Bullied into Bad Science
In this episode of Open Science Talk we are joined by the founder of the campaign #bulliedintobadscience, Corina Logan.
Logan, who is a Senior Researcher at the Department of Human Behavior, Ecology and Culture at the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, explains what she means by “Bad Science”, including important terms like P-hacking/data fishing and HARKing. She also talks about how Open Science could help in the fight against bad science.
Continue reading “Bad Science”
What follows from signing DORA?
In this episode, we try to explain what The Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA) is, and what happens after you have signed the declaration?
The guest of this episode is Kenneth Ruud. He is a professor of theoretical chemistry. He is also Deputy Vice-Chancellor of Research at UIT – The Arctic University of Norway.
Ruud gives us an insight into how this declaration will change his organization and what challenges they are facing.
Continue reading “Implementing DORA”
Psychology of Open Access
In this episode, we talk about the psychology of publishing Open Access. What are the main factors for not choosing OA-publications, and how could institutions and policymakers better understand the choice of the researcher.
Organizational psychologist and ph.d. candidate Lars Moksness at the Tromsø school of Business and Economics at UIT – the Arctic University has published several papers on the issue.
Continue reading “The Psychology of Open Access”
Is the Peer Review system flawed?
In this episode professor at UIT – The Arctic University of Norway, Bård Smedsrød, gives us an insight into peer review.
How does the system work today, and what’s problematic with it?
The Peer Review system is, of course, a brilliant system that helps researchers from across the world to do better science. But who owns this process, and who pays for it?
Smedsrød, who is also Scientific Leader of Laboratory for Electron Microscopy, offers some solutions and encourages Universities to be much more involved in the peer review process.
You can read his latest paper on the issue here:
Peer reviewing: a private affair between the individual researcher and the publishing houses, or a responsibility of the university?