Difference between revisions of "Links on problems in academia"

(Open access)
Line 103: Line 103:
 
* [http://scientopia.org/blogs/drugmonkey/2013/01/14/placing-plos-one-in-the-appropriate-evaluative-context/ Placing PLOS One in the appropriate evaluative context]
 
* [http://scientopia.org/blogs/drugmonkey/2013/01/14/placing-plos-one-in-the-appropriate-evaluative-context/ Placing PLOS One in the appropriate evaluative context]
 
* [http://earlycareerecologists.wordpress.com/2013/03/21/why-i-published-in-plos-one-and-why-i-probably-wont-again-for-awhile/ Why I published in PLOS One and probably won't again]
 
* [http://earlycareerecologists.wordpress.com/2013/03/21/why-i-published-in-plos-one-and-why-i-probably-wont-again-for-awhile/ Why I published in PLOS One and probably won't again]
 +
* [http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/nov/18/beyond-open-access-understanding-sciences-enclosures?CMP=twt_gu Beyond open access]
  
 
===Impact factor===
 
===Impact factor===

Revision as of 10:22, 21 November 2013

This is just a backup of a bookmark folder, will structure it later.

Academic career

Generic

Ph.D.

Postdocs

Coming back

  • Reentering Academia - A Success Story I knew that I could be a reasonable scientist given the chance. I eventually managed to convince people here in Oxford that I could be taken back on as a postdoc.


Finding a job after academia

Academia as a workplace

Funding

Publishing

Fraud and retraction

Peer review

Open access

Impact factor

Plagiarism


Philosophical defenses

Inefficiencies

Italy

Open science


Image

Other