In 2010, two senior ecologists wrote a thought-provoking paper about their experience of the scientific publication process. One of their aims was to generate discussion about the publication process, and that it did: it led to a follow-up piece by a group of eight early career researchers from six countries. In their paper, Schäfer and co (including qaecologist Jane Catford) comment on six key trends in publishing and suggest ways in which the process can be improved. Among the recommendations are increased impartiality and independence of the peer-review process through a move to double-blind review and use of quality control measures for reviewers and editors.
Search this site:
- An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
- QAECO’s tips for running a successful workshop April 23, 2014 qaecology
- Strategic approaches to planning for conservation and development: Putting a stop to cumulative impacts on threatened species April 11, 2014 qaecology
- Australia’s favourite eucalypt March 13, 2014 qaecology
- Now you see me, now you don’t: The impact of imperfect detection on species distribution models March 12, 2014 qaecology
- New paper in Nature: Eutrophication weakens stabilising effects of diversity in natural grasslands February 21, 2014 qaecology
- Word wizardry: formatting figures for long documents (Video), via @lizhmartin bit.ly/QxX4KL 11 hours ago
- Choosing a PhD: people, place, or project?, via @lizhmartin bit.ly/1tzVSWh 23 hours ago