Added value in publishing: I don’t think those words mean what you think they mean

Neither the incumbent subscription publishers, nor their current library customers, appear to believe that the value added by publishers justifies the current costs. Cameron Neylon argues that $1000 per paper is a reasonable lower level cost, and a good place to start an honest conversation with publishers

The Open Practises E-Science Network (OPEN)

A grant proposal submitted for support to fund a research network focussed on identifying and dealing with the practical issues of enabling open practise in research. The text of the proposal was written by a large number of people and coordinated by Cameron Neylon

Open Science: Tools, approaches, and implications

The Pacific Symposium on Biocomputing is an annual meeting whose topics are determined by proposals submitted by members of the community. This document is the proposal for a session on Open Science, submitted for consideration for the PSB meeting in 2009

Science as a Social System and Virtual Research Environment

The accumulation of gradual changes in scientific landscape and research practice due to the Internet has the potential to enhance the quality of both cognitive and social aspects of science and scientists. New types of research outputs, modes of scientific communication and new circulation mechanisms, as well as enhanced opportunities for scientific re-use and measuring research impact, in combination with new approaches to research assessment and evaluation are all having profound effects on the social system of science. To be sure that these innovations will not break the social sustainability of the science community, it will be valuable to develop a model of science as a tool for computer simulation of social consequences from possible innovations within virtual research environment. Focusing on possible social problems related to these new virtual research environments this short paper provides a brief analysis of the current situation in science (challenges, problems, main actors), general views on model of science (landscape, main agents, important properties, etc.) and on areas where simulation can contribute to better understanding of possible futures for the scientific community.Virtual Research Environment, Science System Social Sustainability, Agent Based Modeling

Blacklists are technically infeasible, practically unreliable and unethical. Period.

The removal of the Beall’s list of predatory publishers last month caused consternation and led to calls in some quarters for a new equivalent to be put in its place. Cameron Neylon explains why he has never been a supporter of the Beall’s list and outlines why he believes the concept of the blacklist itself is fundamentally flawed. Not only are blacklists incomplete by definition, they are highly susceptible to legal challenge and vulnerable to personal bias. Scholars should be able to decide for themselves what is a good venue from which to communicate their work

Taking Culture Seriously: how can we build positive change and coherent practice within our research communities?

Change in higher education often progresses slowly. If scholars are serious about wanting to change disciplinary and institutional cultures and not merely to wait for Cultural Change to magically happen, Cameron Neylon argues we need to consider the differing approaches to how certain cultures operate, interact and eventually change. Ultimately, change in higher education requires a variety of levers (e.g. policy, technology, evidence, culture and storytelling). Are we engaging all of these

Leading or following: Data and rankings must inform strategic decision making, not drive them

At yesterday’s Future of Impact conference, Cameron Neylon argued that universities must ask how their research is being re-used, and choose to become the most skilled in using available data to inform strategic decision making. It’s time to put down the Impact voodoo doll and stop using rankings blindly

Fork, merge and crowd-sourcing data curation: tools for collective data processing and analysis.

With the right formats, licensing and distribution mechanisms, people can easily collaborate over data, enhance the analysis and re-purpose for their own needs. Cameron Neylon reflects on the tools available for these aims. The interfaces that make working with the data easy may create barriers to automation and computational processing down the line. Further mechanisms are needed, both social and technical, to make it easy to contribute variations, enhancements and new ideas back to the original resources

Open Notebook Science: Perspectives from a newbie

My group is using an electronic lab notebook based on a Blog format that is being developed in collaboration with the group of Professor Jeremy Frey. Here I discuss how this led to the adoption of an open notebook science approach in my group as well as some of the consequences, both positive and negative, of adopting such an approach