2 ms·
I think you're misplacing the blame here. Researchers need to publish in high impact journals, or they lose their funding. Some funding already comes with the
by dm319 9y ago
I think you're misplacing the blame here. Researchers need to publish in high impact journals, or they lose their funding.
Some funding already comes with the requirement to publish open access.
https://intranet.birmingham.ac.uk/as/libraryservices/library/research/open-access/how-can-i-publish-my-work-as-oa.aspx https://intranet.birmingham.ac.uk/as/libraryservices/library...
- gh02t 9y agoYep, I'm required to make my work freely available when I can. Some of it is sensitive so not all of it can be, but otherwise we have to. Also all of my code and data is open source, which is not required but we have permission. Where I worked previously was totally different, it took months to get any code release approved.
- avar 9y agoObviously it's implied that if public science funding is going to demand that researchers use only openly available journals, that the rules for the funding itself also be adjusted to disregard the impact of these "high impact journals" for the purposes of preferentially allocating funding. What do you imagine is going to happen? That public support of science is going to drop to zero because funding bodies forgot to update two of their internal rules, and instead just updated one, thereby creating a dependency relationship that was impossible to satisfy?