this post was submitted on 26 May 2024
809 points (99.0% liked)

Science Memes

10348 readers
1569 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.


Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 22 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 114 points 3 months ago (1 children)

academic journals now only provide a service to authors. they used to distribute... but the articles are available free on the arxiv, pubmed, authors websites, etc. the peer review and typesetting journals do is a joke and no author will pay for that.

the value journals have now is mainly to the author, because the prestige of getting accepted by the journal helps with the authors career. publishers figured out that authors will pay for this, so here we are ... πŸ™„

[–] [email protected] 42 points 3 months ago (3 children)

I used to have trust in the peer review process, thinking this is why it takes months or years for a paper to get published. Are you telling me it’s not real?

[–] [email protected] 58 points 3 months ago (2 children)

iwriting reviews is time consuming, unpaid, and doesn't help the reviewers career. so it takes a while because reviewers are already busy and don't prioritize writing reviews too much.

quality of the reviews is questionable. 10% of the reviews are through and provide valuable feedback. the remaining 90% are cursory "yeah this is interesting, publish it" or "not interesting/outside scope".

very very few reviews find and report scientific errors

[–] [email protected] 27 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

find and report scientific errors

Hell, the fact that any articles have been published with the openAI "I can't provide up-to-date info" means that shit's not getting read properly, overall.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

Though errors are somewhat monitored by Retraction Watch.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 months ago

Sounds like you already worked it out.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago

Depends on what journal is reviewing the paper.

[–] [email protected] 37 points 3 months ago

The value of a scientists, how funny this world is

[–] [email protected] 16 points 3 months ago (1 children)

That expression is hilarious. What’s the name of the template?

[–] [email protected] 15 points 3 months ago

It's from the movie Monster House

[–] [email protected] 9 points 3 months ago

In so many more ways than one... :-(

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago (3 children)

Why Don't make your own journal with free distribution?

[–] [email protected] 25 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

Its bigger than me, or you. This tracks the Open Access movement in academia: http://tagteam.harvard.edu/remix/oatp/items

[–] [email protected] 16 points 3 months ago

Some people did, look up the Peer Community Journal. Backed up by more and more organisations.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 3 months ago (1 children)

there are plenty of low cost open access journals run by nonprofits and professional societies. however junior researchers when building their reputation try and publish in journals that are as prestigious as possible, without worrying about cost, apc, open access etc.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 3 months ago

Kinda sad that this is necessary or seen as necessary

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

"How much are they?" is a question.

"How much they are" is a statement.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago (2 children)

And "How much they are?" is a question. See? Question mark right there.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Why think that work you how?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Descriptivistic nanomachines, son!

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

Descriptivism doesn't mean people can't fuck up.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 3 months ago