A “controversial ideas” journal where researchers can publish articles under pseudonyms will be launched next year by an Oxford University academic. The new journal is a response to a rise in researchers being criticised and silenced by those who disagree with them, according to Jeff McMahan, a professor of moral philosophy at Oxford.
When scholars choose a topic to work on their research, they need more sources or materials to review literature and add more value to their findings. According to Canadian science publishing’s article from last year, 2.5 million research papers are published annually while another unidentified source suggests that new researches are published around the world; approximately 1 million each year! Which is equal to one every 30 seconds. With the overload of new papers in each field and more growing every year it is practically impossible for scholars to keep with the information that is put out in each paper. Christian Berger’s team from the University of Gothenburg in Sweden, found a staggering number of papers on the subject; more than 10,000 in the same subject. Fortunately, the team had the support of an AI system, a writing investigation tool called Iris.ai.
Iris.ai is an AI, a tool developed for scholars to make writing research papers easier. It is a Berlin-based company that claims to save 90% of time with 85% precision of data matching, has more than 70 m open access papers. Iris.ai is programmed to learn about the topic provided and perform an elaborate frequency analysis over the text. Then it read the words for which it needs to find results and additional material that could be helpful for the paper. It uses a 500-word description of the researcher’s issue, or the link of their paper and the AI restores a guide to thousands of coordinating reports. As the website suggests, it is a scientific writing assistant.
According to Berger, it was “a quick and nevertheless precise overview of what should be relevant to a certain research question”. Iris.ai is one among many of the new AI-based tools offering targeted results of the knowledge landscape. One such tool is called Semantic Scholar, produced by the Allen Institute for Artificial Intelligence in Seattle, Washington, and Microsoft Academic.
Although every instrument is different from each other and gives different output, they all provide researchers with a different look at the scientific literature than conventional tools such as PubMed and Google Scholar. Semantic Scholar is a browser-based search tool that mimics the engines like Google and it is free. But it is more informative than Google Scholar in terms of specific results required by researchers. Doug Raymond, Semantic Scholar’s general manager, says that one million individuals utilize their service every month. It uses natural language processing or NLP to extract data while building connections to determine if the information is relevant and reputable or not.
Artificial intelligence is saving a lot of time and making it easier and quicker to automate some procedures. In the academic publishing industry, the Al-based innovations are being produced and implemented to help both authors and publishers for peer reviews, searching published content, detecting plagiarism, and identifying data fabrication. AI could be costly, but it can accelerate a researchers’ access to new fields. More and more such AI tools are being developed to cater to various requisites of writing a paper, such as filtering topics for relevance, keyword search, etc.
Experts who need more assistance for their specific concerns might consider free Al tool such as Microsoft Academic or Semantic Scholar. While AI is easing so many burdens and saving time for a researcher, let’s not forget that it is still machine intelligence and may require human intervention here and there to make a paper more presentable and precise.
With Open Access turning into the shared vision of various governments worldwide and a specific concentration inside some European research funders, this extended joint effort permits both Wiley and Hindawi to help the continuous improvement of top-notch open access titles and giving creators extra choices for where and how to publish. This collaboration is an extraordinary case of how Open Access is an intense and powerful driving force of the Open Science landscape, supporting an open and energizing worldwide space of sharing and associating the effect of research for the future generations.
Scientists in the Japanese sleep institute have found in their research that active components rich in sugarcane and other natural products may ameliorate stress, thus helping in having sound sleep.
Likert scale is a psychometric scale (i.e. a scale which measures individual differences) that is commonly used in survey research involving questionnaires (i.e. instrument). Each question or statement of the questionnaire forms the “Likert item”. Likert item measures the participants’ level of agreement to a statement, such as “strongly agree” or “neutral” or “disagree” which are orderly numbered. Generally 5 levels of responses are used i.e. 1. Strongly disagree, 2. Disagree, 3. Neither agrees nor disagrees, 4. Agree 5. Strongly agree. However, more than 5 levels i.e. 7 and 9 levels are also sometimes used.
Before analyzing the Likert scale data, the reliability of the instrument or scale is performed. This is achieved by three different ways. First, the uniformity in response within the instrument (i.e. internal consistency) is measured by estimating the Cronbach’s alpha. A Cronbach’s alpha value of ≥0.7 is accepted. Second, the test-retest reliability is calculated. In SPSS, the test-retest is calculated by bivariate correlation which is denoted by the Pearson’s correlation coefficient (r). Third, the inter-rater reliability is also estimated as test-retest in SPSS.
After determining the reliability of the instrument, analysis of Likert data is carried out. Each Likert item can be analyzed either separately (also called as Likert-type data) or summed to create a score for a group of items (summative scales, Likert scales). Each Likert scale consists of at least four or more Likert-type items, all measuring a single variable.
- Likert-type data is an ordinal data, i.e. we can only say that one score is higher than another. Due to the ordinal nature of the data, generally parametric tests (i.e. t-test, ANOVA) are not applied. Rather, non-parametric tests such as Mann Whitney-U test, Wilcoxon signed-rank test, Kruskal-Wallis test should be used. Descriptive statistics used for Likert-type data includes mode or median for measuring central tendency and frequencies for variability. Further analysis appropriate for ordinal scale items includes the chi-square measure of association, Kendall Tau B, and Kendall Tau C.
- Likert scale data, on the other hand, are analyzed as interval data. Since the data are of interval, parametric tests are used for analysis of Likert scale. Analysis that can be performed includes mean for central tendency, standard deviations for variability, Pearson’s r for bivariate analysis, t-test and ANOVA for comparing group means, and regression procedures for associations.
- When Likert-type or Likert scale data can be reduced to nominal level i.e. yes vs. no, agree vs. disagree, then, chi-square test, Cochran Q test, and Mc Nemar test can also be performed.
Further, Likert scales may be subject to biases from several causes. Central tendency bias occurs when respondents may avoid using extreme response categories; acquiescence bias occurs when respondents agree with statements as presented and social desirability bias occurs when respondents try to represent themselves or their institution more positively. All the biases can be checked by conducting a pilot survey before the actual study. If any biases are observed the questionnaire can be modified accordingly. Crafting a scale with an equal number of positive and negative statements can counteract the problem of acquiescence bias. Central tendency bias can be avoided by either making the survey questionnaire short or by forcing comparable rating i.e and/or by randomizing the questions. Social desirability bias can be prevented by implementing the all the above methods i.e. to minimize central tendency bias and acquiescence bias and also by making the questions indirect.
Electing Donald Trump as the 45th American President will bring about scads of policy reforms, even faster than the people realize. Starting from freezing the employee recruitments to the scrapping of Obamacare initiatives are all on the list! In addition, the breakneck statements and views of Donald Trump on various scientific facts have also sparked strong reactions among academics. However, the term “Science” has turned out to be a jargon for the Republicans and has found no special mention in the 100 days plan. However, we will have a bird’s eye view on the Trump’s blueprint that he would gift the Americans and the world community this New Year, and figure out if the science facts have been addressed to.
Trump – Throwing on off Policy fetters
Trump’s hard-line positions on immigration — including his commitment towards barring Muslims or terror-prone nationals from entering the US, a plan for wall building across the Mexico borders, imbibing visa restrictions, prioritizing American workers, and the termination of job programs for foreign youths, have surely perturbed the research advocates. Such decisions could sidetrack many talented international students or researchers from studying or working at US institutions. The future of foreign research scholars in the USA could be jeopardized due to such visa restrictions.
Science Facts vs. Trump’s Contradiction- Will it affect R&D funding?
The US has been a major investor of federal dollars in the field of R&D. “The entire business of the US academic biomedical research enterprise is based on federal dollars. Without that, it would collapse,” says Ethan Weiss, an associate professor, University of California. Trump’s shockingly ignorant views on vaccination for children with autism, and calling climate change a hoax and data to be unrealistic, pulling out US (the second most carbon generator) from the Paris climate change submit), curtailing the funds to UN for supporting climate change initiatives, and calling NASA as a logistics agency, have surely put him under the scanner of the intellectuals.
As per the statement released in September, by Donald Trump, he says that “there are increasing demands to curtail spending and to balance the federal budget; we must make the commitment to invest in science, engineering, healthcare and other areas that will make the lives of Americans better, safer and more prosperous.” In an interview by sciencedebate.org, Trump added that “scientific advances do require long-term investment.” In spite of such speculations, the fate of R&D industry is too early to predict. However, before the commencement of 2017, the present US Congress Govt. could approve spending bills before Christmas. These bills will raise the National Institute of Health funding as well as the NSF budget. During the first year of Trump’s presidency, the public funding will be secured.
Uncertain change in the climate
Trump’s election could factor into climate negotiations and be a setback for the upcoming climate change meets. When the world is thinking of implementing Paris agreement, the exit of the US from the Paris summit can be an unfortunate development and the pledge of 800 million USD as the annual contribution to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change may cease. However, legally Trump would not be able to sign off the Summit within his four years tenure.
Donald trump on Healthcare reforms
The Affordable Care Act, an initiative by Obama, which is in its current incarnation, won’t survive if Trump makes good on his campaign promises. By this logic, the funds linked to birth control programs would fade away, though not immediately. Trump may defund Obamacare and associated programs like state grant for medical care. A Trumpian shift to insurance premium deductions and insurance plans sales and the opening of tax-free Health Savings Accounts may not remedy the ultimate problem of high-cost health care services in the US.
Tech Boost and Trump
The Silicon Valley may be benefitted by the manufacturing revival initiative by Trump’s govt. “There are several things that a Trump administration could do that would be beneficial to tech,” says Rob Atkinson, president of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation. The export industry will flourish over the import, which will be part and parcel of the shifting away from the traditional start-up model and the adjusted tax and trade policy.
We know very little
The research policies and development across a wide spectrum in the US political scenario are still up in the air and have kept the scientific community optimistic (though cautiously). The outcomes of Trump’s immigration policies are also not clear. This is considered as the central pillar of his campaign, which might or might not affect research. Leighton Ku, a professor at George Washington University, said that “it’s likely that the kinds of highly-skilled scientists who immigrate to the US for school or work would still be welcome. But will they want to come?” This is a billion dollar question that still remains unanswered.
The abstract, which is a concise portrayal of the research work, is a decisive factor for the target journal or reader. It is not only essential to encourage people to read your paper, but also to persuade them to cite it in their research work. Thus, it is worth investing some extra time to write an attractive yet simple abstract.
First, it is important to read the main text several times to mentally absorb and retain the whole research work. Thereafter, attempt a draft that does not merely copy the sentences from the main text of the paper. Instead, the abstract should encapsulate the research concisely. Going through several iterations is a good way of improving an abstract.
The first few sentences of the abstract should illustrate the background and the purpose of the research work. These sentences should grab the reader’s attention and create an inquisitiveness to read in greater depth. The next couple of sentences should focus on the methodology of the research. Finally, the abstract should end with the result and conclusion part, which should be summarized in just 3-5 sentences. This part should be concise and emphasize the significant results and not the statistics.
Once the draft is done, proofread the draft to refine it as much as possible. Avoid verbose writing and verify the text for coherence of the information provided and proper usage of grammar. Besides text, scientific journals have come up with a new idea of summarizing their research paper through a graphical abstract. A graphical abstract is a single, concise, pictorial and visual summary of the main findings of the article. It could either be the concluding figure from the article or a figure that captures the content of the article for readers at a single glance. These days, researchers and scientists find abstract writing to be a cumbersome process and instead opt for a graphical abstract.
Regardless of the type of the abstract, it is an essential part of your manuscript that persuades editors, reviewers, and other researchers to absorb your research in detail.
The scope of research is beyond measure and cannot be structured or contained in a single research guide for which knowledge web is need of the hour. Considering the vast well of information, researchers often face problems in zeroing-in on articles that are most suited for their research area. They often take recourse to the World Wide Web in their quest for articles of interest. In this process, researchers use the web crawlers of their favorite search engines. This generates hundreds of sites that store information on the topic of interest. Usually, the first few search results show articles that are cited repeatedly and are the most relevant references for the research. This leads researchers to the important journals and authors related to the field of interest and helps them adopt strategies accordingly.
Although the search results are displayed within few seconds, the researcher needs to devote considerable time in building a mental model of a research field and giving the most apt query for the search engine to return the best and most relevant results. Therefore, a mechanical search on the Web will be grossly insufficient. Instead, the researcher needs to conduct a search for material other than that found on the Web, and must follow up with a wide reading on the subject. That will help the researcher identify the precise data or information require from the search engine. Even after thorough scrutiny of the material, there is a high risk of information masking that could lead to missing out on an important piece of work.
The best way to obtain an overview of a research field is to conduct knowledge domain visualizations. This process expands the ability of researchers to recognize and analyze a knowledge area through several quantitative and qualitative methods. They are able to use tools such as visual analytics and information visualization to analyze data, retrieve information, and mine text from available sources. This process will answer most of their research queries and help avoid repeated searches on the Internet.
Knowledge domain visualizations save valuable time of the researcher in searching, indexing, and structuring data. Knowledge domain visualizations are not only beneficial for individual researchers or a single subject, but also provide a platform for accessing specific publications. It even provides a quick overview of a research field.
In searching for research material on the Web, the automated or mechanical procedure falls woefully sort. On the other hand, manual interventions can improve results significantly and lead to a more substantial research output.
In course of their research, academicians often need to interact and exchange views with their colleagues to provide a firmer ground for their inferences. Such meetings help them debate their research topic with other like-minded participants and then assimilate the information that is presented through audio-visual media to produce a more conclusive finding. Therefore, seminars and colloquia are an essential part in the growth of any research. Often the proceedings of such meetings are recorded in the form of a collection of papers that were presented during the event.
On the other hand, a journal publishes research work, either on the web or as printed copies, after a rigorous process of review and a long approval cycle. However, once published in a reputed journal, your paper has an audience that you would otherwise have never had access to.
Why opt for conferences?
Conference proceedings have several advantages for a researcher. This is because conferences:
– Give a platform for interaction among research scholars who share a common interest.
– Have a faster review process and generate a faster feedback.
– Are often characterized by short presentations, so they manage to present the aim of the research clearly without consuming too much time.
– Include discussions sessions, which encourages exchange of views and ideas on the presentations.
– Allow interaction of scholars from all over the world who are engaged in the same or allied research fields.
– Have a predictable and time-bound review time.
– Help the presentations to be properly archived for reference in similar events held elsewhere on related research topics.
– Involve sponsors, who allure researchers with publishing credits and personal and professional benefits for attending the conference.
– Have high visibility and often leave a greater impact on the academic fraternity.
– Mainly focus on recent researches or up-to-date academic endeavors, unlike a journal that often takes a long time to finally publish a research.
Demerits of a conference publication
On the flip side, conferences have the following drawbacks:
– The review process is often superficial or cursory, i.e., there is no second round of reviewing.
– They have a low acceptance rate.
– The feedback from the research fraternity may be lukewarm compared to a publication in a journal.
– Economies of scale work against good quality publications because the publication is one of many expense heads for the organizers. Therefore, the production quality often leaves much to be desired.
Why opt for a journal publication?
A publication in a reputed journal presents the following advantages for the researcher:
– Research papers that are published in journals are thoroughly peer reviewed, including multiple review phases.
– The quality of research published in a journal is of a high standard.
– Journal publications carry deep analysis of a research work.
– Useful feedback is received from the reviewers, which help bring about substantive changes in the paper to improve the research analysis.
– Word and page limits are longer in the case of journals. This gives more scope to the researcher to express his or her thoughts and interpretations.
– A journal gives a chance to authors to revise their work based on the feedback and then re-submit it for further review and publication.
– Conference papers are never considered the ultimate in publishing a research. Often, conference papers can be converted to journal papers and published in reputed journals with a high impact factor.
Demerits of journal publications
There are also few demerits of journal publications. These include:
– The publication process is time-consuming.
– Due to such delays, the research topic might get outdated.
– Selection of journals is a difficult task. Sometimes, a good research is published in a sub-standard journal.
Both these routes to publication have their pros and cons. It must also be noted that conference proceedings and journal publications are not mutually exclusive; a situation may arise where one form of a research work might be published in the conference proceedings and another, perhaps more developed, form might be published in a journal. Therefore, for a more diverse and in-depth research output, both conference proceedings and journal publications need to play a significant part.