5 ms·

I'm in no way involved in academic research, and I don't now how it works in detail, but a question that popped into my head these days was: is there a place wh

by _def 5y ago

I'm in no way involved in academic research, and I don't now how it works in detail, but a question that popped into my head these days was: is there a place where people can publish papers even without any association with anything? Like, if I manage to do proper research, even without any qualifications on paper, would it still be useful? Does this make any sense?

elcomet 5y ago
You can submit your work to any conference that is double-blind and get accepted if your paper is good. You don't need to be affiliated to a university.
tsbischof 5y ago
In principle, submission is viable at many venues. PNAS has a few mechanisms for having established authors endorse your submission, for example. The main challenge is going to be the appearance of credibility to get past the starting point, since many non-affiliated submissions tend to be unpublishable without serious rework, at least in lab-based disciplines.
SiempreViernes 5y ago
Good research is always useful, where good means something between "reliable and flawlessly explained" and "plausible and very novel". So on one end you could takes something like Newtons Principa, that synthesised a lot of the known facts and laws at the time into one single coherent framework, and on the other you can have Galileo recognising that he was seeing surface features on the moon and not just patterns on a flat disk and announcing this will some illustrations showing the principle and not what he actually saw. As to the first part of the question, if you talk of "publishing" in academia you usually mean you want your work to be know by other credible researchers in the hope they find it useful. The most reliable way to achieve that without credentials is to befriend someone respected in the field you are interested in before you send them your results, because they are more likely to have patience with any errors or confusion in your presentation that way. There are of course some places that pride themselves on being completely free from filtering, but the concept of "spam folder" along should tell you how good a chance you have of getting any serious attention in those places.
lynndotpy 5y ago
As others have said, you can post to academic conferences. But each field has different peculiarities and patterns. You would start by doing your research, finding a relevant conference, and writing a paper to match their style. A more approachable avenue could be blogposts and videos. One good example of a scientific blogpost I recall is here: ( https://dynomight.net/2020/12/15/some-real-data-on-a-DIY-box-fan-air-purifier/ https://dynomight.net/2020/12/15/some-real-data-on-a-DIY-box... ) Someone tested very simple air purifiers with limited experiments. It follows the same "abstract-methods-results-discussion-conclusion" format you might expect. Some obvious caveats, this data could have all been faked, and it isn't peer reviewed for methodological flaws. But you can reproduce the experiments yourself for ~$150. I am in academia but I like blogposts a lot more. I wish they were more popular. I think HTML makes more sense than PDF, and to some degree they cut the middleman out between communicating to peers and communicating to other academics.

by _def 5y ago

elcomet 5y ago

You can submit your work to any conference that is double-blind and get accepted if your paper is good. You don't need to be affiliated to a university.

tsbischof 5y ago

In principle, submission is viable at many venues. PNAS has a few mechanisms for having established authors endorse your submission, for example. The main challenge is going to be the appearance of credibility to get past the starting point, since many non-affiliated submissions tend to be unpublishable without serious rework, at least in lab-based disciplines.

SiempreViernes 5y ago

Good research is always useful, where good means something between "reliable and flawlessly explained" and "plausible and very novel". So on one end you could takes something like Newtons Principa, that synthesised a lot of the known facts and laws at the time into one single coherent framework, and on the other you can have Galileo recognising that he was seeing surface features on the moon and not just patterns on a flat disk and announcing this will some illustrations showing the principle and not what he actually saw. As to the first part of the question, if you talk of "publishing" in academia you usually mean you want your work to be know by other credible researchers in the hope they find it useful. The most reliable way to achieve that without credentials is to befriend someone respected in the field you are interested in before you send them your results, because they are more likely to have patience with any errors or confusion in your presentation that way. There are of course some places that pride themselves on being completely free from filtering, but the concept of "spam folder" along should tell you how good a chance you have of getting any serious attention in those places.

lynndotpy 5y ago

As others have said, you can post to academic conferences. But each field has different peculiarities and patterns. You would start by doing your research, finding a relevant conference, and writing a paper to match their style. A more approachable avenue could be blogposts and videos. One good example of a scientific blogpost I recall is here: ( https://dynomight.net/2020/12/15/some-real-data-on-a-DIY-box-fan-air-purifier/ https://dynomight.net/2020/12/15/some-real-data-on-a-DIY-box... ) Someone tested very simple air purifiers with limited experiments. It follows the same "abstract-methods-results-discussion-conclusion" format you might expect. Some obvious caveats, this data could have all been faked, and it isn't peer reviewed for methodological flaws. But you can reproduce the experiments yourself for ~$150. I am in academia but I like blogposts a lot more. I wish they were more popular. I think HTML makes more sense than PDF, and to some degree they cut the middleman out between communicating to peers and communicating to other academics.