the universities of the Wallonia-Brussels Federation spend around fifteen million euros to subscribe to scientific publications. Their contract with Elsevier, one of the world’s heavyweights in the sector, which gives them access to more than 2,000 scientific journals, ends on December 31. This is an opportunity to put things back on track. A group of university experts was therefore mandated by Cref (the Council of Rectors of French-speaking universities) and BICfB (the Interuniversity Library of the French Community of Belgium) to negotiate the follow-up. According to our information, the discussions promise to be long….”

The unintended consequences of Open Access publishing – And possible futures – ScienceDirect

“Highlights

 

• Most early geography journals were established by learned societies as non-profit-making ventures.

• Most of these are now published by commercial organisations, alongside many others they have established.

• Journal publication is now a capitalist, profit-making venture to which academics donate their intellectual property.

• Moves to make all journal papers derived from publicly-funded research freely accessible and sustained by author charges will exacerbate this situation.

• Non-capitalist alternatives are desirable….”

 

Justice Department investigates Sci-Hub founder on suspicion of working for Russian intelligence – The Washington Post

“The Justice Department is investigating a woman who runs a major Internet piracy operation on suspicion that she may also be working with Russian intelligence to steal U.S. military secrets from defense contractors, according to people familiar with the matter.

Alexandra Elbakyan?, a computer programmer born in Kazakhstan, is the creator of Sci-Hub, a website that provides free access to academic papers that are usually available only through expensive subscriptions. Elbakyan’s supporters have favorably described her as a “Robin Hood of science.”

It’s unclear whether Elbakyan is using Sci-Hub’s operations in service of Russian intelligence, but her critics say she has demonstrated significant hacking skills by collecting log-in credentials from journal subscribers, particularly at universities, and using them to pilfer vast amounts of academic literature….”

Comments on “Factors affecting global flow of scientific knowledge in environmental sciences” by Sonne et al. (2020) – ScienceDirect

Abstract:  In a recent publication in the journal Science of the Total Environment, Sonne et al. (2020) highlight how Open Access journals and associated fees may limit the production and flow of knowledge. Sonne et al. (2020) also illustrate how the pressure to publish has accelerated the proliferation of predatory journals and has, in some cases, led to the use of fictious data which may increase the public’s distrust of science. The paper also discusses how researchers in poor countries may be left behind by the Open Access initiative of publishing houses due to a lack of funding to cover publication fees. Thus, Sonne et al. (2020) make a valuable contribution to the debate on Open access versus Paywall publishing practices, but several inconsistences and omissions are highlighted by this paper.

 

Comments on “Factors affecting global flow of scientific knowledge in environmental sciences” by Sonne et al. (2020) – ScienceDirect

Abstract:  In a recent publication in the journal Science of the Total Environment, Sonne et al. (2020) highlight how Open Access journals and associated fees may limit the production and flow of knowledge. Sonne et al. (2020) also illustrate how the pressure to publish has accelerated the proliferation of predatory journals and has, in some cases, led to the use of fictious data which may increase the public’s distrust of science. The paper also discusses how researchers in poor countries may be left behind by the Open Access initiative of publishing houses due to a lack of funding to cover publication fees. Thus, Sonne et al. (2020) make a valuable contribution to the debate on Open access versus Paywall publishing practices, but several inconsistences and omissions are highlighted by this paper.

 

Publishing in 2020: A checklist to support a shift in behaviour to achieve best practice – Cobey – – European Journal of Clinical Investigation – Wiley Online Library

Abstract:  When it comes to publishing, researchers’ stated norms for established best practices often do not align with their actual behaviour1. Consider the example of data sharing: failure to share research data when publishing is increasingly viewed as a barrier to research progress, and to contribute to waste and inefficiency2. Policies seeking to maximise the value of public funding are at the heart of the data sharing movement. Patients appear to be overwhelmingly agreeable to their data being shared too3.