EASE

Author: EASE Secretary

  • RESEARCH EVALUATION

    Grens K. 2006. NSF examines plateau in US publications. US scientists’ share of publications is declining in the face of competition from countries like China. The Scientist, November 14.

    The Science Resources Statistics Division of the National Science Foundation held a workshop to explore why the number of US science publications remained essentially flat from 1992 to 2002, leading to a drop in the US share of publications from 38% to 30%.
    One of the reason is that the percentage of US publications is declining as other countries increase their output. Moreover, this is partly due to an increase in global collaborations and to a growing appreciation among non-US researchers for the value of publishing in English-language journals, making it more competitive for American scientists to get their work accepted.
    Much of the new competition appears to be coming from China.

    http://www.the-scientist.com/daily/2006/11/14/

  • ETHICAL ISSUES

    Elliott, K. C. 2006. An Ethics of Expertise Based on Informed Consent. Science and Engineering Ethics. 12(4):637-661.
    Scientists are believed to serve society by the informing both the public and its political representatives, but the coupled with this is the moral responsibility to benefit society. This paper bases its theory on the notation that scientists must be responsible for providing information in a way that promotes autonomous decision-making. A theoretical framework is developed for an “ethics of expertise” (EOE). It is suggested that the concept of informed consent (developed in biomedical ethics) can help set guidelines to help all scientists fulfil their ethical responsibilities.

    http://http://www.opragen.co.uk/SEE/fulltext.php3?&id=717

  • ECONOMICS AND FUNDING, RESEARCH EVALUATION

    King, D. W., Tenopir, C., Clarke, M. 2006. Measuring Total Reading of Journal Articles. D-Lib Magazine. 12(10).

    This article states that from the perspective of cost–benefit analysis the amount of reading of an article is an essential metric to compare with article and journal publishing costs. The myth that journal articles are read infrequently has been quashed by the advent of electronic publishing and ability to observe server counts of hits and downloads. The four main measures used to assess the amount of reading per article are; article citations, surveys of amount of reading divided by number of articles, electronic “hits and downloads” and surveys using Table-of-Contents, the later being the main study of this article. Results of this form analysis are complementary to other estimates of amount of reading, and are proposed to overcome their flaws.

    http://www.dlib.org/dlib/october06/king/10king.html

  • ETHICAL ISSUES

    Jaffer U, Cameron AEP. 2006. Deceit and fraud in medical research. International Journal of Surgery 4 (2):122-126

    Reported incidences of deceit and fraud in medical literature are alarming.
    The problem ranges from gift authorship to wholesale fabrication of data. Among the potential factors which may have promoted fraud and deceit there are financial gain, personal fame and the competitive scientific environment Most cases may be dealt with at an institutional level; the principles of ethical behaviour should be developed in scientists curricula; the role of regulatory organisations such as the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) is pointed out.

  • ECONOMICS AND FUNDING

    Frankfurt Group. 2006. Survey on the impact of VAT on libraries and the scientific publication markets. Final report. Frankfurt Group. 16 p.

    Printed and electronic versions of publications are treated differently within the European Union as regards VAT rates: whereas books and periodicals are subject to a reduced
    rate, electronic publications are charged with the full rate. These regulations have several consequences for European libraries and the market for scholarly publications in Europe. The report contains the results of a survey commissioned by the Frankfurt Group in order to show the impact of current VAT regulations on the resources available for libraries and the competitive position of EU publishing, education and research.

    http://www.sub.uni-goettingen.de/frankfurtgroup/vat/EndberichtVAT210906.pdf

  • ETHICAL ISSUES

    Couzin J, Unger K. 2006. Scientific misconduct. Cleaning up the paper trial. Science 312:38-42

    Using Thomson Scientific’s ISI Web of Knowledge and Google Scholar, Science found dozens of citations of retracted papers in fields from physics to cancer research to plant biology. Efforts to correct scientific literature are often uneven and chaotic. Like ghosts riffling the pages of journals, retracted papers live on and continue to be cited; sometimes their citations are “negative”, but scientists often do not know that the work they are citing has been retracted. The article gives many examples of retraction cases and comments of major editors and relevant scientists. [DOI: 10.1126/science.312.5770.38]

    http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/312/5770/40

  • RESEARCH EVALUATION

    Cockerill M. 2006. Identifying the most important research – Is there more to life than Impact Factor? The Write Stuff 15 (3):82-84

    Impact factor has become one of the most debated themes on research evaluation. In this article published in the official journal of the European Medical Writers Association (www.emwa.org), Cockerill exoplores the developments in citation tracking services since the pioneering work of Eugene Garfield who created what is now a de facto standard (impact factor). Among them: Google scholar, Scopus, CrossRef, CiteSeer and CiteBAse. Alternatives to IF (article-level citation information, downloads, etc.) are pointed out and critivally discussed.

  • POLITICS OF PUBLISHING

    Wager E. 2006. Publishing clinical trial results: The future beckons. PLoS Clin Trials 1(6): e31.

    Why do we publish clinical trials results? Is the present format for reporting results from randomized clinical trials in peer-reviewed journals still efficient and effective? The advantages offered by alternative models of publications are presented and the implications for trial sponsors and medical journals are discussed in detail. Problems, opportunities and possible solutions on reporting results are clearly pointed out in the ever changing scenario of online publications.
    http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pctr.0010031

  • ETHICAL ISSUES

    Farthing, M. J. G. 2006. Authors and Publication Practices. Science and Engineering Ethics. 12(1):41.

    Not only authors can perpetrate research and publication misconduct, but journal editors and reviewers may also breach ethical standards (particularly with respect to conflicts of interest). The progression towards ‘open’ peer review is a result of the need for increased transparency. This paper also discusses the need for a drastic overhaul of the relationship between journals, editors and the biomedical industry. A radical proposal that journals should no longer publish clinical trials sponsored by industry is examined.

    http://www.opragen.co.uk/SEE/contents.php3?volume=12&issue=1

  • PUBLISHING, LANGUAGE AND WRITING

    García Landa L. G. 2006. Academic Language Barriers and Language Freedom. Current Issues in Language Planning. 7(1):61.
    The current trend to publish research predominantly in English acts as an obstacle to many non-English-speaking academics in poor countries wishing to access and publish scientific literature. A case study at the National Autonomous University of Mexico examines these issues by asking researchers and teachers about the language of choice for their activities, the problems they faced and how they were solved.

    http://www.multilingual-matters.net/cilp/007/1/default.htm

  • PUBLISHING, LANGUAGE AND WRITING

    Burrough-Boenisch, J. 2006. Negotiable Acceptability: Reflections on the Interactions between Language Professionals in Europe and NNS 1 Scientists Wishing to Publish in English. Current Issues in Language Planning. 7(1):31.

    This paper discusses what affects the criteria of acceptability of language professionals when working with a non-native speaking author before submission of their papers in English. It is argue that language planners could make significant contribution by both training language professionals and securing better guidance from journals.

    http://www.multilingual-matters.net/cilp/007/1/default.htm

  • PUBLISHING, LANGUAGE AND WRITING

    Ammon U. 2006. Language Planning for International Scientific Communication: An Overview of Questions and Potential Solutions. Current Issues in Language Planning. 7(1):1.

    The recent history of international science communication is discussed in the context of possible improvements to language planning. With English increasing becoming the language choice in today’s scientific communication, the paper analyses the problems and advantage which are encountered. Suggestions include a campaign to raise awareness amongst Anglophones of the difficulties faced by non-Anglophones, especially by scientists of recently declined international languages. The paper also discusses the possible downsides for scientific progress by a reduction to a single international science language.

    http://www.multilingual-matters.net/cilp/007/1/default.htm