Hello ebc–

Publishing certainly dictates success in your career, from competing for scarce tenured-track positions to receiving government grants, the sheer volume of primary research articles and their impact factor is at the forefront of climbing the scientific ladder. This is embedded into the culture of academia and is not going away any time soon, but how will we manage in an ever-evolving publication model?

In today’s episode, Avery and Yassine break down publishing in academia, including the process of submitting a manuscript for peer review, the meaning and economies of “open-access,” and the current ways for which article submissions are funded. We also discuss the issues with the current publishing model, highlighting the proposed government changes to bankrolling publications, the shortage of finding scientists to conduct peer-review, and the ramifications of closed-access. Finally, we offer our ideas to create an ideal publishing model for across stakeholders including journals, academics, and the tax-payer. Will they be integrated? The world only hopes so. We hope you enjoy the listen!

Next episode topic and homework for this week: The collective consciousness

As always, stay educated and seek confusion!

-A&Y

Get connected with us:

Contact us for educated thoughts or general confusions at educatedbutconfused@gmail.com & follow us on instagram @ebcpod :)

Resources:

Article on elife’s new publication policy and its ramifications for its Clarivate-assigned Impact Factor

Article discussing the outrage with the proposed changes to funding from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)

See this article released by Society for Neuroscience (SFN) discussing the importance of the commenting campaign and more information on what OMB is proposing:

The deadline for submitting a comment to OMB to advocate against the changes has passed. But… we will keep you guys posted for the next phase of action and responses if you want to show your support!