Have you ever thought about questionable research practices (QRPs) in academia?

The Retraction Watch team have highlighted this new paper in PLoSOne that has a systematic analysis. The authors identify 25 QRPs and then survey a lot of academics.

The results are interesting, widespread use of QRPs, sort of a grey area of acedemic behaviour, with some explanatory factors.

I'm bookmarking this for future use.

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0304342

#academia #academicchatter #research #researchethics #academicpublishing

Is something rotten in the state of Denmark? Cross-national evidence for widespread involvement but not systematic use of questionable research practices across all fields of research

Questionable research practices (QRP) are believed to be widespread, but empirical assessments are generally restricted to a few types of practices.

^{journals.plos.org}

MIT dropped its contract with Elsevier, the huge scientific journal company. Their library instead arranged alternate access to journals and tools for researchers to get them. They’re saving $2 million/year:

https://sparcopen.org/our-work/big-deal-knowledge-base/unbundling-profiles/mit-libraries/

#academicpublishing #OpenAccess #science #scientificpublishing

Unbundling Profile: MIT Libraries - SPARC

^SPARC