3 ms·
I think a lot of scientists would actually do "boring research". (a) they actually know such work is useful (b) some know that they don't produce work as good a
by abdullahkhalids 6y ago
I think a lot of scientists would actually do "boring research". (a) they actually know such work is useful (b) some know that they don't produce work as good as the best in the field, but are happy to do more grunt work at lower stress level, rather than endlessly chasing "high impact" publications.
Unfortunately, there is no funding for such research. Which is find really sad. Private grants might need to show "impact" but State run grants don't have that many constraints, and they could conceivably offer such grants.
- gvurrdon 6y agoI'd happily have done that grunt work, back when I was in a lab. The work may not have been interesting but at least I could feel as if I was being useful whilst also paying the mortgage. Instead, I've ended up writing software which is related to assisting journals in the task of getting researchers to share their data.
- abdullahkhalids 6y agoThat sounds fascinating. Can you talk a bit more about your work? What are the principal challenges in getting people to share their data?
- gvurrdon 6y agoNo problem. This article might be of some interest: https://www.go-fair.org/fair-principles/ https://www.go-fair.org/fair-principles/ There are, of course, political challenges in persuading researchers to share data, primarily the fear of other researchers using those data for their own papers or to secure funding, depriving the originator of the work of the chance to do the same. I hear this at conferences quite often. The part I'm working on is at attempt to catalogue the places were research data may be stored and the requirements various journals and repositories impose on researchers who want to deposit data there. Gathering this information, curating it and making it easily accessible is not trivial, and relies upon a lot of manual curation by specialist "knowledge engineers".