Cargando…
The five deadly sins of science publishing
Science cannot progress without scientists reporting their findings. And yet researchers have given control of this central pillar of the scientific process to science publishers, who are in the business of serving the interests of their journals; these are not always the same as the interests of sc...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
F1000Research
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4457117/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26097694 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.6488.1 |
_version_ | 1782374940802023424 |
---|---|
author | Tracz, Vitek |
author_facet | Tracz, Vitek |
author_sort | Tracz, Vitek |
collection | PubMed |
description | Science cannot progress without scientists reporting their findings. And yet researchers have given control of this central pillar of the scientific process to science publishers, who are in the business of serving the interests of their journals; these are not always the same as the interests of science. This editorial describes the problems with the process of preparing and publishing research findings, and with judging their veracity and significance, and then explains how we at Faculty of 1000 are starting to tackle the ‘deadly sins’ of science publishing. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4457117 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | F1000Research |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-44571172015-06-19 The five deadly sins of science publishing Tracz, Vitek F1000Res Editorial Science cannot progress without scientists reporting their findings. And yet researchers have given control of this central pillar of the scientific process to science publishers, who are in the business of serving the interests of their journals; these are not always the same as the interests of science. This editorial describes the problems with the process of preparing and publishing research findings, and with judging their veracity and significance, and then explains how we at Faculty of 1000 are starting to tackle the ‘deadly sins’ of science publishing. F1000Research 2015-05-11 /pmc/articles/PMC4457117/ /pubmed/26097694 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.6488.1 Text en Copyright: © 2015 Tracz V http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ Data associated with the article are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Zero "No rights reserved" data waiver (CC0 1.0 Public domain dedication). |
spellingShingle | Editorial Tracz, Vitek The five deadly sins of science publishing |
title | The five deadly sins of science publishing |
title_full | The five deadly sins of science publishing |
title_fullStr | The five deadly sins of science publishing |
title_full_unstemmed | The five deadly sins of science publishing |
title_short | The five deadly sins of science publishing |
title_sort | five deadly sins of science publishing |
topic | Editorial |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4457117/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26097694 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.6488.1 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT traczvitek thefivedeadlysinsofsciencepublishing AT traczvitek fivedeadlysinsofsciencepublishing |