Category Archives: science publishing

The big chief at Molecular Ecology Resources: Interviewing Shawn Narum

What are the most exciting parts of doing science? The first look at results? The sheen of your publication finally in print? That initial foray out into the field? What about the moment you figure out a way to make a … Continue reading

RedditDiggMendeleyPocketShare and Enjoy
Posted in interview, methods, Molecular Ecology views, science publishing | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

They’ll let anything through peer review these days

… where “they” are the hordes of bogus pay-to-publish journals that seem to be spamming every .edu email address (especially those connected to corresponding authors in real journals) with invitations to submit. Submission spam from the International Journal of Advanced … Continue reading

Posted in peer review, science publishing | Leave a comment

Haldane’s Sieve

This week we have a guest post by Graham Coop and Joe Pickrell. Here, Graham [GC] and Joe [JKP] answer a few questions we had about the development and future of their blog, Haldane’s Sieve. If you’re interested in population genetics … Continue reading

Posted in blogging, community, interview, peer review, science publishing | Leave a comment

Peer review, reviewed

Rebecca Schuman, who has almost single-handedly turned Slate into one of best big websites for coverage of the many trials and tribulations of academia, turns to peer review for scholarly journals, in which an author’s academic peers volunteer to weigh … Continue reading

Posted in peer review, science publishing | 6 Comments

Mol Ecol’s best reviewers 2014

As a continuation of our post from last year, Molecular Ecology is publishing a list of our very best referees from the last two years (2012 and 2013). Our hope is that the people listed below will put ‘Top Reviewer … Continue reading

Posted in community, Molecular Ecology, the journal, peer review | 2 Comments

Why we sign our peer reviews

Last week I posted the results from a brief survey of our readers, asking whether they usually sign their peer reviews. In that small sample of evolutionary ecologists, the overwhelming majority said they review anonymously, though many participants seem to … Continue reading

Posted in career, community, peer review, science publishing | 5 Comments

Why we don’t sign our peer reviews

Last week I posted the results from a brief survey of our readers, asking whether they usually sign their peer reviews. In that small sample of evolutionary ecologists, the overwhelming majority said they review anonymously, though many participants seem to … Continue reading

Posted in career, community, peer review, science publishing | 1 Comment

Do we sign our peer reviews? Mostly, no.

Update, 24 November 2014: There’s been a renewed interest in this post, so now is as good a time as any to note that, in addition to this survey, I also posted written responses from folks who choose to sign … Continue reading

Posted in community, peer review, science publishing | 10 Comments

Journals must boost data sharing

Here’s the text from Tim’s recent (3rd April) Correspondence piece in Nature The journal ecosystem is a powerful filter of scientific literature, promoting the best work into the best journals. Why not use a similar mechanism to encourage more comprehensive … Continue reading

Posted in data archiving, science publishing | Leave a comment

Do you sign your peer reviews?

Update: The survey is now closed! Thanks to everyone who participated—I’ll post the results soon. Yesterday John Stanton-Geddes e-mailed me and Tim Vines to ask about writing a post, or a series of posts, on the question of whether or … Continue reading

Posted in peer review, science publishing | 1 Comment