Publishing and funding

Fccb9ef81d69152b6096ec047428ac2e?s=47 Ian Mulvany
March 18, 2014

Publishing and funding


Ian Mulvany

March 18, 2014


  1. Publishing and Funding @IanMulvany Head of Technology - eLife DGZ,

    Regensburg, 2014-03-18
  2. • a bit about eLife • how to improve your

    impact factor • the future of “impact” • what to focus on when you publish - and why you might consider eLife

  4. None
  5. Airplane icon designed by Nolan Paparelli on the @NounProject.

  6. flickr: gromgull

  7. This is the best time in history to do science

  8. None
  9. and the worst time in history to be a scientist

  10. • there-too-many-phds/

  11. None
  12. For, to be silent about Your Most Serene Highness's ancestors

    to whose eternal glory the monuments of all histories testify, Your virtue alone, Great Hero, can by Your name, impart immortality to these stars ! 1610 (the telescope may prove useful, but to explore future possibilities we recommend that more funding be applied)
  13. None
  14. None
  15. slide via Graham Steel

  16. flickr: kwbridge

  17. 28,100 1800000 Ware, Mark, and Michael Mabe. 2009. “The Stm

    Report Journals Publishing” (September).
  18. IF = C(y-1) + C(y-2) A(y-1) + A(y-2)

  19. photo: flickr - scottandress

  20. IF = C(y-1) + C(y-2) A(y-1) + A(y-2)

  21. Acta Crystallographica - Section A IF in 2008 = 2.0

    IF in 2009 = 49.9 ! The dramatic rise was due to a single article cited over 6,700 times! Without this article, the IF would have remained < 3.0! via Abd Karim Alias
  22. International Journal of Nonlinear Science and Numerical Simulations Arnold, Douglas

    N., and Kristine K. Fowler. 2010. “Nefarious Numbers”. History and Overview; Digital Libraries (October 1): 5.
  23. the point that a journal’s IF (an arithmetic mean) is

    almost useless as a predictor of the likely citations to any particular paper in that journal Kravitz, Dwight J., and Chris I. Baker. 2011. “Toward a New Model of Scientific Publishing: Discussion and a Proposal.” Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience 5 (December): 1–12. doi: 10.3389/fncom.2011.00055. http:// Computational_Neuroscience/10.3389/ fncom.2011.00055/abstract. “Deciphering Impact Factors.” 2003. Nature Neuroscience 6 (8) (August): 783–783. doi:10.1038/nn0803-783.
  24. Seglen, P O. 1997. “Why the Impact Factor of Journals

    Should Not Be Used for Evaluating Research.” BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) 314 (7079): 498–502.
  25. IF = C(y-1) + C(y-2) A(y-1) + A(y-2)

  26. None
  27. Brembs, Björn, Katherine Button, and Marcus Munafò. 2013. “Deep Impact:

    Unintended Consequences of Journal Rank.” Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 7 (January): 291. doi:10.3389/fnhum.2013.00291. http://
  28. ?

  29. When it comes time to evaluating faculty, most people do

    not have or care to take the time to read the articles any more! Garfield, Eugene. 2005. “The Agony and the Ecstasy — the History and Meaning of the Journal Impact Factor.” Journal of Biological Chemistry 295 (1): 1–22. http://
  30. Lozano, George a, Vincent Lariviere, and Yves Gingras. 2012. “The

    Weakening Relationship between the Impact Factor and Papers’ Citations in the Digital Age.” Arxiv Preprint arXiv12054328 8: 14. doi:10.1002/asi.22731.
  31. For unto every one that hath shall be given, and

    he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken even that which he hath. Matthew 25:29, King James Bible
  32. Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all

    those other forms that have been tried from time to time.
  33. Bollen, Johan, Herbert Van de Sompel, Aric Hagberg, Luis Bettencourt,

    Ryan Chute, Marko a Rodriguez, and Lyudmila Balakireva. 2009. “Clickstream Data Yields High-Resolution Maps of Science.” PloS One 4 (3): e4803. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone. 0004803. http:// pubmed/19277205.
  34. Bollen, Johan, Herbert Van De Sompel, Aric Hagberg, Ryan Chute,

    Prototyping Team, Los Alamos National, Mathematical Modeling, and Analysis Group. 2009. “A Principal Component Analysis of 39 Scientific Impact Measures.” Methods: 1–19. doi:10.1371/journal.pone. 0006022.
  35. Adler, Robert, John Ewing, and Peter Taylor. 2009. “Citation Statistics.”

    Statistical Science 24 (1) (February): 1– 14. doi:10.1214/09-STS285. flickr: jessica wilson {jek in the box}
  36. one of the minor mysteries of our time is why

    so many scientifically sophisticated people give so much credence to a procedure that is so obviously flawed “Deciphering Impact Factors.” 2003. Nature Neuroscience 6 (8) (August): 783–783. doi:10.1038/nn0803-783.
  37. ! ▪ If you include journal impact factors in the

    list of publications in your cv, you are statistically illiterate. ! ▪ If you are judging grant or promotion applications and find yourself scanning the applicant’s publications, checking off the impact factors, you are statistically illiterate. ! ▪ If you publish a journal that trumpets its impact factor in adverts or emails, you are statistically illiterate. (If you trumpet that impact factor to three decimal places, there is little hope for you.) ! ▪ If you see someone else using impact factors and make no attempt at correction, you connive at statistical illiteracy. • Stephen Curry
  38. A new hope flickr: mac_filko

  39. Lozano, George a, Vincent Lariviere, and Yves Gingras. 2012. “The

    Weakening Relationship between the Impact Factor and Papers’ Citations in the Digital Age.” Arxiv Preprint arXiv12054328 8: 14. doi:10.1002/asi.22731.
  40. • Sarigöl, Emre, and René Pfitzner. “Predicting Scientific Success Based

    on Coauthorship Networks”: 1–21.

  42. None
  43. Journal level Alternative Article level Impact factor Title Editorial board

    H 5 index Eigenfactor ! Citations Data sets Data reuse Data downloads Data citation Software Reviewing Tools built Grant revenue PhDs supervised Course materials Patents Government service ! Downloads Mendeley readers Tweets Facebook likes Citeulike bookmarks Betweenness centrality F1000 score Wikipedia citations News mentions Lay summaries Length spent reading Annotation density Readership demographic
  44. flickr: 24263322@N05

  45. $200 billion (an astonishing 85% of the world’s spending on

    medical research) was squandered on studies that were flawed in their design, redundant, never published or poorly reported The Lancet - via the economist 2014-03-15
  46. sharelatex writelatex publons authorea zenodo figshare fidus wrtier publons pubpeer

    kudos iPython papership shazino github paperscape scholastica peej elife pubchase sciencescape sparrho plum-analytics impactstory scienceexchange

  48. the best time in history to be an ex-scientist

  49. • Publish as fast as possible • Publish in a

    venue that you respect • Publish in a venue that is not going to make arbitrary decisions about your paper • Make your work open access Efficiency
  50. v1 50 Media policy 2 20 Cover letter and single

    PDF Swift triage process by Senior Editors Full submission BRE member plus external reviewer(s) Decision after peer review Revision assessed by BRE member Consultation Single decision letter
  51. v1 Single set of instructions – focused revision Limit rounds

    of revision Reduced times from submission 
 to acceptance ! No “3rd” reviewer problem
  52. 133 1.3 3

  53. Yeah, ok but what is eLife’s Impact Factor?

  54. flickr: twicepix

  55. Picture of the room

  56. Submit Now!

  57. Appendix!


  59. he published little of import between insulin in 1952 and

    his first paper on RNA sequencing in 1967 with another long gap until DNA sequencing in 1977 - Sydney Brenner
  60. says he has … published fewer than 10 papers after

    his groundbreaking work … was published in 1964. • 2013/dec/06/peter-higgs-boson- academic-system
  61. None