Comments on: Universally available research http://www.speedofcreativity.org/2006/06/20/universally-available-research/ Mon, 06 Oct 2008 19:30:04 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: Basement Tapes » Universally available research http://www.speedofcreativity.org/2006/06/20/universally-available-research/#comment-5592 Basement Tapes » Universally available research Thu, 22 Jun 2006 13:04:01 +0000 http://www.speedofcreativity.org/?p=1097#comment-5592 [...] Moving at the Speed of Creativity » Blog Archive » Universally available research [...] [...] Moving at the Speed of Creativity » Blog Archive » Universally available research [...]

]]> By: andi forte http://www.speedofcreativity.org/2006/06/20/universally-available-research/#comment-5547 andi forte Tue, 20 Jun 2006 18:13:30 +0000 http://www.speedofcreativity.org/?p=1097#comment-5547 The vision of open access is so enticing, but it's really a more complicated issue than most people realize. I think one of the challenges of open peer review and publication is captured in one of your quotes. The idea that scientists "write, edit and peer review without compensation" is WAY off. These activities essentially drive funding for scientific research. Bruno Latour has written a couple of (relatively inexpensive ;-) ) books about the sociology of the scientific community. He suggested that one of the most critical features of science is the cycle of credit. He observed that publication is part of a cycle of credit that eventually gets translated into research funds and equipment. The entire scientific enterprise is tightly bound to a publishing tradition that essentially serves as the engine that gets scientists the funds they need to continue carrying out their research. By serving as a reviewer or editor, scientists help determine who gets what kind of funding in the future. That's some serious compensation. I like the open publishing vision, in fact, all my work is about wikis, but I think it will take some time before this complex social system shifts in any radical way toward a more open model. The vision of open access is so enticing, but it’s really a more complicated issue than most people realize. I think one of the challenges of open peer review and publication is captured in one of your quotes. The idea that scientists “write, edit and peer review without compensation” is WAY off. These activities essentially drive funding for scientific research.

Bruno Latour has written a couple of (relatively inexpensive ;-) ) books about the sociology of the scientific community. He suggested that one of the most critical features of science is the cycle of credit. He observed that publication is part of a cycle of credit that eventually gets translated into research funds and equipment. The entire scientific enterprise is tightly bound to a publishing tradition that essentially serves as the engine that gets scientists the funds they need to continue carrying out their research. By serving as a reviewer or editor, scientists help determine who gets what kind of funding in the future. That’s some serious compensation.

I like the open publishing vision, in fact, all my work is about wikis, but I think it will take some time before this complex social system shifts in any radical way toward a more open model.

]]> By: Stephen Downes http://www.speedofcreativity.org/2006/06/20/universally-available-research/#comment-5545 Stephen Downes Tue, 20 Jun 2006 14:33:25 +0000 http://www.speedofcreativity.org/?p=1097#comment-5545 If Wired was going to profile anybody with respect to Open Access, it should have profiled Peter Suber, who has been at the forefront of this very large movement for years now. See http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/fosblog.html If Wired was going to profile anybody with respect to Open Access, it should have profiled Peter Suber, who has been at the forefront of this very large movement for years now.

See http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/fosblog.html

]]>