Facebook PixelWhat are the biggest challenges to knowledge generation and dissemination in academia?
Brainstorming
Brainstorming
Create new
EverythingEverything
Sessions onlySessions only
Ideas onlyIdeas only
Brainstorming session

What are the biggest challenges to knowledge generation and dissemination in academia?

Image credit: I putu Balda / unsplash.com

Loading...
Darko Savic
Darko Savic Sep 25, 2020
13
Creative contributions

Publish or Perish: integrity, reproducibility and collaboration

Loading...
Antonio Carusillo
Antonio Carusillo Sep 26, 2020
Loading...
Shubhankar Kulkarni
Shubhankar Kulkarni2 months ago
This "publish or perish" horror has its own consequences that in turn lead to poor quality of research. Authors need to constantly be on their toes and have to read potentially everything that is produced in their fields - this rarely happens since there is a lot to read. Since you don't read everything, you may think your idea is new. Also, the haste may divert you from finishing your experiments that could have made the concept full-proof. This leads to half-baked ideas being published and stale ideas being revisited. The urge to publish is so strong that the quality does not matter much. If you can wrap a half-baked concept using a super language (choice of words), the chances are good that it gets through. Publishing then becomes a matter of expertise in the presentation than expertise in the domain.
Loading...
Subash Chapagain
Subash Chapagain4 months ago
Genuinely original thoughts there. Talking about your suggestion of specialized journal editions with negative results, could we mould it into a new idea session?
Loading...
Shubhankar Kulkarni
Shubhankar Kulkarni4 days ago
Subash Chapagain Antonio Carusillo It's like they heard the cry.

JOTE (Journal of Trial and Error) https://www.jtrialerror.com/ "publishes answers to the question “what went wrong?” in the form of short communications, as well as problematizing ‘the question of failure’, facilitating reflections and discussion on what failure means in research."

So basically they publish negative results. Moreover, the journal has full open access.

According to their manifesto (https://www.jtrialerror.com/the-manifesto-for-trial-and-error-in-science/), they intend to reduce the gap between what is researched and what is published, display a more faithful picture of science, and host a platform for views on replicability of results.

Acute hierarchies and extreme political inclinations

Loading...
Subash Chapagain
Subash Chapagain Sep 25, 2020

Sparse inter-disciplinary communication

Loading...
Shubhankar Kulkarni
Shubhankar Kulkarni Sep 28, 2020

[1]https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/education-k-12/reports/2018/06/20/452225/addressing-gap-education-research-practice/

[2]https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13803610701640227?journalCode=nere20

Language barriers and the linguistic-cultural imperialism

Loading...
Subash Chapagain
Subash Chapagain Oct 08, 2020

[1]van Weijen, D. (2012). The Language of (Future) Scientific Communication. Research Trends, 31

[2]Tardy, C. (2004). “The role of English in scientific communication: Lingua Franca or Tyrannosaurus rex?,” in J. English Acad. Purp. 3, 247–269. doi: 10.1016/j.jeap.2003.10.001

[3]Alves, M. A., and Pozzebon, M. (2013). How to resist linguistic domination and promote knowledge diversity? Rev. Adm. Empres. 53, 629–633. doi: 10.1590/S0034-759020130610

Loading...
A
Ana Suarez 3 months ago
Additionally, the point of view that gets encouraged with the English language generalization also stimulates research to promote civilized – barbaric populations' duality. Ethnographical works (I don't mean to generalize because they seem to be decreasing in number) often show non-English speakers as brutes.

You don't have to go to small communities to see this working. An example is that the United States call themselves 'Americans' excluding South and Central America from the range of 'civilization.'

This conception is pitifully mimicked by many people in Latin-American & Caribbean countries where their passive role in the civilization vs. barbaric opposition is reproduced and reinforced.
As crazy as it may seem, there is no word in English to refer to the United States population but "Americans".

Many schools in Humanities, Philosophy, and Social Studies have a "American tradition" or are named "The American School of X".

Being bilingual in developing countries entails a very privileged education. Hence, access to publications and production and dissemination of knowledge ends up in a few hands.

“Funding”: A cry in unison

Loading...
Shubhankar Kulkarni
Shubhankar Kulkarni Sep 28, 2020

[1]https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/021715/what-country-spends-most-research-and-development.asp#:~:text=Israel%20and%20South%20Korea%20are,the%20Unesco%20Institute%20for%20Statistics.

[2]https://ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsf20301/data-tables/

[3]https://www.statista.com/statistics/240833/higher-education-institutions-in-the-us-by-type/

[4]https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/02/how-many-phds-actually-get-to-become-college-professors/273434/

[5]https://smartsciencecareer.com/become-a-professor/

Corruption in hiring

Loading...
Shubhankar Kulkarni
Shubhankar Kulkarni Oct 30, 2020

Intellectual Property: to share or not to share?

Loading...
Y
You_Know_Who Nov 29, 2020

Standardize, standardize, standardize - the difference between positive and negative results

Loading...
Brett M.
Brett M. Nov 29, 2020
Loading...
Shubhankar Kulkarni
Shubhankar Kulkarnia month ago
Rightly said - non-significant results and the standardization process, if published, will help a lot of students. Here (https://brainstorming.com/ideas/order-lab-reagents-using-study-protocols/47) is an idea that addresses and also solves the problem. If you read the comments, it has been suggested that along with the reagents, the protocols should also be made public. This will tackle the problem with non-reproducible experiments. We can add another database to it that lists all the standardization processes along with the details of the reagents and cell lines used. If someone wants to reproduce a certain experiment, which does not seem to be working in their lab, they can ask for the reagents and other materials from the original lab or buy the same materials.
Loading...
Brett M.
Brett M.a month ago
Shubhankar Kulkarni Thanks for directing me here. This is exactly what needs to be done. I'm wondering, however, how open journals and their editors would be to adding these criteria to their review process; after all, acquiring reviewers can be a difficult process (personal experience). At the same time, I would hope that all journals would move in this direction, or else we face the possibility that some labs may want to submit to a handful of journals that do not require these criteria, thus allowing the authors to bypass this process and continue the cyclic issue presented here.

However, I think it be would be worth waiting out and navigating through a longer review process if it enhances the integrity of the publication process and the progression of science.
Loading...
Shubhankar Kulkarni
Shubhankar Kulkarnia month ago
Brett Melanson I agree we need norms that will be followed by most researchers to make this a success. I was thinking more on the lines of creating a parallel database (not via the publication process), something more social that will attract users to post their research and gain popularity based on it. This motivation may suffice for more researchers to sign up.

However, what you suggest (appending the reporting process to the publication process) ensures the reporting of standardization and negative results. The problem here is convincing journals to accommodate it in their review process.

Work^2 & Journal classification

Loading...
Anja M
Anja M Nov 30, 2020

A blinded peer-review system can introduce bias that poses a threat to knowledge generation and dissemination

Loading...
Shubhankar Kulkarni
Shubhankar Kulkarni Nov 06, 2020

[1]https://absolutelymaybe.plos.org/2017/10/31/the-fractured-logic-of-blinded-peer-review-in-journals/

[2]https://www.researchgate.net/publication/220416453_Single-_Versus_Double-Blind_Reviewing_An_Analysis_of_the_Literature

[3]https://www.atsjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1164/rccm.201711-2257LE

[4]https://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2018/6/228027-effectiveness-of-anonymization-in-double-blind-review/fulltext

[5]https://springerplus.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s40064-016-2601-y

Fallacies/ biases in research

Loading...
Shubhankar Kulkarni
Shubhankar Kulkarni Dec 08, 2020

[1]https://www.nature.com/news/how-scientists-fool-themselves-and-how-they-can-stop-1.18517

Going open source

Loading...
Martina Pesce
Martina Pesce Nov 05, 2020
Loading...
Martina Pesce
Martina Pesce2 months ago
sci-hub <3
Loading...
Shubhankar Kulkarni
Shubhankar Kulkarni2 months ago
Agreed! There is a revolution on its way in the field of research publication. Open source is a major part of that. We know how https://sci-hub.do/ has been tackling this issue. Although they have faced wrath, more and more people are secretly supporting it. It is only a matter of time when it is officially recognized.

"Sticking to the textbook/ curriculum" ideology

Loading...
Shubhankar Kulkarni
Shubhankar Kulkarni Nov 09, 2020

Add your creative contribution

0 / 200

Added via the text editor

* Indicates a required field

By using this platform you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

General comments