publication process

Jean-Claude Bradley presents on "Open Education in Chemistry Research and Classroom" at the University of the Sciences on January 11, 2011. The talk covers screencasting, wikis, chemical information validation, Open Notebook Science and smartphones.

Jean-Claude Bradley presents on "The implications of Open Notebook Science and other new forms of scientific communication for Nanoinformatics" at the Nanoinformatics 2010 conference on November 3, 2010. The presentation first covers the use of the laboratory knowledge management system SMIRP for nanotechnology applications during the period of 1999-2001 at Drexel University. The exporting of single experiments from SMIRP and publication to the Chemistry Preprint Archive is then described...

On May 14, 2010 Jean-Claude Bradley presented on Open Notebook Science at the OpenSciNY conference at the New York University Library. He introduced the topic by telling a few stories about how new forms of communication are affecting how we think about concepts like "scientific precedent", "peer review", "scientific publishing" and "scientific scholarship". At the end he spoke about archiving Open Notebook Science projects culminating in the publication of the Reaction Attempts and ONS...

Jean-Claude Bradley presents on "Peer Review and Science2.0: blogs, wikis and social networking sites" as a guest lecturer for the “Peer Review Culture in Scholarly Publication and Grantmaking” course at Drexel University. The main thrust of the presentation is that peer review alone is not capable of coping with the increasing flood of scientific information being generated and shared. Arguments are made to show that providing sufficient proof for scientific findings does scale and...

The productivity of scientists and the quality of their papers differ enormously. Still, all papers written get published eventually and the impact factor of the publication channel is not correlated to the citations that individual papers receive. Hence it does not matter where to publish papers. Based on these two conjectures, I conclude that all papers should be published. The review process should focus on feedback that helps authors to improve their manuscripts. But we should no longer...