this post was submitted on 26 May 2024
810 points (99.0% liked)

Science Memes

15333 readers
2594 users here now

Welcome to c/science_memes @ Mander.xyz!

A place for majestic STEMLORD peacocking, as well as memes about the realities of working in a lab.



Rules

  1. Don't throw mud. Behave like an intellectual and remember the human.
  2. Keep it rooted (on topic).
  3. No spam.
  4. Infographics welcome, get schooled.

This is a science community. We use the Dawkins definition of meme.



Research Committee

Other Mander Communities

Science and Research

Biology and Life Sciences

Physical Sciences

Humanities and Social Sciences

Practical and Applied Sciences

Memes

Miscellaneous

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
all 22 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] gi1242@lemmy.world 115 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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 ... πŸ™„

[–] bleistift2@feddit.de 42 points 1 year ago (3 children)

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 58 points 1 year ago (2 children)

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

[–] FinalRemix@lemmy.world 27 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

find and report scientific errors

Hell, the fact that any articles have been published with the openAI "I can't provide up-to-date info" means that shit's not getting read properly, overall.

[–] blurg@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Though errors are somewhat monitored by Retraction Watch.

[–] wewbull@feddit.uk 9 points 1 year ago

Sounds like you already worked it out.

[–] pennomi@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

Depends on what journal is reviewing the paper.

[–] max@lemmy.blahaj.zone 37 points 1 year ago

The value of a scientists, how funny this world is

[–] OpenStars@discuss.online 9 points 1 year ago

In so many more ways than one... :-(

[–] Mikufan@ani.social 6 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Why Don't make your own journal with free distribution?

[–] fossilesque@mander.xyz 25 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Its bigger than me, or you. This tracks the Open Access movement in academia: http://tagteam.harvard.edu/remix/oatp/items

[–] flyos@jlai.lu 16 points 1 year ago

Some people did, look up the Peer Community Journal. Backed up by more and more organisations.

[–] gi1242@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

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 12 points 1 year ago

Kinda sad that this is necessary or seen as necessary

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

"How much are they?" is a question.

"How much they are" is a statement.

[–] nintendiator@feddit.cl 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

And "How much they are?" is a question. See? Question mark right there.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Why think that work you how?

[–] nintendiator@feddit.cl 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Descriptivistic nanomachines, son!

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

Descriptivism doesn't mean people can't fuck up.

[–] mindbleach@sh.itjust.works -2 points 1 year ago