Publishing and crediting different shaped research objects the way 0000-0001-6444-1436 @SCEdmunds...
-
Upload
augusta-allison-ferguson -
Category
Documents
-
view
217 -
download
0
Transcript of Publishing and crediting different shaped research objects the way 0000-0001-6444-1436 @SCEdmunds...
Publishing and crediting different shaped research objects the way
0000-0001-6444-1436
@SCEdmunds
[email protected] Edmunds, #FORCE2015
1665-2015 style publication: problems• Article structure & journal policies (Ingelfinger, etc.) prevents
transparency, dissuades sharing of data & methods
• Lack of reproducibility is the norm. Ioannidis: “an estimated 85% of research resources are wasted”1
• “Industrial scale” ghostwriting of papers by Chinese companies & pharma, with ID theft & fake referees to guarantee JIF publication2-3
1. http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pmed.1001747 2.http://www.grassley.senate.gov/sites/default/files/about/upload/Senator-Grassley-Report.pdf3. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/for-sale-your-name-here-in-a-prestigious-science-journal/
Data
Methods
Answer
Metadata
softwareAnalysis
(Pipelines)
Workflows/protocols
Idea
Study
Anatomy of a (Reproducible) Publication?
Data Publication
Software Publication
Workflow Publication
Virtual Machine Publication
Knitr Publication
Death to the Publication. Long live the Research Object!
Manifesto for a reproducible publisher:
The era of the 1665-style publication is over
Reward replication not advertising
We credit FAIR data, not JIF-bait narrative
Granularity ≠ salami slicing. Ingelfinger is the enemy
We need a recognizable score(s)/mark/badge for replication
Separate category in ORCID for actually usable things
?