Check new design of our homepage! Want to research on a sociological topic but facing a dilemma about which one to choose? EduZenith Staff Last Updated: Mar 20, Society does not consist of individuals, but expresses the sum of interrelations, the relations within which these individuals stand.
But I made the science so egregiously bad that no competent peer reviewer would accept it. The approach was deeply flawed — there were poor or absent controls in every figure.
I used ludicrously elaborate experiments where simple ones would have done. I then submitted the paper to Science, punching up the impact the work would have on our understanding of extraterrestrials and the origins of life on Earth in the cover letter. And what do you know? Maybe there are journals out there who do subscription-based publishing right — but my experience should serve as a warning to people thinking about submitting their work to Science and other journals like it.
He created a deeply flawed paper about molecules from lichens that inhibit the growth of cancer cells, submitted it to open access journals under assumed names, and recorded what happened. Of the journals that rendered decisions, accepted the paper, most with no discernible sign of having actually carried out peer review.
Here is their press release: His hoax paper claimed that a particular molecule slowed the growth of cancer cells, and it was riddled with obvious errors and contradictions. And, according to Bohannon, 16 of those journals eventually accepted the spoof paper despite their negative reviews.
It is unacceptable that there are publishers — several owned by big players in the subscription publishing world — who claim that they are carrying out peer review, and charging for it, but no doing it. Like OA journals, a lot of subscription-based journals have businesses based on accepting lots of papers with little regard to their importance or even validity.
And one look at many of their journals shows that they also will accept almost anything. But the real story is that a fair number of journals who actually carried out peer review still accepted the paper, and the lesson people should take home from this story not that open access is bad, but that peer review is a joke.
If a nakedly bogus paper is able to get through journals that actually peer reviewed it, think about how many legitimate, but deeply flawed, papers must also get through. Any scientist can quickly point to dozens of papers — including, and perhaps especially, in high impact journals — that are deeply, deeply flawed — the arsenic DNA story is one of many recent examples.
While some fringe OA publishers are playing a short con, subscription publishers are seasoned grifters playing a long con. Like all good grifters playing the long con, they get us to believe they are doing something good for us — something we need.
Not only do they traffic in billions rather than thousands of dollars and denying the vast majority of people on Earth access to the findings of publicly funded research, the impact and glamour they sell us to make us willing participants in their grift has serious consequences.
Every time they publish because it is sexy, and not because it is right, science is distorted. And it often distorts public policy. There are deep problems with science publishing. But the way to fix this is not to curtain open access publishing. It is to fix peer review.
First, and foremost, we need to get past the antiquated idea that the singular act of publication — or publication in a particular journal — should signal for all eternity that a paper is valid, let alone important. Even when people take peer review seriously, it is still just represents the views of 2 or 3 people at a fixed point in time.
To invest the judgment of these people with so much meaning is nuts. And its far worse when the process is distorted — as it so often is — by the desire to publish sexy papers, or to publish more papers, or because the wrong reviewers were selected, or because they were just too busy to do a good job.
This entry was posted in open accessscience.This list of sociology research paper topics represents a thorough inquiry into the state of knowledge and scholarly thinking in various subfields of sociology. Sociology is a very broad field of study that employs tools such as surveys, personal or telephonic interviews, observational techniques, and other experiments to get into the details of a variety of topics related to human interactions, society, and culture.
Want to research on a sociological topic but facing a dilemma about which one to choose? The article describes the most interesting topics to discuss on the subject sociology and also gives direct questions that could be described in paper.
iClicker is the market-leader in student and audience response systems for Higher Education, recognized for ease-of-use, reliability, and focus on pedagogy. The Journal of Mixed Methods Research serves as a premiere outlet for ground-breaking and seminal work in the field of mixed methods research.
Of primary importance will be building an international and multidisciplinary community of mixed methods researchers. The journal's scope includes exploring a global terminology and nomenclature for mixed methods research, delineating where mixed.
AQA A-Level Sociology: Topics in Sociology Exam: Advice for answer the families and households section Paper 2 is a 2 hour paper, out of a total of 80 marks. You get a booklet of questions, split into two sections (A Continue reading →.