Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

Sharing of Research Results
Pages 29-34

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.

From page 29...
... Various publication practices, such as the standard scope of a manuscript and authorship criteria, vary from field to field, and digital technologies are creating new forms of publication. Nevertheless, publication in a peer-reviewed journal remains the most important way of disseminating a complete set of research results.
From page 30...
... New communication technologies provide researchers with additional ways to distribute research results quickly and broadly. For example, raw data, computational models, the outputs of instruments,
From page 31...
... As one news article noted, "They say Cordova steals research ideas at con ferences and then presents the ideas as his own by publishing the results of hasty and often poorly executed parallel experiments."a In effect, he was able to appropriate others' ideas and get them into public view first by knowing of journals where he could publish more quickly. As C&E News recounted the case, Cordova countered that his behav ior was appropriate and that he simply practiced ethics that he learned from his mentors during graduate school and his early research career.
From page 32...
... Science also benefits when more individuals have greater access to raw data for use in their own work. However, if these new ways of disseminating research results bypass traditional quality Publication Practices Andre, a young assistant professor, and two graduate students have been working on a series of related experiments for the past several years.
From page 33...
... If a researcher publicizes a preliminary result that is later shown to be inaccurate or incorrect, considerable effort by researchers can be wasted and public trust in the scientific community can be undermined. If research results are made available to other researchers or to the public before publication in a journal, researchers need to use some kind of peer review process that may compensate for the lack of the formal journal process.
From page 34...
... For example, internal reviewers or properly structured visiting committees can examine proprietary or classified research while maintaining confidentiality. The publication of results from fundamental scientific research has generally not been restricted in the United States unless those results are deemed so critical to national security that they are classified.

This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.