Why We March for Science

Posted Apr 28, 2017
    Samantha Green
Samantha Green
Society Marketing, Wiley


On April 22nd of this year, more than 600 cities hosted Marches for Science. We were proud to support our society partners, authors, and researchers as they defend science around the world.


The activities of the March for Science and its satellite marches are an important first step, but the missions of our society partners extend beyond April 22nd. Working together with a few of the official March for Science partners, we’ve put together a report about advocacy resources for societies.


Download Building Momentum: Advocacy Resources for Societies here.



At the March in DC, we hosted a few of our partners and editors at a breakfast to fuel up for the day ahead. Rain clouds loomed large outside, but the atmosphere inside was cheery and warm. Check out the video below, to see a few of the highlights:

DC march.JPG


     Francis Finch
Francis Finch
Content Specialist, Axonn Media

As the end of Mathematics and Statistics Awareness Month draws near, we take a look at how the subject is represented in popular culture. Can mainstream media influence the perception of shutterstock_128667257_292236676_292236677_256224451.jpgmathematicians and mathematics? Will increased representation drive awareness and engagement for the subject? Or does it really do more harm than good?


Mathematics and popular culture may, at first glance, seem an awkward juxtaposition. Popular culture is mainstream, trendy and appeals to the masses, whereas mathematics can be perceived as difficult, highbrow and only accessible to the academically gifted.


However, mathematics has enjoyed something of a pop culture renaissance over the last 20 years and is now a central theme of many successful films, TV shows, plays and books.


The ways in which popular culture presents mathematics often has a significant impact on public perceptions of the subject. Positive representations can spur fascination and wonder among children and adults alike. One only has to look at the huge influence Star Trek had on youngsters when it first aired in the 1960s, inspiring a new generation of budding scientists and engineers.


Sadly, popular culture can also reinforce negative stereotypes of mathematics and its practitioners, which might prevent people from pursuing an interest or career in the field. Let's examine some examples of mathematics in popular culture, including the good, the bad and, in some cases, the incorrect or 'bogus'.


Mathematicians and “Fitting In”

Good Will Hunting was a huge critical and commercial success. But was it an accurate representation of mathematics?  It has been criticized for perpetuating the idea that gifted individuals often struggle to fit into society. Biographical movies of real-life mathematicians also tend to emphasize these issues, including John Nash's schizophrenia in A Beautiful Mind and Alan Turing's eccentricities in The Imitation Game. Good Will Hunting also contains inaccuracies from a practical perspective.


The American crime drama, Numb3rs, was lauded for making mathematics a suitable topic for prime time Friday night viewing, with 10 million Americans regularly tuning in to watch. Academics praised the lead actor’s performance as a socially capable, family-oriented mathematician who is able to apply his abstract skills to multiple real-world scenarios. In fact, many of the episodes are based on actual events.


Mathematics is also one of the several themes in the multiple award-winning play, Arcadia. Yet Stoppard draws heavily on recognized theorems and concepts such as Fermat's last theorem, chaos theory and the second law of thermodynamics. Notably, Thomasina discovers a link between functional iteration and functional geometry, a revelation that was not uncovered in real life until the second half of the 20th century. Critics celebrated Arcadia's portrayal of a female mathematician in a central role, helping to address gender issues in the field. Interestingly, Lord Byron - father of esteemed mathematician Ada Lovelace - is an offstage character in the play.


Getting the Numbers Right

The Da Vinci Code sold over 80 million copies worldwide. Cryptography features heavily in the novel, and Brown explains various mathematical concepts such as Fibonacci sequences and the Golden Ratio. The Da Vinci Code has received criticism for its historical and religious inaccuracies, but how do the mathematics hold up to scrutiny? On first appearances, relatively well - yet some discrepancies appear after scratching below the surface.


Mathematics even makes an appearance in The Simpsons. With many of the shows’ writers having mathematical backgrounds, it’s no wonder that numerous mathematically themed jokes, subplots and main storylines have made an appearance!


Clearly, there is an important distinction to be made between the ways in which mathematics is represented in popular culture and how mathematicians themselves are portrayed. While many academics are willing to accept mathematical inaccuracies in films, TV, books and plays, depictions of practitioners as eccentric and socially awkward could damage the subject's appeal among young people.


Despite these concerns, the success of sitcoms such as The Big Bang Theory appears to show public appetite for traditionally niche topics like science and mathematics is high. Many educators in the fields of pure and applied mathematics will no doubt hope this mainstream acceptance continues to grow.


Mathematics has experienced a pop culture resurgence over the last two decades, with writers increasingly utilizing mathematical concepts to drive plots, create intriguing characters and hook audiences across multiple genres.


The accuracy of these depictions can vary, with negative stereotypes of practitioners a common occurrence and incorrect or "bogus" mathematics occasionally offsetting the positive aspects of the discipline's widening appeal.


Nevertheless, many academics agree that thrusting mathematics more firmly into the spotlight could encourage a greater number of people, both young and old, to embrace a subject that is often seen as difficult and inaccessible.


This extract has been taken from ‘Mathematics in Popular Culture’ which can be read in full here.


Image Credit: antos777/Shutterstock


    Helen Eassom
Helen Eassom
Author Marketing, Wiley

Six organizations recently announced the establishment of the Initiative for Open Citations (I4OC), a new collaboration between publishers, researchers and other interested parties. Wiley is delighted to be one of the publishers involved with this exciting new project by opening our citation metadata via Crossref. To mark the launch of I4OC, we spoke to Dario Taraborelli of Wikimedia to tell us more about the initiative:


Dario Taraborelli.JPGQ.Could you tell us what the Initiative for Open Citations (I4OC) is?

A. The Initiative for Open Citations (I4OC) is an initiative to promote the unconstrained availability of scholarly citation data.

Q. What are the aims of the I4OC?

A. A number of curated citation databases have been available to universities and funding bodies via subscriptions for years. However, these databases don't allow any kind of reuse or reproducible data analysis due to the restrictive nature of their licenses. There are also prominent citation databases with more permissive licenses, such as the Microsoft Academic Graph, or the recently announced Springer Nature SciGraph, but they also limit reuse through noncommercial licenses.


The Initiative for Open Citations was designed to promote the availability of citation data with no copyright or usage restriction whatsoever. To achieve this goal, we are asking scholarly publishers depositing reference data to Crossref to make this data openly available in the public domain. Before I4OC, only 1% of publications with reference metadata deposited in Crossref made this data openly available. As of the launch of the initiative, this number is 40% and growing.


Q. What do you see as being the key benefits for authors and researchers of a fully open citation dataset?

A. The availability of this data benefits authors, researchers, funding and evaluation bodies, publishers, and the general public alike.

  • Authors will have consistent, machine-readable access to references for all their publications;
  • Researchers will be able to use this resource to study the dissemination of methods and scientific ideas, the genesis and provenance of scholarly knowledge;
  • Funders will be able to rely on a public resource to develop transparent and reproducible evaluation metrics, and new tools to assess the academic and societal impact of research they fund;
  • Publishers will benefit from the increased discoverability of publications that this data provides, and tools built on it.
  • The public will be able to use this data to trace knowledge back to its sources or reuse it in open knowledge repositories such as Wikipedia and Wikidata.

Q. What are the next steps for the Initiative?

A. The most important, immediate goal is to reach 100% coverage of open citation data. We had a successful start reaching 40% coverage in just six months, with large publishers such as Wiley, Taylor & Francis, Springer Nature, and many more opting into the release of citation data in the open. We encourage other publishers to join the list of 29 publishers who have already enabled open reference data distribution.


Coverage aside, curation is the second challenge. The goal of the initiative is to make raw reference metadata openly available. Building a comprehensive graph for scholarly knowledge – linking up scientific statements to their sources, their authors, institutions and funding bodies, and addressing problems such as author disambiguation and entity resolution – will require substantial time and effort. Our hope is that by making citation data available as a public resource, a growing number of platforms will be able to contribute to the creation of a repository of knowledge that everyone can use, not just universities and institutions with access to subscription-based services.


To find out more about the Initiative for Open Citations, please visit the website here, or follow @I4OC_ORG on Twitter.


Image Credit: Dario Taraborelli


    Samantha Green
Samantha Green
Society Marketing, Wiley

Discoverability is critical for societies in attracting new members. They need to be able to find your website quickly and easily. Search Engine Optimization (or SEO) is one way that your website can rise to the top. To learn more, we sat down with Wiley SEO expert Tatiana Pacheco.



Q. Let’s start with the basics. What is search engine optimization?

A. Here’s the definition according to the dominant search engine itself, Google:  “Search Engine Optimization is the process of maximizing the number of visitors to a particular website by ensuring that the site appears high on the list of results returned by a search engine.”


This means there is an ongoing process of improving a site’s organic search visibility by optimizing the site for search engine ranking factors and improving the user experience of the site. This involves not only bringing more organic traffic to your site but ensuring that it is quality traffic and users who are visiting your site are genuinely interested in your product and getting relevant information to their search queries.


If you are new to SEO, I would recommend watching this video, which is relevant to the publishing industry and will help you to understand how Search Engine Optimization works.


Q. Are there any easy changes that organizations can make to improve their website’s SEO?

A. SEO is a long term process that takes time and involves strategic planning of the content and technical aspects of the site. Many people in your organization should be involved in the site’s optimization, including product managers, public relations, designers, developers, writers, and social strategists.


There are some quick wins:

  • Optimize existing pages according to SEO Best Practices
  • Create new content keeping SEO Best Practices in mind
  • Make sure that all pages can be crawled by search engines and eliminitate any technical obstacles for the site's organic visibility.


Q. Can you explain a little bit about the difference between on-page and off-page factors?

A. It is very simple! On-Page factors are elements within the organization's site: headings, page titles, domain name, URL structure, video, and images. Off-Page factors include anything outside of the organization's website: backlinks, social media accounts, affiliates, and reviews.


On-Page and Off-Page SEO Optimizations are both imperative for the organic visibility of the site. There are over 200 different factors in a search engine"s algorithm, including social signals, user interaction, and trust.


Q. Different search engines have different algorithms for how and when results appear. Do you have to balance different SEO strategies for different search engines?

A. There are a few major search engines in the United States: Google, Bing and Yahoo. According to Search Engine Land, 90% of searches happen on Google and from what we see in Wiley SEO reports, Google is undoubtedly taking the highest search share in the United States.


However, in other countries, there are other players that you would consider individually when optimizing the site. For example, the majority of the Chinese population is using Baidu while the majority of the Russian Population is using Yandex, and South Korea uses Naver.


So for every country search optimization will be conducted on a case by case basis. However, general best practices apply to every search engine, because each of them aims for an optimal user experience. If you look at the history of improvements of the Google algorithm, you will see that all of them were catering to an improved user experience, eliminating sites with bad practices and encouraging digital players to create the best user experience possible, while providing quality content and easy accessibility. Thus, even though search engines in different countries might have different algorithms, they run on this principle and aim to improve their users’ experiences.


Q. To close, I wanted to ask you to do a little future-gazing. Do you see any changes in how search engines operate and how SEO might evolve?

A. SEO has become more important and sophisticated over the years. Google is constantly making improvements to its algorithm to display only the most valuable and relevant sites to users. The SERPs (Search Engine Result Pages) layout changed drastically. In recent years Google implemented many new services like Google Quick Answers and Accelerated Mobile Pages, etc.


This trend will continue. Mobile First Index will be huge by the end of 2017 and early 2018. It is no longer a question as to whether sites need to be mobile-friendly or not; it is an absolute must! The question now is mobile strategy and how to outperform competitors on mobile devices.


With so many voice devices, voice search will play a huge role in 2017. Optimizing for voice search can give organizations a very high competitive advantage & ROI.


SEO professionals need to adapt to changes and have a strategy in place to stay on the top of the competition.


Have you found SEO to be a challenge for your organization? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.


Image Credit:Your Design/Shutterstock

    Kiera Sullivan
Kiera Sullivan
Library Services

Do you feel scholarly publishers hear your needs and challenges as a librarian?


Bernie Folan, Bernie Folan Research and Consulting and Claire Grace, The Open University, feel that too often the answer is no. And so a conversation over lunch at UKSG16 was the starting point for their recent research project: “Facts of the matter: what librarians want publishers to know.”


Earlier this month at UKSG17, Bernie and Claire shared their research highlights in a 10 minute ‘lightning talk’. Ahead of their talk, we asked Bernie to expand on what inspired their research, if there were any surprises in the data, and what actions both publishers and librarians can take as a result.


Q. What prompted you to carry out this research?
Bernie.jpgA. In my work with librarians, typically carrying out market research on behalf of publishers, I have heard often that librarians feel talked at but not necessarily heard. There are of course alternative comments; I do also hear of good experiences at library advisory groups which are more collaborative. While talking about this with Claire Grace (Head of Content and Licensing at the Open University and my partner on this project) over lunch at last year's UKSG conference, she suggested that it's important that publishers hear librarians and we agreed this conference might be the ideal platform. When I worked in academic publishing I was happiest when talking with customers and trying to understand challenges with a view to finding workable solutions. This has naturally driven me into the work I do and I truly hope sharing the information that we've gathered will positively impact scholarly communication and start much needed conversations.

Q. How many responses did you receive?
A. We had no idea what to expect and received 235 responses in total which produced 676 messages for publishers. We deliberately tried not to lead in any way and apart from the demographic information, all responses were free text. In this study, respondents were overwhelmingly from the UK and Ireland (over 80%) and from higher education institutions. We are interested in carrying out further research at more granular levels if there is an appetite.


A significant number of UK HEIs are represented. We left name and institution name as optional to encourage candor. Just under a third of the respondents provided contact details.

Q. Did consistent themes emerge in the responses?
A. Absolutely. Budget challenges and pricing strategies dominated across all role types. Although this may not be surprising, I would challenge publishers to review the feedback and take it into their organizations to discuss. If that is not a priority, I'd question why that's the case.

A close second was ebook (particularly etextbook) licenses and purchase models creating real access headaches for users. There is a palpable feeling of weariness that this is still a problem.  Other recurrent themes were user experience and access issues, discoverability challenges largely due to metadata problems, communication and collaboration needs (particularly from senior librarians) and accessibility issues.

Q. Did anything surprise you in the responses?
A. I think the scale of operability and access type issues that cause headaches for so many libraries. Innovation is great but getting the basics right should be a given for publishers supplying a service. The overwhelming messages about pricing models and strategies and declining or flat library budgets are food for thought. Just because we've heard it before, doesn't mean we should discount the large number of comments provided. We hoped for more comments of a strategic nature from senior librarians, and there are a good number, but it feels like ebook challenges and pricing concerns are taking up too much headspace and time at many levels.

Q. What actions do you think publishers can take as a result?

A. First, I'd say get a cup of coffee and delve into the data! We've organized it by themed tabs so that different functions can review the messages relevant to them. I'd suggest that publishers take time to have a conversation internally about the messages. Are there surprises? What improvements are possible to make? What are the barriers to change that would improve the work lives of librarians and access to research and pedagogy by library users? Have a good open and frank conversation.

Libraries and publishers are partners in research communication and teaching so must talk more openly and regularly. Use your time with librarians wisely. It's not just about sales. There is and can be rich collaboration.

Smaller publishers need to find a way to communicate and listen while explaining their practices and differentiating themselves. Can they join forces to enable better communication?

Q. Are there any takeaways for librarians from the survey?
A. Given the large number of comments on pricing and budgets, I'd challenge librarians to consider why this message is not being heard by many publishers. What are the possible blocks? Should there be different questions being asked and answers given? On which side do the blocks to understanding exist? What can be done differently to move forward? Where the budget message has been heard, what were the enablers?

Q. Are you planning on repeating the research?
A. There has been a great deal of interest in the study and lots of delegates at the UKSG conference were keen to review the data.  Future research could drill down in different ways by organization type or by role. But what we'd really like to do is the reverse of this... ask publishers for their messages to librarians. That could be a very interesting study - watch this space.

I carry out bespoke research with librarians on behalf of publishers from time to time but I'm increasingly keen to find a mechanism for longitudinal studies tracking the same few themes over time. I welcome ideas and suggestions for the themes we need to track.

Find our PowerPoint slides and the dataset organized into themed tabs here.


Do you agree with the themes and comments in this research? Share your thoughts in the comments below.


Image Credit: Bernie Folan


    Anna Ehler
Anna Ehler
Society Marketing

The best way to evaluate your journal's success is to take a holistic view, says David Nygren, Wiley’s VP for Research Insights, in our new episode of the Society Podcast:




You can listen to this episode and others – including how governments are driving open science and how to make sense of science for the public – by going to iTunes and subscribing to the Wiley Society Podcast.


For more information about Wiley Journal Insights, the new reporting dashboard for societies, read David’s post: Introducing Wiley Journal Insights – An Insight Engine for Our Society Partners.

If you have any questions or feedback for how Wiley Journal Insights can best serve your needs, please contact David at dnygren@wiley.com or Bill Deluise at wdeluise@wiley.com.

David Nygren is Vice President for Research Insights at Wiley. Research Insights is a global team responsible for understanding the needs of societies, authors, researchers, libraries and corporate customers via analytics and market research.  David is based in Wiley’s corporate headquarters in Hoboken, New Jersey, USA. 

Photo - David Nygren.png

     Francis Finch
Francis Finch
Content Specialist, Axonn Media

Continuing our series commemorating Mathematics and Statistics Awareness month, we look at why the beauty of math matters.


architecture.jpgEuler’s identity, Einstein’s Theory of Relativity, Fibonacci sequences, the Golden Ratio - why is it important to acknowledge and promote the aesthetic value of these iconic numbers, formulas and theorems?


After all, practitioners no doubt already appreciate their mathematical elegance, so isn’t this simply preaching to the choir? For many mathematicians, particularly those tasked with encouraging new generations of students to pursue the subject, the answers to these questions are usually more practical than abstract. Namely, the beauty of mathematics can make a challenging discipline more acc essible and engaging for young people.


Whether it’s unique number patterns, the existence of key formulae in nature or the intriguing links between mathematics and famous masterpieces, educators should utilize every tool at their disposal to optimize student engagement. Annual international conferences such as the Bridges: Mathematical Connections in Art, Music and Science event highlight the interdisciplinary opportunities that exist between the various fields in an effort to build interest in mathematics as a creative, aesthetic pursuit. This approach can breathe new life into mathematics in the classroom by evoking
curiosity in students and showing how important the subject is when it comes to understanding the world - and universe - around us.


As we’ve mentioned in previous posts, there is a beauty in numbers, equations and shapes that mathematicians instinctively understand. Only recently, however, have researchers shown that beautiful mathematics evokes the same pleasure response in the brain as breathtaking pieces of art or stunning musical compositions. While we are perhaps only now beginning to
accurately quantify the discipline’s aesthetic value, the presence of key mathematical concepts has been noted in nature and replicated in art throughout history. Recognizing and celebrating this beauty is not only an eye-opening experience but also a potential method of unlocking some of the wonders of mathematics for the next generation of mathematicians.


Information featured in this series of posts celebrating mathematics has been extracted from a dedicated eBook: The Beauty of Numbers, which is free to download here.


Why not test your knowledge on famous mathematicians by taking part in our fun quiz.


Image credit:Kamil Krawcyzk/Istockphoto

    Thomas Gaston
Thomas Gaston
   Managing Editor, Wiley

Peer review is an integral component of the checking of articles prior to publication, ensuring the quality and validity of scientific and scholarly record. Often “peer review” is used as shorthand for the whole checking process but in fact the review of an article by peers is only one part of that process. Reviewers provide invaluable assessment of aspects including readability, reproducibility, contribution and validity. Different aspects of the paper are checked by others in the process. In this post we list some of the things reviewers are not expected to do.

  1. Formatting
    reviewers.jpgMost journals will have formatting requirements in their author guidelines. These may include such things as the word limit, the recommended structure and the referencing style. Any such submission requirements will be checked by the editorial office upon submission so by the time the paper is sent to reviewers any formatting issues will have been dealt with. In any case, if accepted, the paper will be typeset according the journal stylesheet so nit-picking over style and format at review stage would be wasted effort.
    Having said this, if the structure of the paper interferes with its readability then this is definitely worth commenting on.
  2. Spelling, Punctuation, and Grammar
    In the same vein, journal articles will be copyedited prior to publication. In some cases this will be a technical edit; in most cases it will be a general language edit. This means that minor language issues, such as spelling, punctuation, and grammar will be corrected prior to publication and so reviewers are not expected to devote time to such corrections.

    It is helpful if reviewers note language issues that fundamentally affect the meaning of the paper, such as missing negatives, misspelled technical terms, or unclear prose.
  3. Plagiarism
    It would be simply unreasonable to expect reviewers to pick up all instances of plagiarism. Even with a photographic memory and encyclopedic knowledge, this would not be possible. Many journals now employ plagiarism checking software to routinely check submissions for plagiarism and other overlaps with previously published material.

    Reviewers are encouraged to point out anything they find suspicious to the journal’s editorial office.
  4. Ethical Standards
    All good journals seek to uphold high ethical standards for the research they publish and so will require declarations about the ethical standards relevant to their fields. These might include such things as a conflict of interests statement, clinical trial registration, and patient consent forms. These submission requirements will be checked by the editorial office on submission.

    Again, reviewers are encouraged to point out anything they find unethical to the editorial office.
  5. Rerun Research
    Science is an inductive method. Reproducibility is essential to the process of doing science, which is why accurate and detailed reporting of the research methodology is a key component of any scientific paper. Reproducing the research with the same result increases evidential basis of the conclusions. So in an ideal world it would be great to rerun scientific research before its results are published. But that just isn’t practical, which is why reviewers aren’t expected to do it.

    The most any reviewer can do is ensure that the research methodology is sound and that the implications drawn from the results are valid.
  6. Make The Final Decision
    Reviewers provide invaluable advice to editors about whether an article should be published. Ultimately it is the editor who decides whether something is to be published. Most journals will solicit more than one review prior to making a decision, and the editor may solicit a further review if two reviewers disagree. The recommendation that a reviewer provides will always be advisory; the editor may make a different decision.


Image credit: Jacob Lund/Shutterstock


     Bobby Vocile
Bobby Vocile
Market Analyst, Wiley

One topic of great interest across academia is the evolution of researcher perceptions of open access publishing and data sharing. In September, this was the focus of the latest in Wiley’s annual surveys of the research community. The 2016 Wiley Open Science Researcher Survey* builds upon our previous surveys on open access and open data to discover trends in research. Despite geographical and subject-level differences among authors, there are underlying commonalities in open science practices. The insights reported by our respondents show a willingness to move forward with open initiatives, but confusion around the best ways to do so.


Open Access


Publishing open access is on the rise, with nearly two thirds of authors indicating that they have published an article in a hybrid or full gold journal, up 8% from 2013.


Survey respondents perceived an increase in requirements from funders and institutions to make versions of their article publicly available, either through gold or green open access.


The most funder requirements for gold open access were reported in the life sciences (12%), whereas funders in the physical sciences reportedly have the most requirements for green open access (52%). In terms of institutional requirements, again, researchers in life and physical sciences reported having the most overall requirements of either gold or green open access (59% and 62% respectively).


58% of authors from the Asia-Pacific region reported funder requirements for open access, the most across the three regions surveyed. This compared to 44% of respondents from the Americas, and 47% from Europe, Middle East and Africa. There was a larger difference across the regions in reported institutional requirements; 66% of authors in Asia-Pacific reported requirements, compared to just 39% in the Americas.



Article Archiving


Archiving of articles has reportedly more than doubled, including deposition in institutional and public repositories, as well as on personal webpages.


44% of researchers report depositing their article in an institutional repository, making these the most common place for archiving work.


‘Institutional requirements’ and ‘dissemination’ are the top reasons why researchers are archiving their articles, with 34% and 29% of respondents citing these factors respectively. The number of authors naming institutional requirements as a reason for archiving has increased markedly, up 24%. In Europe, Middle East and Africa, and Asia-Pacific, institutional requirements are the leading motive for archiving an article, whereas in the Americas, dissemination is a stronger reason. Regardless of subject area, approximately one-third of all respondents archive due to institutional requirements.


Data Sharing


69% of our researchers have indicated that they have shared data from their research in some way. This represents a 17% increase from our previous study in 2014, where 52% of researchers indicated that they had shared data.**


The most common ways in which researchers reported sharing their data was either at a conference (48%), as supplementary material in a journal (40%), or informally/on request (33%). Only 41% report sharing data formally via any form of data repositories (institutional, discipline-specific, or general-purpose). Just over 20% of researchers say that they have shared data formally via institutional repositories, which represents an increase of 7% over the past two years. These results demonstrate that researchers continue to be unclear on what ‘sharing’ data means in the sense of providing unlimited, appropriately licensed and permanent access to their data and other artefacts.


Other than being required to, the top reasons why our researchers state they share are to ‘increase the impact and visibility of (their) research’, for ‘public benefit’, and ‘transparency and re-use’. Researchers say that the top reasons for not sharing are ‘intellectual property and confidentiality issues’, and concerns over ‘ethics’ and ‘misuse’ of research. These results are largely in line with previous surveys; the exception being ‘ethical concerns’, which is now the second most common reason authors cite for not sharing data.


As Open Science continues to evolve, understanding the perceptions of our researchers in this time of change is just the first step in the right direction as we continually work towards making research more accessible, collaborative, and transparent. To find out how Wiley supports Open Science, visit our Open Science page.

301409-Final Web Ready-V1-smaller.jpg

Click on infographic above to enlarge



Here's a more focused look at Data Sharing trends.

301409-Final Web Ready-V2-smaller.jpg

Click on infographic above to enlarge.


*In September 2016, Wiley contacted approximately 55,000 of our authors across many disciplines and received more than 4,600 responses. The survey effort focused on Open Science, broadly aiming to help us understand how researchers approach open access requirements, manage data, and participate in the sharing and archiving of their research. It is important to note that our survey just represents the perceptions of our researchers and provides directional findings for Wiley to explore. Additionally, the results from this survey are being shared on our figshare page, available for download and full re-use here.


** Our 2014 Data survey reported data sharing as those who just share data. In 2016 we have reflected data sharing as those who both produce and share data.


Why SPSSI Marches for Science

Posted Apr 19, 2017
    Samantha Green
Samantha Green
Society Marketing, Wiley

On Earth Day, April 22, cities around the world will host a March for Science. More than a hundred organizations have signed on as official partners for this global endeavor. One of these is the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues. Watch below as SPSSI members explain how important the defense of science is to them, and how critical it is to preserve science’s role in debate, discussion and democracy.


Capture (40).PNG

For more on SPSSI’s activities, visit their website.


    Katey Maye
Katey Maye
Library Services, Wiley

We are thrilled to announce Cristina Caminita, Head of Research & Instruction Services at Louisiana State University, as this year's winner of our National Library Week contest: Embedded Librarianship.


The nomination we received on behalf of Cristina is an exemplary illustration of how librarians are making an impact on student learning through embedded librarianship.


caminitacristina.jpg“Cristina Caminita’s experience in embedded librarianship is deep and multifaceted. Using a relationship-centered approach, she works to develop close connections with faculty and students by building and maintaining knowledge of programmatic goals and objectives and of specific class needs. She strengthens her approach by regularly integrating new methods and feedback based on how students learning objectives are met. An example of Cristina’s commitment can be seen through NFS 3110, where she has been embedded for over 4 years. In this course, Nutrition Counseling and Education, students develop evidence-based practice skills by writing a paper that requires them to identify and summarize nutrition counseling intervention scholarship and apply what they have learned in the scholarship to an observed nutrition counseling session. Cristina meets with the class face-to-face three times during the semester, using each successive session to advance and reinforce students’ understanding of research and methods through active learning exercises. She is also deeply integrated in the Moodle site for the course. There, she provides learning objects, including videos, documents, and polls, to underscore student learning. She runs a forum within Moodle, coordinating student participation and providing detailed feedback on an activity that the professor, in turn, uses as formative assessment. Finally, Cristina’s commitment to supporting student learning extends beyond the classroom space as she meets with these students in research consultations as needed. Her approach is collaborative and she works closely with the professor at the end of the semester to assess the experience and identify improvements for the subsequent embedding.

Cristina has become an integral element of NFS 3110 and, as such, has impacted student learning. But another very significant way she has impacted student learning at Louisiana State University (LSU) is by serving as a model for other Research and Instruction librarians at LSU Libraries. She is active in sharing her experience and insights with fellow librarians, empowering them by strengthening their ability to adopt this approach and by providing feedback and support as they embedded. As a result of her mentorship, a third of the librarians in this department have implemented student-centric embedding to deepen the disciplinary support they provide to their departments. “


- Emily Frank, Research & Instruction Librarian, Louisiana State University


Please join us in congratulating Cristina! She will receive a $1500 travel grant to attend the Charleston Conference in 2017.


Image: Cristina Caminita, Photo credit: Cristina Caminita


Why Cochrane Marches for Science

Posted Apr 14, 2017
    Samantha Green
Samantha Green
Society Marketing, Wiley

On Earth Day, April 22, cities around the world will host a March for Science. More than a hundred organizations have signed on as official partners for this global endeavor. One of these is Cochrane.


Watch below as Professor Lisa Bero, Cochrane Governing Board Co-Chair, explains the shared values of Cochrane and the March for Science to use evidence and science to improve decision-making and lives around the world.



For more on Cochrane activities, visit their website.


cochrane photo.JPG


    Vicky Kinsman
Vicky Kinsman
Assistant Marketing Manager

Following on from the webinar An Introduction to Publishing for Early Career Researchers in Latin America, Dr Serena Tan and Dr Costas Agalou join us again to answer your questions about the publishing and peer review process. Each of the questions below was submitted by a participant in the webinar.


LATAM webinar Editor 1.jpgDr Costas Agalou is Commissioning Editor at Wiley. Prior to publishing, Costas completed his PhD in Chemical Sciences at the University of Bologna in Italy. He has been awarded various grants including a Marie Curie Fellowship from the European Commission, two dissemination grants from the European Science Foundation and a Research Grant from the Italian Government. Finally, he has published numerous research articles in high impact factor peer-reviewed journals in the areas of nanomaterials and nanotechnology.



LATAM webinar Editor 2.jpgDr. Serena Tan is an Editor at Wiley where she manages a portfolio of 10 journals, mostly in the life sciences, working to ensure they remain competitive and offer the best level of service to their research communities.  She has also worked as a freelance writer, editor, and consultant for a variety of clients in the scientific and academic research community.  Dr. Tan holds a Bsc (Biology) degree from Brown University and MSc and PhD degrees (Physiology and Cellular Biophysics) from Columbia University.



Questions to Dr Serena Tan

Q. What’s the best way to deal with reviewers who reject my article?

A. First, I would take a step back and remind myself to take it slow and wait until I can assess the situation objectively and calmly. Review the comments you have received and if you feel that the rejection is based on a misunderstanding of the research presented or scientifically inaccurate reasoning, you may have a case for making an appeal to the editor for reconsideration. If you do so, be sure to provide evidence to support your claim in a letter with point-by-point responses to the reviewer(s) comments while remaining professional and objective.


Q. What is the trend between promotion and visibility that you see for those who want to publish their research results?

A. Authors who have put in the effort to promote their articles, whether doing so themselves directly through social media, or with the help of services like Kudos, have benefited from increased visibility of their published work.  There are an increasing number of ways to measure the attention your research is getting, including Kudos, Altmetric, and journal article citation tracking.  You can even set up custom email alerts to inform you of how your article is doing in terms of downloads, social media mentions, etc.  For more information, check out Wiley’s Author Resources page on measuring impact.


Q. Do you have any tips for how to motivate my students to write papers or research?

A. When I was still at the bench, doing research and writing papers, I remember that the biggest challenge was getting started and what helped the most was learning how to dissect the task at hand and break it down.  So as one would do for an experiment, when it comes to writing, you need a plan.  I would always start with the figures first.  That’s the heart of the paper, where the data is represented and findings are conveyed visually to the reader.  Review your data and organize the figures in a way that makes the story and significance of your research clear, and then move forward with the actual writing of the text.  Don’t try to do everything at once or just sit down in front of a blank screen and try to start writing the paper from scratch without an outline and figures around which to frame your manuscript.  Take it one step at a time and don’t be afraid to take a step back and step away from it for a while if you get writer’s block and get stuck.  Sometimes you just need to take a break and come back with a fresh pair of eyes.


Questions to Dr Costas Agalou


Q. Is there a data bank that allows you to better understand the characteristics of each journal and decide which to send your paper to?

A. Wiley publishes more than 1,500 journals in all scientific disciplines. Therefore, it can be more than one journal that could be relevant to your particular subject area and scope. For this reason, Wiley Author Services created a sophisticated search platform to help you search relevant journals either by keyword, subject area or alphabetically. Click here to use this platform and find the journal you are looking for. For further advice on choosing the right journal take a look at this helpful infographic.


Q. There are several leagues, so to speak, of academic journals. How can you distinguish them? Which are the easiest and which ones are the hardest to publish in?

A. It is true that there are many journals for particular subject areas, and the number keeps increasing since research is growing. In general, authors can find the ranking of the journal they are interested in on its website. For example, if you go to the homepage of the Journal of Chemical Technology & Biotechnology you will see that the journal has a ranking of 18/50 in Environmental Engineering, 28/135 in Chemical Engineering, 54/161 Biotechnology & Applied Microbiology and that it is a multi-disciplinary journal and covers different subject areas. If you can’t find this information on a journal’s website, then you can always ask the editor of the journal. Impact factor (IF) is also a criterion authors use to distinguish different journals, but it is not always the safest one. Your research work should always meet some quality criteria to get published. It is by no means true that journals with low IFs publish low-quality research work. In general, journals with high IFs are asking authors to show that their work is a breakthrough or has a significant novelty. For example, in materials science journals, authors need to have at least one industrial application that your work can be applied to an industrial use/scale or a product.


Q. How can researchers from low-income countries deal with international publication charges?

A. We do have a list of countries that are eligible for discounts or fee waivers for our Open Access titles. Some journals offer a 20% discount if the manuscript is a transferred submission from another Wiley title. Also, researchers can check if their institution has a special agreement with Wiley from this list.


Q. I would like to know if you can suggest strategies for authors working on a local scale to be published in recognized journals.

A. The best strategy for authors working on a local scale to get published in recognized journals is to try to collaborate and network with other scientists. The best way to do that is through networking when attending conferences or to become involved in funded projects that include international collaborators. If you still cannot attend conferences or participate in large-scale funding projects, the internet can play a major role in creating collaborations. There are social media platforms for scientists where you can connect with researchers, ask questions, read their work, and initiate collaborations if there are mutual interests.


To hear more from Dr Tan and Dr Agalou catch up now on demand with the webinar Introduction to Publishing for Early Career Researchers in Latin America. For your chance to ask the editors, and for further practical tips and expert guidance on the process of writing and submitting your research, sign up to our webinar channel where all of our content  is available for free and on demand.


     Francis Finch
Francis Finch
Content Specialist, Axonn Media

In the second post in this series commemorating Mathematics and Statistics Awareness month, we explore our relationship with numbers and the beauty behind some of our favorites…


Pick a number, any number.


This exercise is usually the precursor to magic tricks or parlor games, but it can also provide an interesting insight into our relationship with numbers. Many people who are instructed to select a number often choose their favorite or ‘lucky’ digit.


A recent global survey from Brazilian mathematician Alex Bellos claimed ‘7’ is the world’s favorite number, based on responses from more than 30,000 people.


But would you get the same result if you asked mathematicians for their favorite number? Probably not. In fact, they are likely to choose from a multitude of numbers that could be considered ugly to the untrained eye, yet hold specific mathematical significance. For example, pi (π) and the Golden Ratio (Φ) are irrational numbers, but both are frequently cited for their beauty. Other popular choices could include Kaprekar’s constant (6174) the Hardy-Ramanujan number (1729) or 3654345456545434563, which is currently acknowledged as the largest palindromic triangular number with a palindromic index.


281210_Pick a number_HI.JPG


These numbers all possess unique quirks and properties that may make them beautiful to a mathematician. Moreover, numbers are just one of many mathematical building blocks. It is perhaps easier to understand the natural beauty in mathematics once the scope is widened to include more complex mathematical concepts.


The Golden Ratio: The epitome of beauty?


Fibonacci numbers are also linked to arguably the most well-known example of mathematical beauty - the Golden Ratio. Represented by the Greek letter Phi (Φ), the Golden Ratio was first described by mathematician Euclid in his treatise ‘Elements’ and has become famous for its supposed aesthetic value. The ratios of successive Fibonacci number pairs eventually converge on Phi (1.618 …), with the ratio frequently used in art, music and architecture.


Golden rectangles - rectangles that have side lengths corresponding with the Golden Ratio - have been used to map physical beauty in human faces and bodily proportions for centuries.


Traditionally, experts believed people who are perceived as naturally beautiful have facial features that are more consistent with Phi than those whose features do not fit the ratio. This theory remains an area of contention between mathematicians and scientists, with some still confident of its validity and others claiming it has been debunked. University of Toronto researchers have even proposed a new Golden Ratio for female beauty. Whether or not Phi truly corresponds with aesthetic beauty is uncertain, but the ratio has still influenced thousands of years’ worth of artistic creations. The fact that mathematicians, historians and other researchers continue to debate the existence of the Golden Ratio in both natural and man-made phenomena lends credibility to its status as one of mathematics’ most beautiful numbers.


Famous examples of the Golden Ratio


Advocates of the Golden Ratio’s beauty have argued it was used in the creation of numerous historical masterpieces over time, ranging from the Great Pyramid of Giza and the Parthenon to the music of Mozart and Leonardo da Vinci’s Vitruvian Man. Some of these claims have more substance than others; nevertheless, there is strong evidence that the ratio is present in many popular pieces of art, music and architecture.


The above is an excerpt from a dedicated free eBook: The Beauty of Numbers. Download your copy here.


    Samantha Green
Samantha Green
Society Marketing, Wiley

On Earth Day, April 22, hundreds of cities around the world will host the March for Science. More than a hundred organizations have signed on as official partners for this global endeavor. One of these is the American Anthropological Association.


Watch below as Ed Liebow, Exective Director, explains why the AAA will be marching and how science is a “pillar of a just and sustainable society.”


Capture (37).PNG

Over the next few weeks, we’ll be hearing from other societies on why they choose to march. For more on the American Anthropological Association’s activities, check out their Facebook event for the March for Science and visit their website


    Ola Jandali
Ola Jandali
Western Michigan University Homer Stryker M.D. School of Medicine

notebookandlaptop.jpgHow do you describe the life of a medical student in one word? Studying. Constantly. I study all day Friday through Friday nonstop. Some might think those type A personality medical students are studying this hard to get ahead. But the reality is that we do it to just keep up with the volume of material thrown at us, and often we still feel behind. Not all of us are geniuses, yet in one week we are expected to absorb material approximately equivalent one of an upper division science course. At the same time, we are human beings, not robots. We also have to sleep, eat, and have laughter in our lives. So on the weekends, I do try to go out and see the sun at Spring Valley Lake, watch a movie at the local theater, or go bowling.


On a typical weekday, I start off by preparing my breakfast, lunch, and some tea. I usually go to the school gym to exercise for at least 5 minutes to help me wake up. After a quick shower, I run to class because my lecture starts at 8 AM. Luckily, the gym is only a minute away from the lecture hall. Classes continue until noon with a few short breaks in between for bathroom runs and socializing. At noon, I have my lunch either alone, while studying, or by the fireplace with some friends for a nice break. If there is time, we go out for lunch at the local sandwich shop or grab some aromatic chai from the local café. From 1-5 we have anatomy or pathology lab classes or clinical skills classes where we practice clinical skills peer to peer or on standardized patients. Other afternoons include clinical rotations or project meetings and there’s always a research project to work on, including a longitudinal community project. Mine involves a healthcare career pipeline program as well as a mentorship program for local 10th graders.


The evenings are for cooking dinner, doing laundry, studying and working on any of the numerous projects we have. Another cup of heavenly tea helps set the mood. Sometimes I study as part of groups to help break up the monotony and lighten the mood. Group studying also means it’s easier to ask my classmates questions if I don’t understand something. I also use our class Facebook page to ask questions, in addition to contacting our professors of course.  To be active and involved in the community outside of my studies, I often attend events hosted by specialty interest groups like a case study presentation event by the Internal Medicine Interest Group or a movie screening plus discussion by the Bioethics Interest Group. Attending an evening Borgess Emergency Medical Services continuing education class, for example, is a great break from studying with enough hands-on experience to remind me there is another world outside whatever basic science I am learning.  The day ends just a sit started with another round of studying and more tea. Around 9 or 10 PM, I call it a night. After all, sleep is sacred, and it’s what I look forward to every day.


It’s tough and humbling to work so hard while feeling I have not mastered anything, with more and more work routinely piled on. Since I don’t have any extra time, I know I have to become more efficient in managing my time when I get too far behind. Just as importantly, I need breaks to maintain my sanity. Regardless, no matter how difficult things become, I am very grateful to be a medical student. This path isn’t easy, but I chose it for a reason. I love learning about medicine. I wouldn’t have it any other way.


Image credit:Goydenko Liudmila/iStockphoto

     Chris Graf
Chris Graf
Society Partnership Director, Wiley

Researchers at Stanford (Daniele Fanelli, Rodrigo Costas, and John Ioannidis) have published in PNAS a new analysis of bias and compromised research integrity in the published (and grey) literature.Stressed authorr.jpg


Fifty-eight percent of researchers think that people like them are tempted to cut corners and compromise research integrity, according to the Nuffield Council on Bioethics report on culture in UK science. There’s a commonly-held opinion that pressure to publish is one of the causes.


But the cause is not pressure to publish, Fanelli and colleagues suggest. Instead, experience and absence of strong collaborations seem to be drivers. Fanelli and colleagues say (and I have cherry-picked these quotes, so reader please beware, and be sure to read the whole paper below.)


  • “the notion that pressures to publish have a direct effect on bias was not supported and even contrarian evidence was seen”
  • “the most prolific researchers and those in countries where pressures are supposedly higher were significantly less likely to publish overestimated results, suggesting that researchers who publish more may indeed be better scientists”
  • “small, highly-cited, and earlier studies may yield inflated results, may overestimate effects”
  • “effect sizes were likely to be overestimated by early-career researchers, those working in small or long-distance collaborations, and those responsible for scientific misconduct, supporting hypotheses that connect bias to situational factors, lack of mutual control, and individual integrity.”
  • “Some of these patterns and risk factors might have modestly increased in intensity over time, particularly in the social sciences.”
  • “Our findings suggest that […] interventions […] need to be discussed on a discipline-specific and topic-specific basis.”


What do you think? Read the full paper and share your thoughts in the comments below.


Image credit: Beer5020/Shutterstock


Can Math Be Beautiful?

Posted Apr 5, 2017
     Francis Finch
Francis Finch
Content Specialist, Axonn Media

To commemorate Mathematics and Statistics Awareness Month, this is our first in a weekly series of posts in April exploring the beauty of numbers.

What do you find beautiful? Have you ever considered that your favorite building, flower or even vegetable may have mathematical significance? Unless you’re a mathematician or have a natural affinity for numbers, you may find it hard to believe that numbers, shapes, equations and formulae have an allure extending far beyond the intellectual realm.


Join us as we explore The Beauty of Numbers and celebrate Mathematics Awareness Month in a series of dedicated posts, you might be surprised at some of the discoveries…


Beauty and the brain


iStock-182213475.jpgBeauty is inherently subjective; people can differ wildly on what they believe to be aesthetically pleasing based on their culture, upbringing, education, personal tastes and more. ‘Beauty is in the eye of the beholder’ is a common phrase used to encapsulate this subjectivity.


However, research has indicated that beauty can be objectively identified and quantified, at least in part, through brain activity. Professor Semir Zeki and Dr Tomohiro Ishizu from the Wellcome Laboratory of Neurobiology at University College London discovered in 2011 that certain pieces of art and music have a measurable impact on the section of the brain related to pleasure and reward.


The researchers asked 21 volunteers to rate excerpts of art and music as either ‘beautiful’, ‘indifferent’ or ‘ugly’. Participants were then asked to view or listen to the examples again while lying in a functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) scanner to measure their brain activity. The experiment revealed that the medial orbitofrontal cortex, a region at the front of the brain, lit up when people saw or heard art and music they had previously rated ‘beautiful’. Brain activity also increased in the caudate nucleus region, which is commonly linked to feelings of romantic love. Conversely, no specific regions of the brain were notably active when ‘ugly’ pieces were repeated.


What is mathematical beauty?


Professor Zeki and Dr Ishizu’s research suggests beauty is an abstract concept in the mind – one that exists irrespective of the source material. It didn’t take long for Professor Zeki to link this discovery to the beauty of mathematics. Three years after publishing his previous research, Professor Zeki performed a similar experiment to test how mathematicians ranked the intellectual beauty of famous formulae.


“To many of us, mathematical formulae appear dry and inaccessible, but to a mathematician an equation can embody the quintessence of beauty.”


“The beauty of a formula may result from simplicity, symmetry, elegance or the expression of an immutable truth. For Plato, the abstract quality of mathematics expressed the ultimate pinnacle of beauty.” Professor Zeki


Fifteen mathematicians were given 60 formulae and asked to rate them ‘beautiful’, ‘indifferent’ and ‘ugly’ before undergoing an fMRI scan. Again, the medial orbitofrontal cortex lit up among participants who were shown the formulae they had previously described as beautiful. But which ones were deemed the most beautiful and why? According to the results, Leonhard Euler’s identity, the Cauchy-Riemann equations and the Pythagorean identity consistently topped the rankings. Of these, Leonhard Euler’s identity was considered the most beautiful, while Srinivasa Ramanujan’s infinite series was the ‘ugliest’.


While the Wellcome Trust study falls short of identifying what exactly makes a formula beautiful, the Euler identity was favorably compared to Hamlet’s soliloquy. It is also not the first time this particular formula has ranked highly for its aesthetic value; a 1988 issue of scholarly journal ‘Mathematical Intelligencer’ revealed that its readers had voted Euler’s identity as mathematics’ most beautiful theorem. For many, Euler’s identity is admired because it uses three complex numbers (e, pi and i), as well as three basic mathematical operations (addition, multiplication and exposition). The formula also utilizes five core constants: zero, one, pi, i and e. The ability to link seemingly disparate mathematical areas and create complex relationships between them, while maintaining simplicity and succinctness of structure, is a common factor in beautiful formulas. These characteristics also exist in other elegant equations, such as Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity and Pierre de Fermat’s Two Square theorem. Our fascination with the beauty of mathematics isn’t just an intellectual pursuit, however. Mankind frequently discovers mathematical concepts in nature and has drawn inspiration from numbers and formulas for artistic purposes for thousands of years. The search for mathematical beauty is as popular now as it ever was.


The above is an extract from a free eBook, The Beauty of Numbers. Download your copy here.


Image Credit: Philartphace/Shutterstock


Filter Blog

By date:
By tag: