The value of a scientists, how funny this world is
We live in a meritocracy.
Submitted 5 weeks ago by fossilesque@mander.xyz to science_memes@mander.xyz
https://mander.xyz/pictrs/image/505ac81e-371b-42b7-bc03-7fa4ac76274c.jpeg
Comments
max@lemmy.blahaj.zone 5 weeks ago
scytale@lemm.ee 5 weeks ago
That expression is hilarious. What’s the name of the template?
DrSteveBrule@mander.xyz 5 weeks ago
It’s from the movie Monster House
OpenStars@discuss.online 5 weeks ago
In so many more ways than one… :-(
Mikufan@ani.social 5 weeks ago
Why Don’t make your own journal with free distribution?
fossilesque@mander.xyz 5 weeks ago
This tracks the Open Access movement in academia: tagteam.harvard.edu/remix/oatp/items
flyos@jlai.lu 5 weeks ago
Some people did, look up the Peer Community Journal. Backed up by more and more organisations.
gi1242@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
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.
Mikufan@ani.social 5 weeks ago
Kinda sad that this is necessary or seen as necessary
mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 5 weeks ago
“How much are they?” is a question.
“How much they are” is a statement.
nintendiator@feddit.cl 5 weeks ago
And “How much they are?” is a question. See? Question mark right there.
mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 5 weeks ago
Incorrect.
gi1242@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
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 … 🙄
bleistift2@feddit.de 5 weeks ago
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?
gi1242@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
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
wewbull@feddit.uk 5 weeks ago
Sounds like you already worked it out.
pennomi@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
Depends on what journal is reviewing the paper.