http://chrislintott.net/2008/04/17/to-write-or-not-to-write/ The Universe as seen from the perspective of an astronomical researcher, presenter and writer. Tue, 22 Dec 2009 10:28:22 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 http://chrislintott.net/2008/04/17/to-write-or-not-to-write/comment-page-1/#comment-54177 Kieron Wilkinson Tue, 29 Apr 2008 20:21:21 +0000 http://chrislintott.net/2008/04/17/to-write-or-not-to-write/#comment-54177 Ah, thanks. I had assumed there was more to it than that. I had visions of scientists reading other peoples papers on the train, and mailing their feedback when they get into the office. Hey, I an optimistic person... :) Ah, thanks. I had assumed there was more to it than that. I had visions of scientists reading other peoples papers on the train, and mailing their feedback when they get into the office. Hey, I an optimistic person…

]]> http://chrislintott.net/2008/04/17/to-write-or-not-to-write/comment-page-1/#comment-53659 chrislintott Sun, 27 Apr 2008 11:53:10 +0000 http://chrislintott.net/2008/04/17/to-write-or-not-to-write/#comment-53659 There isn't usually formal peer review after publication by a journal, although of course there's the ultimate peer review of waiting to see if anyone ever reads or refers to it... There isn’t usually formal peer review after publication by a journal, although of course there’s the ultimate peer review of waiting to see if anyone ever reads or refers to it…

]]> http://chrislintott.net/2008/04/17/to-write-or-not-to-write/comment-page-1/#comment-52534 Kieron Wilkinson Tue, 22 Apr 2008 11:40:46 +0000 http://chrislintott.net/2008/04/17/to-write-or-not-to-write/#comment-52534 How incredibly insightful. Thanks very much for this Chris. One thing I am still confused about though - doesn't peer review also happen after publication? Or is it the responsibility of other future papers to discredit a papers conclusions? How incredibly insightful. Thanks very much for this Chris. One thing I am still confused about though – doesn’t peer review also happen after publication? Or is it the responsibility of other future papers to discredit a papers conclusions?

]]> http://chrislintott.net/2008/04/17/to-write-or-not-to-write/comment-page-1/#comment-51566 Sarah Fri, 18 Apr 2008 13:06:46 +0000 http://chrislintott.net/2008/04/17/to-write-or-not-to-write/#comment-51566 Hiya Chris. I do think the 'status' of a scientific result is often not made clear enough in news stories: submitted, accepted, conference talk. Among the people reading these news stories, how many do you think understand the peer review process enough to be able to judge the importance of the results adequately? But as I fully support astro-ph and similar archives I think the burden lies with the journalists and editors to make sure that the results are being reported in a fair way, leaving no doubt as to whether this is theory, hypothesis, fact, whatever. Hiya Chris. I do think the ’status’ of a scientific result is often not made clear enough in news stories: submitted, accepted, conference talk. Among the people reading these news stories, how many do you think understand the peer review process enough to be able to judge the importance of the results adequately? But as I fully support astro-ph and similar archives I think the burden lies with the journalists and editors to make sure that the results are being reported in a fair way, leaving no doubt as to whether this is theory, hypothesis, fact, whatever.

]]> http://chrislintott.net/2008/04/17/to-write-or-not-to-write/comment-page-1/#comment-51257 Stuart Thu, 17 Apr 2008 11:47:10 +0000 http://chrislintott.net/2008/04/17/to-write-or-not-to-write/#comment-51257 Chris, thanks so much for your views on the process and pitfalls of the modern scientific paper publishing world. I understand that due to the enormous cost of specialist journals, which are now proving a burden to libraries, there is a move in some areas for non-peer reviewed, Internet based journals. Have these started up in Astronomy/Cosmology? Chris, thanks so much for your views on the process and pitfalls of the modern scientific paper publishing world. I understand that due to the enormous cost of specialist journals, which are now proving a burden to libraries, there is a move in some areas for non-peer reviewed, Internet based journals. Have these started up in Astronomy/Cosmology?

]]> http://chrislintott.net/2008/04/17/to-write-or-not-to-write/comment-page-1/#comment-51256 Nick Cross Thu, 17 Apr 2008 11:40:14 +0000 http://chrislintott.net/2008/04/17/to-write-or-not-to-write/#comment-51256 I have done a lot of work in big collaborations (mainly in cosmology). There has usually been a rule in these collaborations only to put papers on astro-ph when they have been accepted, although occasionally this has been relaxed if there is a strong chance it will be scooped. In these collaborations there has already been a strong refereeing process before submission: I often have found my colleagues a lot tougher than the referee. I was also a little annoyed when one paper was accepted a couple of days after a similar paper (only submitted) was put out on astro-ph. Some of my colleagues felt that the referee may have been on the other team. Of course it could have been coincidental. This is a topic which has been endlessly debated and there is no real concessus. I have done a lot of work in big collaborations (mainly in cosmology). There has usually been a rule in these collaborations only to put papers on astro-ph when they have been accepted, although occasionally this has been relaxed if there is a strong chance it will be scooped. In these collaborations there has already been a strong refereeing process before submission: I often have found my colleagues a lot tougher than the referee. I was also a little annoyed when one paper was accepted a couple of days after a similar paper (only submitted) was put out on astro-ph. Some of my colleagues felt that the referee may have been on the other team. Of course it could have been coincidental. This is a topic which has been endlessly debated and there is no real concessus.

]]>