A new hierarchy

This paper from Siler el al. (2018) confirms the appearance of a new hierarchy where researchers affiliated to low-ranked institutions are less likely to submit their papers to open access (OA) journals. It is not difficult to find positive attitudes towards OA from Universities, but they lack of an established policy of funding OA publications. This should be a challenge that we might achieve.

Siler K, Haustein S, Smith E, Larivière V, Alperin JP. Authorial and institutional stratification in open access publishing: the case of global health research. PeerJ 2018; 6:e4269 Available in URL https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.4269


When the problem is not only about sharing data…

Following the paper from Silberzahn et al. (2018), where 29 research teams worked with the same data set, obtaining a significant variation in the results of the analyses, a new issue comes up: it is not only about the fact of sharing data, but the need for an homogeneous management of research outcomes to ensure reproducibility. We need to be aware of this question.

Silberzahn et al. Many Analysts, One Data Set: Making Transparent How Variations in Analytic Choices Affect Results. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science 2018, 1(3) 337–356. Available in journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/2515245917747646