Journal of Negative Results
I'm curious about the future of "open-source journals." You don't need to drive by the swank Dupont Circle office of the OSA or AAAS to suspect they may have become about more about a leadership that was to the manor born than producing quality scientific publications. But it helps.
I am pessimistic, and believe that the optimism about these publications will disappear when the new boss is found to passing resemble the old one. There is a need to allocate money and so many of the problems (cronyism, falsification of data, hype, etc.) with are symptomatic and not causes.
Still, it's good to have a debate [=> @Nature]. And there's plenty of room for crazy ideas: The Journal of Negative Results. I'm curious about how the reviewing criteria will work out. Anyway, here's a quote I stuck on the front of my dissertation:
Pretty much.
I am pessimistic, and believe that the optimism about these publications will disappear when the new boss is found to passing resemble the old one. There is a need to allocate money and so many of the problems (cronyism, falsification of data, hype, etc.) with are symptomatic and not causes.
Still, it's good to have a debate [=> @Nature]. And there's plenty of room for crazy ideas: The Journal of Negative Results. I'm curious about how the reviewing criteria will work out. Anyway, here's a quote I stuck on the front of my dissertation:
We have a habit in writing articles published in scientific journals to make the work as finished as possible, to cover up all the tracks, to not worry about the blind alleys or describe how you had the wrong idea first, and so on. So there isn’t any place to publish, in a dignified manner, what you actually did in order to get to do the work. . .
- Richard P. Feynman - Nobel Lecture, December 11, 1965.
Pretty much.
