Tag Archives: nature

Nature makes all articles free (to view)

Interesting move from Nature: All research papers from Nature will be made free to read in a proprietary screen-view format. It can be annotated but not copied, printed or downloaded. Is this open access or public relations? John Wilbanks:
"With access mandates on the march around the world, this appears to be more about getting ahead of the coming reality in scientific publishing. Now that the funders call the tune and the funders want the articles on the web at no charge, these articles are going to be open anyway.”

Launch of an online data journal

Nature Publishing Group will next spring launch Scientific Data, an open-access, online-only journal for detailed descriptions of data sets (http://nature.com/scientificdata). This week, Scientific Data announced its first call for submissions (see go.nature.com/1gnd1j). The doors are now open for scientists to submit ‘Data Descriptor’ manuscripts — a new article type that is designed to describe scientifically valuable data sets in a way that will promote data sharing and reuse.
Nature.

Crowdfunding: Another Form of Science Outreach

Science crowdfunding changes the equation by adding a powerful new incentive for scientists to engage the public with science: the potential for raising money for research directly from the public. What makes crowdfunding such a powerful potential lever to connect science and society is that the amount of money that can be raised in this way is directly proportional to the size of the audience that has been built.
Nature. SoapboxScience Blog.

Editor-in-Chief at Nature talks about open science

This article refers to the  conference “Science as an Open Enterprise: Open Data for Open Science,” held at FAPESP’s headquarters in São Paulo. Philip Campbell, Editor-in-Chief of Nature magazine, chemist Martyn Poliakoff (Foreign Secretary of the Royal Society); and the FAPESP’s Scientific Director, Carlos Henrique de Brito Cruz talked.
Campbell went to explain, “The literature is published in many different scientific magazines, and if they are closed, it is impossible for any researcher to find them with ease. Since we need people from all disciplines and from several places working on climate change, it seems reasonable to make data open.”

It’s time to align policy

says Alma Swan, director of Key Perspectives Ltd. and SPARC director for european advocacy in Nature’s article “How to hasten open access”.
So, harmonization is happening. But the development of seamless policies among funders needs to be the focus of advocacy. It will mean less author confusion and greater compliance. Authors will begin to understand the potential of truly open research and be inspired to devise further innovative practices. Then we can expect true disruption: a very different kind of scholarly communication, catalysed by good policy.

Scientific publishing: Changing “Nature”

For all the differences, the fates of Nature and Frontiers have become intertwined. On February 27th Nature Publishing Group (NPG), which owns Nature and 81 other scholarly journals, announced that it has bought a controlling stake in Frontiers for an undisclosed sum. Besides 30 titles in 14 scientific fields the Swiss upstart brings a social-networking platform—a LinkedIn for boffins, if you like—to share not just research, but news, job offers, information about conferences and events. It currently boasts around 80,000 members.
The Economist. See also the article on Frontiers’ website.

Researchers opt to limit uses of open-access publications

In many parts of the world, anyone wishing to re-use papers must get permission from the copyright owner (usually either the publisher or the author). Often, the owner will forbid re-use or demand payment. Supporters of open access argue that free papers should come with licences attached, making it clear what kinds of re-use are allowed.  
Nature. See also the discussion following the article.

In search of credit: make science more searchable

In search of credit: make science more searchable

Any referee who, in a given year, has refereed three or more papers for any of the journals will receive a letter acknowledging their contribution and a free subscription to their choice of one of the journals. More importantly, we have recently introduced a system by which our referees can download a statement of the number of papers they have refereed for us. This report is available by logging into the ‘My Account’ page on any Nature journal’s manuscript submission and tracking system and reflects the refereeing activity across all Nature journals.

Nature.

How to act against faked research in China

How to act against faked research in China

Shi-min Fang, who has just won the inaugural Maddox prize, announced by the British journal Nature and charity organization Sense about Science, on risking his life and libel writs to expose scientific misconduct in his native China.

“The majority of cases exposed are plagiarism, the exaggeration of academic credentials and faked research papers, which are endemic in China.” says Shi-min Fang in an interview refering to the question if dubious claims would be a big problem in China.

Advances in Open Access à la Nature Publishing Group

Advances in Open Access à la Nature Publishing Group

With its recent launch of Light: Science and Applications, an open access (OA) physical sciences journal, and several more OA specialist publications planned for this year, Nature Publishing Group (NPG) is moving forward with its plan to include this publishing model in the center of its business. Though not every NPG journal is fair game for open access, it seems – top-tier publications will remain under a subscription-based model – specialist titles may be a place for further expansion as open access continues to develop.

The case for open computer programs

The case for open computer programs

Ince, D.C., Hatton, L., Graham-Cumming, J. (2012). The case for open computer programs. Nature 482, 485–488.

Comprehensive nature article on open computer programs in science. From the abstract:

Scientific communication relies on evidence that cannot be entirely included in publications, but the rise of computational science has added a new layer of inaccessibility. Although it is now accepted that data should be made available on request, the current regulations regarding the availability of software are inconsistent. We argue that, with some exceptions, anything less than the release of source programs is intolerable for results that depend on computation.