Get expert advice to help you get published!

You are here

Publication Buzzwords

From the earliest days of the printing press to speedily disseminating scientific knowledge online through open access journals, academic publishing has come a long way. What are the most important topics of discussion in scholarly publishing today? Stay tuned to this section to know more about the buzzwords in the scholarly publishing industry: journal impact factor, scientific paper retraction, research impact metrics, and more.
Is the reproducibility crisis real? An overview of Nature’s survey
Irreproducibility of published results is considered a modern-day crisis that science is facing. However, the lack of a commonly agreed definition of reproducibility and the various opinions on what underlies the issue prompted Nature to conduct a survey.
What are preprints and why you should use them to diisseminate research
To circumvent the delays that are inevitable in the journal publication process, scientists these days post preprints of their articles. What exactly are preprints? Why do authors use them? This article introduces you to preprints and explains how they can facilitate research dissemination.
Combating new developments in academic misconduct
Traditionally the province of rogue individuals, academic misconduct has entered a new era in which third parties are exploiting submission loopholes to manipulate the peer review process. Consequently, authors should be aware that not all editorial service providers operate within the bounds of accepted ethical standards. In reaction, the editorial services industry is launching a new initiative to institute operational guidelines for editorial service providers.
Can self-retraction boost the efforts to correct the scientific record?
Retractions are central to academic publishing, but they have been too journal-centric and stereotyped. Therefore, researchers hesitate to disclose even honest errors in their papers for the fear of losing their reputation due to retraction. There have been discussions around making retractions more author-centric rather than it being a tool used predominantly by editors to announce misconduct. Would a self-retraction system motivate authors to step up and announce honest errors? 
Will Sci-Hub change the face of academic publishing forever?
Should access to academic research be free? In the past year, this seemingly moral issue took a legal twist with Elsevier suing the founder of Sci-Hub. This website which provides unauthorized access to almost all paywalled research papers has become the bone of contention between researchers and publishers. 
Good reads, April 2016
The month of April saw recurring deliberations on interesting topics such as the evolution of peer review and its current state, the Sci-Hub initiative, career development of researchers, retraction, and so forth. This post shares some of the most interesting trends in academia this month.
Good reads, March 2016
The month of March has brought some interesting developments in the scholarly publishing scene: boost in research funding, data sharing mandates, retractions due to honest error and academics' protests in Turkey. This post shares some of the most interesting trends in academia this month.
Can scientific inquiry harm science?
With transparency and reproducibility coming under the spotlight, we frequently encounter statements such as “Science is broken” and “Science needs to be fixed.” Therefore, to ensure the credibility and integrity of published research, various initiatives have been undertaken to channelize scientific inquiry. But can the questioning of published research, in fact, affect science? This post explores different views on this issue and tries to establish whether researchers should be wary of...
Outcome switching in clinical trials
Many researchers indulge in what is known as ‘outcome switching,’ which means the trial report does not include outcomes that are part of the pre-registration, or includes new outcomes without any underlying explanation. Switching of outcomes can have an impact on healthcare and scientific advancement. Why are journal editors and trial sponsors unable to put a stop to this phenomenon? Could accurate reporting in clinical trials help in countering the reproducibility crisis that science is...
Academic publishing and scholarly communications: Good reads, February 2016
In February 2016, the scholarly publishing landscape was abuzz with discussions on topics like irroproducibility, government policy, struggles faced by postdocs, and delays in journal publishing. We tracked several science forums and blogs to follow up on these discussions and bring you an overview in this post. Happy reading!