Establishment of the Indonesian Association of Scientific Journal Editors

On too many occasions researchers conduct public health and/or epidemiological studies in low-income countries without the appropriate in-country ethical approval. This article reflects on some of the underlying reasons for not applying for ethical approval. The piece concludes that we need to start by educating our (junior) researchers and research students about the importance of research ethics. We conclude with a number of recommendations for researchers, scientific journal editors and reviewers and ethical committees in high-income countries to bring the message home to researchers that ethical approval should be sought in low-income countries if and when required!

Download Full-text

Addressing the “Bias Gap”: A Research-Driven Argument for Critical Support of Plurilingual Scientists’ Research Writing

Written Communication ◽

10.1177/0741088319861648 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 36 (4) ◽

pp. 538-577 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

James Corcoran

Keyword(s):

Latin American ◽

Scientific Journal ◽

Scientific Journals ◽

Research Writing ◽

Scholarly Writing ◽

Writing For Publication ◽

Self Reflection ◽

Journal Editors ◽

Shared Goal

This article outlines findings from a case study investigating attitudes toward English as the dominant language of scientific research writing. Survey and interview data were collected from 55 Latin American health and life scientists and 7 North American scientific journal editors connected to an intensive scholarly writing for publication course. Study findings point to competing perceptions (scientists vs. editors) of fairness in the adjudication of Latin American scientists’ research at international scientific journals. Adopting a critical, plurilingual lens, I argue that these findings demand a space for more equity-driven pedagogies, policies, and reflective practices aimed at supporting the robust participation of plurilingual scientists who use English as an additional language (EAL). In particular, if equity is indeed a shared goal, there is a clear need for commitment to ongoing critical self-reflection on the part of scientific journal gatekeepers and research writing support specialists.

Download Full-text

Developments in Schizophrenia Treatment

CNS Spectrums ◽

10.1017/s1092852900000894 ◽

2001 ◽

Vol 6 (11) ◽

pp. 881-881

Author(s):

Jack M. Gorman

Keyword(s):

Restriction Fragment Length Polymorphism ◽

Length Polymorphism ◽

Fragment Length ◽

Fragment Length Polymorphism ◽

Scientific Journal ◽

Initial Finding ◽

Complex Disorders ◽

Journal Editors ◽

The United Kingdom ◽

Restriction Fragment Length

Several years ago, a research group from the United Kingdom announced in the prestigious scientific journal Nature that a gene for schizophrenia had been located. This was greeted with widespread applause. Even the editors of Nature believed that a major piece of the puzzle for schizophrenia had at last been found.Sadly, the bubble soon burst. Despite many attempts, no one was able to replicate the initial finding, and it is now widely felt to have been a mistake. This is no longer surprising. Use of the restriction fragment length polymorphism approach to finding genes for complex disorders like schizophrenia has been notably unsuccessful. Currently, journal editors are alerted to the receipt of claims that a gene for some disorder has been found, only to be burnt by the next dozen failures to replicate the finding. The schizophrenia “finding” was a great disappointment.

Download Full-text

The Treason of The Editors - How Scientific Journal Editors Changed Sides

The Winnower ◽

10.15200/winn.140831.19571 ◽

2014 ◽

Author(s):

Bruce G Charlton ◽

Keyword(s):

Scientific Journal ◽

Journal Editors

Download Full-text

Realizing the potential of metallic iron for environmental remediation: Flee or adapt?

10.21203/rs.3.rs-193098/v1 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Rui Hu ◽

Huichen Yang ◽

Viet Cao ◽

Bernard Konadu Amoah ◽

Arnaud Igor Ndé-Tchoupé ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Peer Review ◽

Metallic Iron ◽

Environmental Remediation ◽

Scientific Journal ◽

Review Literature ◽

Reducing Agent ◽

Efficient Technology ◽

Journal Editors ◽

Dissolved Species

Abstract The evidence that metallic iron (Fe0) is not an environmental reducing agent has been declared to be a claim. Researchers presenting their findings in a scientific journal have to accept the burden of proving that their argumentation has any validity. This 30-year-lasting discussion within the Fe0 remediation community is alien to graduate chemists, as it is a century old electrochemistry knowledge. Nevertheless, the peer review literature on "remediation using Fe0" seems to be aggressively controlled by self-appointed experts (e.g., journal editors) who are not tolerating any alternative thinking. This communication demonstrates the fallacy of the view that Fe0 donates any electron to a dissolved species. The sole goal is to reconcile a proven efficient technology with his scientific roots, and enable the design of better Fe0 remediation systems.

Download Full-text