ciencia_2.0 - Mario A Núñez on Diigo

22 Nov 09

First, there is the content. This consists of scientific papers submitted to the journal by researchers, usually (though not exclusively) university employees.
The final part of the business plan is to sell the content (supplied for free), suitably edited (for free) and refereed (for free) back to the universities paying the wages of the people who so generously donated their labour. Not just sell, of course, but sell at a grossly inflated price.
8 more annotations...
- Just to summarise, then: academics write the papers, do the refereeing and provide the editorial oversight for free and we then buy back the product of our labours at an astronomical price.
- Right into the pockets of the journal publishers.
- It seems to me that it would be a very easy matter to get rid of academic journals entirely (at least from the areas of physics and astronomy that I work in).
- I would say, to put the paper on the arXiv and let others comment on it, either in private with the authors or perhaps each arXiv entry should have a comments facility, like a blog, so that the paper could be discussed interactively.
- The internet is pushing us in a direction in which the research literature should be discussed much more openly than it is at present, and in which it evolves much more as a result of criticisms and debate.
- A sizeable fraction of papers published in the professional literature receive no citations at all in their lifetime.
- So we end up paying over the odds for papers that nobody even bothers to read. Madness.
- As more and more departments decide not to participate in this racket, no doubt the publishers will respond by hiking the price for the remaining customers. But it seems to me that this lunacy will eventually have to come to an end.

14 Nov 09

News: Farewell to the Printed Monograph - Inside Higher Ed

""I have been increasingly convinced that the business model based on printed monograph was not merely failing but broken," said Phil Pochoda, director of the Michigan press. "Why try to fight your way through this? Why try to remain in territory you know is doomed? Scholarly presses will be primarily digital in a decade. Why not seize the opportunity to do it now?""

www.insidehighered.com/...michigan - Preview

ciencia_2.0 agujero

Ciencia 2.0: Redes sociales y aplicaciones en línea para académicos

www.hipertext.net/pag295.htm - Preview

ciencia_2.0

12 Nov 09

Open science at web-scale: Optimising participation and predictive potential : JISC

www.jisc.ac.uk/...opensciencerpt.aspx - Preview

ciencia_2.0

31 Oct 09

Entornos de colaboración científica y ciudadana más eficientes gracias a la Web semántica | El caparazon

www.dreig.eu/...tes-gracias-a-la-web-semantica - Preview

ciencia_2.0

30 Oct 09

SciSpace.net

www.scispace.com - Preview

ciencia_2.0

Scholarship 2.0: An Idea Whose Time Has Come

scholarship20.blogspot.com/ - Preview

ciencia_2.0

22 Oct 09

apophenia: open-access is the future: boycott locked-down academic journals

www.zephoria.org/...openaccess_is_t.html - Preview

open_access ciencia_2.0 agujero

17 Oct 09

Budapest Open Access Initiative

www.soros.org/openaccess - Preview

declaration open_access ciencia_2.0

universidad20 - Articulos

universidad20.wikispaces.com/Articulos - Preview

universidad_2.0 ciencia_2.0 agujero

24 Sep 09

Communicating knowledge: how and why UK researchers publish and disseminate their findings | RIN

www.rin.ac.uk/communicating-knowledge - Preview

ciencia_2.0

Cómo se comunican los investigadores (I) « Documentación, biblioteconomía e información - La Coctelera

"Como curiosidad, los investigadores apenas le dan importancia a canales como blogs, foros u otros medios electrónicos de comunicación informal ya que sólo un 12% le concede algún tipo de relevancia a la hora de difundir investigación."

documentacion.lacoctelera.net/...-se-comunican-investigadores-i - Preview

ciencia_2.0

14 Aug 09

bibliotecarios 2.0: Ciencia 2.0: Tenemos que IKEARNOS

bibliotecarios2-0.blogspot.com/...a-20-tenemos-que-ikearnos.html - Preview

ciencia_2.0 universidad_2.0

29 Jun 09

BioUnalm: Ciencia 2.0 y el periodismo científico

biounalm.com/...-el-periodismo-cientifico.html - Preview

ciencia_2.0

04 Jun 09

Moving from Script to Science 2.0 for Scholarly Communication

www.webology.ir/...a68.html - Preview

open_access ciencia_2.0

24 May 09

What is not available online is not worth reading?

www.webology.ir/...a63.html - Preview

ciencia_2.0

ased on a study of physicists and astronomers, this article shows that more scientists now assume that if articles are of enough quality and significance, they must be available online and vice versa. Though still in a low minority, a number of scientists believe that what is not available online is not worth the effort to obtain it.
All of the interviewees in the study stated that their preference was to obtain the articles online as PDF files.
3 more annotations...
- The reason of course was the convenience associated with accessing an article electronically compared to having to go to the library and reading or photocopying the print version.
- The interviewees then were asked what they would do if the article was not available online. Going to the library in order to access the hard copy was the second option that a considerable number of interviewees said they would choose. However, a few (four) of the interviewees stated that before going to the library they would try to see if a colleague had a copy, or they might even contact the author and ask for a copy. Surprisingly seven interviewees thought that if an article is not online then it is not worth the effort to obtain it. They said that if it is not available online they would not bother to look for it elsewhere and they would try to find an alternative source of information if possible.
- It implies that at least in some scientific fields online availability of articles is a measure of their collective quality assessment by their subject community.