Some links on publishing that I’ve collected the past month.
I e-mail myself a lot of things that I either want to blog, or want to download and print, or do other things with. For later. Then, they just accumulate. But, now it is summer, and all the teaching duties are done done done! And, I’m procrastinating about writing a paper. So, I’m going through all the self-sent e-mails. Here are a few links.
Azimuth introduces the slective papers network. It is an attempt to update how we communicate science, dealing with a) selection (there is a need to filter) and b) endorsement (so we can show our scientific status). Didn’t see much psychology at the network. But, an interesting attempt.
The Future of Scientific publishing Also some neat ideas here. Plus, a couple of those automatic animations on the mismatch between scientists and publishers….
Mark Kirschner writes on “A perverted view of impact” in this Science editorial. We can’t predict true Impact.
Stephen Casper writes on the “Ironies of academic publishing”
From “Be openly accessible or be obscure comes recommendations for how to select an open access journal. This is important, considering that there are predatory OA journals preying on vulnerable scientists with papers to publish. As in this “buyer beware” checklist from Open Access Belgium.
Andrew Gelman, my favorite statistician, also has a post on how to fix the tabloids. That is Science and Nature and Psychological Science and the like for you.
Finally, from Jason Antrosio, comes Twitter Academia. The ridge between “engagement, self-promotion and self-destruction”