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 favourite ecology and conservation papers of 2014 December 19, 2014 ltkellyresearch
- The QAECO & CEBRA lab retreat 2014 December 15, 2014 qaecology
- A carbon code of conduct is not enough September 4, 2014 qaecology
- Saving the most species at #uomOpenDay August 17, 2014 qaecology
- Socially-acceptable conservation planning: how can we integrate biological and social values to improve conservation? July 24, 2014 qaecology
- Info transfer at traditional vs online conferences, via Hannah Pearson bit.ly/1AebKRL 2 days ago
- RT @pveski: @jscamac @chsjones about to graduate! @qaecology #phd http://t.co/QtExaW7kVt 3 days ago
- Networking at traditional vs online conferences, via Hannah Pearson bit.ly/1J0tCDR 3 days ago