Senior Statistician and Senior Scientist in the Office of the Chief Statistician of the United States
I suspect that one of the many motivations that for-profit journals have against reforming open science to make it more freely transparent is because they're afraid of the embarrassment of retractions because they think that it will erode their prestige and affect their bottom line. Retractions are a part of science! Nothing is final - or settled science - there is no such thing as a definitive or putative version of record. it's an invention created by the for-profit publishers to provide them with legitimacy on the record and it is anti- scientific. Move to a model of a record of versions and provide opportunity for scholars to engage freely and transparently in revision the way that science intends.
"In June a notice posted on the website of the journal Nature set a new scientific record. It withdrew what is now the most highly cited research paper ever to be retracted." - Peter Aldhous, Scientific American https://lnkd.in/eB-Qf46q HT Retraction Watch #PublicationEthics #NatureMagazine #SpringerNature #ResearchIntegrity #Retractions #StemCells #StemCellScience #AdultStemCell #CatherineVerfaillie #UniversityOfMinnesota #BoneMarrow #HighImpactResearch
Trained in science with a passion for scientific publishing. Open research and open science advocate. Looking to develop a transparent, inclusive & equitable scientific ecosystem.
3moExactly - publications need to be *living documents* rather than being fossils frozen in time!