scholarly journals In Memoriam – Dr. Consolacion Y. Ragasa

KIMIKA ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 58-69
Author(s):  
Wyona Patalinghug ◽  
Drexel Camacho ◽  
Jaime Raul Janairo ◽  
Lourdes Guidote ◽  
Maria Carmen Tan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Research ◽  
Research Community ◽  
Huge Impact ◽  
In Memoriam ◽  
Chemistry Community

On April 14, 2021, the Philippine chemistry community lost one of its most prolific researchers due to the COVID19 virus. Herein we reflect on the extraordinary life and work of Dr. Consolacion Y. Ragasa. We highlight her story, her scientific contributions, and the huge impact she left, not only on her students and colleagues but also on the scientific research community.

scholarly journals In Memoriam – Dr. Leon M. Payawan Jr.

KIMIKA ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 62-67
Author(s):  
Ken Aldren S. Usman ◽  
Yasmin D.G. Edañol ◽  
Marlon T. Conato
Keyword(s):  
Research Community ◽  
Huge Impact ◽  
In Memoriam

On September 25, 2020, the Philippine chemistry society lost one of its most eminent members. Herein we reflect on the life and work of Dr. Leon M. Payawan Jr., referred to as Leon by his close friends and colleagues. We highlight some of his contributions that left a huge impact, not only to his students and cohorts, but also to the Philippine research community in general, both locally and internationally.

EDITORIAL

1970 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. i-iv
Author(s):  
A K M A Islam
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Science ◽  
Academic Career ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Editorial Policy ◽  
Research Community ◽  
Hard Copy ◽  
Original Research ◽  
Scientific Publications ◽  
Advisory Boards

Journal of Scientific Research EDITORIAL Do we need a new journal? The answer lies in the fact that currently no international journal (online and print) with interdisciplinary character which specifically caters to the academic needs of the international community operates from Bangladesh. This journal aims to fill this lacuna and to be a bridge for the scientists from the east and the west. This is the first issue of the Journal of Scientific Research (JSR). The idea of launching a journal that hopes to publish quality scientific works was planted in early 2008 during a science faculty meeting at Rajshahi University. Now it is our pleasure to see the idea blossom into the first issue of first volume (1 January 2009) that contains scientific work not only of Asian regions but of much beyond that. The inaugural issue indicates the type of journal we hope to become. It is wide ranging and interdisciplinary. Our contributors include scholars at every stage of their academic career. As regards editorial policy and scope the Journal of Scientific Research is a peer-reviewed international journal originally intended for publication annually. But due to a satisfactory flow of manuscripts since the first announcements the publication frequency has now been increased to 3 online issues (one print volume) per year.The journal is a unifying force, going across the barriers between disciplines, addressing all related topics and materials. An international Editorial Board (along with an Advisory Board) comprising of renowned academics from various fields guides our editorial policy and direction. The journal is devoted to the publication of original research (research paper, review paper, short communication) covering the following fields:Section A:  Physical and Mathematical Sciences: Physics, Mathematics, Statistics, Geophysics, Computer, Environmental Science, Communications and Information Technology, Engineering and related branches.Section B:  Chemical and Biological Sciences: Chemistry, Biochemistry, Pharmacy, Biology, Genetics, Fisheries and related branches.The articles selected for the first issue have been reviewed by two discipline-specialists, and their recommendations have been appropriately incorporated. Submissions from the world research community are encouraged to fulfill our mission and aim for the journal to stand for the international scientific publishing standards.    It was clear during the planning and development of this first issue that the Asian region needs a forum through which research could be shared and acknowledged. I hope that this journal will soon be recognised by the wider research community as their forum for the dissemination of knowledge. We hope that the journal will not simply act as a place for publication of material, though obviously this is important, but should act as a catalyst for the advancement of science both within and outside the region.The journal is being published both online and in print. Online publishing, unique in nature, is faster and far less expensive than traditional hard copy publishing. Access of online journals is easier and better images, storage and multimedia are other advantages. I must thank the International Network for the availability of Scientific Publications (INASP) for helping us publish via BanglaJOL – and the help of Ms. Sioux Cumming in this regard is worthy of mention.The success of a journal depends on the quality of its Editorial Board and the reviewers. The effort that I have seen from them speaks well for the future of the new born journal.  Both the Editorial and Advisory Boards should deserve thanks for their indispensable advice and support during the planning phases of the journal. I should also thank the reviewers who contributed their valuable time to complete reviews within a reasonable time. I truly hope that the diversity contained in this first issue of the journal will be the hallmark of future issues. A K M A Islam email: [email protected]  website: www.banglajol.info/index.php/JSR           © 2009 JSR Publications. ISSN: 2070-0237 (Print); 2070-0245 (Online). All rights reserved.DOI: 10.3329/jsr.vlil.1703    

Getting out of the Field

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeasik Cho
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Academic Research ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Research Community

This chapter provides a review of the book, which explores how to conceptually understand and practically evaluate the quality of qualitative research. Despite the fact that there are few scholarly pieces regarding qualitative research, the depth and creativity that the pioneering researchers have demonstrated are profound, and the extent to which they cover not only the broad quality of qualitative research but also most of the specific qualities expected by many different kinds of qualitative research is incredible. This chapter summarizes the major topics of this book. Final remarks on this exciting, creative, but difficult topic are preceded by the following summary: Fortunately, There are commonly agreed, bold standards for evaluating the goodness of qualitative research in the academic research community. These standards are a part of what is generally called “scientific research.”

scholarly journals 2019 – TIME FOR INNOVATIONS THROUGH COLLABORATIONS

INDIAN DRUGS ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 56 (01) ◽  
pp. 5-6
Author(s):  
Gopakumar G. Nair ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Prime Minister ◽  
Pharmaceutical Research ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Research Community ◽  
Research Professionals

At very outset, I wish all our readers and pharmaceutical scientists a very Happy New Year. 2019 is dawning on the Indian research community in general and all pharmaceutical research professionals in particular. The Prime Minister has come up with “JAI VIGYAN” and “JAI ANUSANDHAN” in support of scientific research. This strengthens the call under Article 51A of Fundamental duties under the Constitution of India for developing a Scientific Temper… and the spirit of enquiry.

A Response to the Attempted Critique of the Scientific Phenomenological Method

2017 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-144 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amedeo Giorgi
Keyword(s):  
Edmund Husserl ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Phenomenological Research ◽  
Research Community ◽  
Rhetorical Strategies ◽  
Phenomenological Method ◽  
Research Strategies ◽  
Know How ◽  
New Research ◽  
Oriented Research

Recently, a book (details are given below) was published, the sole purpose of which was to discourage researchers from using the scientific phenomenological method. The author (Paley, 1997; 1998; 2000) had previously been critical of nurses who had used the scientific phenomenological method but in the new book he goes after the originators of different methods of scientific phenomenological research and attempts to criticize them severely. In this review I defend only the scientific phenomenological method that is strictly based upon the thought of Edmund Husserl. Given the entirely negative project of only critiquing phenomenologically grounded scientific research, one would expect the author to be sensitive to the cautions historians and philosophers of science speak about when one attempts to criticize concepts and procedures that belong to a different research community. Paley, an empiricist, uses empirical criteria to criticize phenomenological work. Moreover, given the entirely negative project of critiquing phenomenologically grounded scientific research one would expect the author to be knowledgeable about phenomenology and the innovative research practices used by a new research community. However, (1) the author has only a thin, superficial understanding of phenomenology (e.g., it is not a technology; Paley, 2017, 109). One gets the impression that he only reads phenomenology in order to critique it. He displays an outsider’s understanding of it which means that his criticisms of it are faulty because he does not know how to think and dwell within the phenomenological framework; (2) he does not understand “discovery-oriented” research and he keeps judging such research according to criteria from the “context of verification” perspective which are the wrong criteria for “discovery-oriented” research; (3) he denigrates and reduces nursing research strategies because he interprets them to be based on pragmatic motivations only. He does not even grant that nurses can have authentic scientific motivations for seeking phenomenologically based methods; (4) he uses unfair rhetorical strategies in the sense that he uses strategies himself that he criticizes when others use them. The review below documents what has been summarized here.

Genetic Engineering and Biological Risks

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Filippa Lentzos
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Engineering ◽  
Self Regulation ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Standard Setting ◽  
Research Community ◽  
Technological Capabilities ◽  
Regulatory Evolution ◽  
Perceived Risks ◽  
Legal Frameworks ◽  
Narrative Account

This chapter serves three objectives. First, it provides a narrative account of key developments in core bioengineering technologies. Second, it critically interrogates the emergence and evolution of regulatory regimes aimed at responding to perceived risks associated with these technological capabilities, highlighting how these have primarily relied on establishing ‘soft’ forms of control rather than hard edged legal frameworks backed by coercive sanctions, largely in the form of self-regulation by the scientific research community (with some notification provisions to keep the relevant government informed). Third, it provides an analysis of this regulatory evolution, focusing on the narrow construction of risk, and flagging up the possibility of alternative framings, which might have generated more inclusive and deliberative approaches to standard-setting and oversight.

Science as a Persuasion Game: An Inferentialist Approach

Episteme ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
pp. 189-201 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jesús Zamora Bonilla
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Knowledge ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Language Game ◽  
Research Community ◽  
Theoretic Analysis ◽  
Game Theoretic Analysis ◽  
Game Theoretic ◽  
Similarities And Differences

ABSTRACTScientific research is reconstructed as a language game along the lines of Robert Brandom's inferentialism. Researchers are assumed to aim at persuading their colleagues of the validity of some claims. The assertions each scientist is allowed or committed to make depend on her previous claims and on the inferential norms of her research community. A classification of the most relevant types of inferential rules governing such a game is offered, and some ways in which this inferentialist approach can be used for assessing scientific knowledge and practices are explored. Some similarities and differences with a game-theoretic analysis are discussed.

scholarly journals Predatory journals and their effects on scientific research community

2017 ◽  
Vol 27 (2) ◽  
pp. 270-272 ◽  
Author(s):  
Farrokh Habibzadeh ◽  
Ana-Maria Simundic
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Research ◽  
Research Community ◽  
Predatory Journals
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document