{"objectType":14,"id":2014,"valid":true}
2017
    Anne-Marie Green
Anne-Marie Green
Content and Community Marketing Manager, Wiley

Our last top 10 list of the year brings together our most popular posts from the world of research and scholarly communications. Open science and promotion of research continue to be hot topics. Which posts resonated most with you? Let us know in the comments below.

 

  1. Infographic: Navigating the World of Citation MetricsGettyImages-172251930-lab scientist.jpg
  2. An Illustrated History of Open Science
  3. Celebrating International Women in Engineering Day: Men as Allies
  4. How to Effectively Publicize Your Research
  5. How to Proofread Your Thesis
  6. Trailblazing Women in Science: An Illustrated History
  7. How to Choose Effective Keywords for Your Article
  8. What Will Libraries of the Future Look Like?
  9. Open Science Trends You Need to Know About
  10. 8 Simple Steps to Getting Your Work Noticed

 

Image credit: Getty Images

    Anne-Marie Green
Anne-Marie Green
Community Manager, Wiley

We're excited to announce that Wiley Exchanges is now called The Wiley Network. As the first step in our plans to enhance and refresh this online community in the new year, we've decided to change the name. We'll continue to feature the type of content that serves you in meeting your academic or professional goals, while developing the site to expand its offerings.. Here's to a new name and a new year. As always, thanks for stopping by.

 

sunrise in the city.jpg

Victoria White
Victoria White
Marketing Manager, Wiley

In today's globalized world, clear communication and understanding are critical to advancing knowledge and research. However, language often becomes a barrier to international collaboration and SuperStock_1589R-8674.jpglearning, especially in academia. Language Learning authors identified this challenge and recently published The Academic Spoken Word List to help bridge the language gaps for English second language learners in higher education. I recently spoke with authors Dr. Thi Ngoc Yen Dang (Victoria University of Wellington), Dr. Averil Coxhead (Victoria University of Wellington), and Dr. Stuart Webb (Western University) about the significance of their study.

 

Q. What is the Academic Spoken Word List (ASWL) and who are its intended users?

Dang: It is a corpus-based word list that was developed to help second language learners to enhance their comprehension of academic speech in English-medium universities. It includes 1,741 words that these students are likely to encounter often in a wide range of academic disciplines and speech events.

Coxhead: To me, the ASWL is a welcome addition to a major gap in academic vocabulary research.  It supports learners and teachers in decisions on which words are important to learn for university level speaking preparation, and tells us more about the vocabulary in English at tertiary level.

Webb: Second Language Learners can study the ASWL to better understand lectures, seminars, and tutorials. It should have great value in English for General Academic Purposes programs as a resource to help prepare students for university and college studies.

 

Q. Why was the ASWL needed?

Dang: It was important to develop the ASWL because second language learners need to compehend both their reading materials and academic speech to achieve success at English-medium universities. And research has shown that vocabulary knowledge is closely related to comprehension. So, it is crucial for English for General Academic Purposes Programs to help their learners master the words that they are likely to encounter often across academic settings. While there are a lot of word lists to support students’ comprehension of academic written English, not much is available to help them comprehend academic spoken discourse.

Coxhead: The research on written academic language, such as the AWL (Coxhead, 2000) and the AVL by Gardner & Davies (2014), is helpful for working with written texts, but the ASWL is targeted at spoken academic texts.  The ASWL also addresses working with learners at different levels of proficiency, which is something that is not often seen in word list research.

Webb: Much of the support available for second language learners preparing for study at English-medium universities has been devoted to helping them understand academic written text. This is really important because reading makes up a large part of academic study. However, support for comprehension of academic speech is also necessary, and resources in this area have been lacking. The ASWL fills an important need here, and may contribute to greater focus on preparing students to understand academic speech.

 

 

Q. What are the key features of the ASWL?

Dang: The Academic Spoken Word List is innovative because it is adaptable to learners’ knowledge of general vocabulary. The Academic Spoken Word List was developed as a complete list, but was then divided into four levels according to different vocabulary sizes. Learners may be able to recognize 92%-96% of the words in academic speech with the aid of this list. Creating the four levels for learners at different stages of lexical development allows teachers and learners to avoid repeatedly targeting known items.

Coxhead: One key feature of this word list is that it is based on a very large spoken academic corpus, and carefully tested on other corpora. Each academic spoken corpus consisted  of 13 million words. To our knowledge this is the largest academic spoken corpus that has ever been created.

Webb: The ASWL was designed to represent the vocabulary that occurs in four kinds of academic speech—lectures, seminars, labs, and tutorials. Given the size and composition of the two academic spoken corpora, it is expected that the ASWL can represent the words that students are likely to encounter in their academic studies. The composition of these corpora, the ASWL and its sub-lists are publicly accessible via the Open Science Framework and the IRIS digital repository.

 

Q. How can you use the ASWL?

Dang: The ASWL can help with setting vocabulary learning goals to improve L2 learners’ comprehension of academic speech. In the article, we have proposed a learning sequence for different groups of learners. This sequence incorporates the Academic Spoken Word List and Nation’s (2012) BNC/COCA word frequency lists. Depending on learners’ current vocabulary levels and their specific learning and teaching context, teachers and learners can use the sequence as a guide to set long-term vocabulary learning goals for learners.

Coxhead: The ASWL research can be used to highlight the importance of vocabulary in spoken academic English for teachers and learners.  The more we know about the vocabulary that learners will encounter in their studies and be expected to use in speaking, the better.  Paul Nation’s Four Strands (2007) is a great way to think about vocabulary in EAP courses, and the ASWL can be used in each strand.  See Paul’s (2016) book Making and Using Word Lists for Language Learning and Testing for more.

Webb: The ASWL should be treated as a guide rather than a requirement for learners and teachers to follow. Although the ASWL is presented as a decontextualized word list, this does not mean that these words should be learned and taught solely through decontextualized methods. Knowing a word involves learning different types of vocabulary knowledge. Thus, it is important for teachers and material designers to create activities and materials that allow students to repeatedly encounter these words in speech and use them in different contexts related to their target subject areas. This will help learners to acquire, consolidate, and expand on their knowledge of these words in a meaningful way.

 

Q. Where do we go from here in this area of research?

Dang, Coxhead, and Stuart: Academic spoken English is an underexplored area of vocabulary research. So, the development of the Academic Spoken Word List has provided a useful basis for future research. Some potential follow-up projects that would be useful are:

 

• Developing spoken word lists for different disciplinary areas to serve the need of learners in ESP and ESAP programs and Academic Written Word List using the same approach as the ASWL.

• Examining other features of vocabulary in each speech event as well as in other kinds of discourse types (e.g., office hours, conference presentations).

• Developing a test that measures knowledge of the ASWL.

• Examining the words that are likely to be used together with the ASWL words.

• Investigating how word lists like this can be integrated into teaching and learning, and evaluating the success of any such integration.

 

Dang.jpgCoxhead.jpgWebb.jpg

 

L-R: Dr. Thi Ngoc Yen Dang (Victoria University of Wellington), Dr. Averil Coxhead (Victoria University of Wellington), and Dr. Stuart Webb (Western University

 

    Morgan Kubelka
Morgan Kubelka
Library Services, Wiley

GettyImages-516041744.jpgThere’s nothing librarians won’t do to help students succeed.

 

An increased focus on student success coupled with the rising cost of tuition and course materials has created opportunities for librarians to lead the charge on student affordability initiatives.

 

While historically outside of their purview, librarians are increasingly focused on providing students with required classroom materials as a means to not only drive affordable access, but to demonstrate measureable impact on student success.

 

For librarians, ensuring students have access to critical scholarly resources is nothing new. From assiduous collection development efforts to acquiring content through complicated contracts and licensing notations, librarians are well versed in the process and means of meeting the needs of their diverse student patrons.

 

Textbooks have always been a trickier business as compared to journals and reference works. In this paradigm, instructors have historically served as selectors while bookstores have owned (sometimes exclusively) procurement and consumer sales. There have also been philosophical debates among librarians themselves on whether or not it’s the library’s job to procure classroom texts, which do not necessarily fall into the category of their primary domain of supporting research.

 

But as times change, so do librarians.

 

For one, the rising cost of higher education and the increased pressure to demonstrate the library’s value has engendered a more proactive approach to librarianship than ever before. Whereas traditionally they may have been posted at the reference desk, librarians are now out on campus, in various academic department meetings and even embedding themselves into classroom instruction. They’re marketing the library’s resources, beefing up their patron services, and continually seeking innovative ways to contribute to student success. One of the most direct ways then that libraries can impact the student academic experience is by offering affordable solutions to procuring textbooks and course materials.

 

Another integral factor that has empowered more librarians to get involved in the student affordability movement is increased support from their institutions’ administrators as well as legislation and incentives in several U.S. states. With access to course material proven to be positively correlated to academic performance, the recent research indicating that nearly 67% of students are opting-out of purchasing required textbooks presents an untenable situation that institutions cannot ignore. In many cases, librarians are finally securing the internal and external partnerships needed to move the needle in a positive direction.

 

NYU’s Engineering E-Textbook Pilot

 

One recent example is a three-year e-Textbook pilot now underway at Bern Dibner Library, New York University’s engineering library. Angela Carreño, Head of Collection Development at NYU Libraries, recently shared details of the initiatives at last month’s Charleston Library Conference session, How Libraries Can Serve a Critical Role in Addressing Student Affordability, Equity of Access and Improved Learning Outcomes.

 

In January 2016, amidst administrative directives to support student affordability, Angela began a dialogue with Wiley about the potential for conducting a textbook pilot. After several conversations with key stakeholders on both sides, it was decided that NYU’s engineering library would license Wiley textbook content, embarking on a three-year pilot project.

 

A rigorous selection process ensued to determine which e-Textbooks to pilot, examining which Wiley titles had the widest circulation in course reserves, and which books would serve the largest number of courses and students. By the start of the fall semester, 14 Wiley e-Textbooks were licensed by the library on behalf of the students, providing free and unlimited access campus-wide.

 

By November, the success of the initiative garnered notoriety across campus, leading to conversations with important university stakeholders like NYU’s Provost and student affordability committee. In light of a relatively unsuccessful all-inclusive access initiative being piloted simultaneously at the campus bookstore, the library’s e-Textbook project was favored by the committee for its ability to make course materials 100% available on the first day of class and for providing unlimited, free access to all of NYU’s students.

 

While the pilot is still ongoing, the first year was already a tremendous success. With impact on over 800 students a semester, the potential savings reached as much as $350,000 for the year. Usage data indicates very high use of the 14 titles, demonstrating a strong return on the investment.

 

Now in its second year, Angela and her colleagues in NYU’s engineering library are focused on collecting data related to how students and professors are using and incorporating these e-Textbooks in the classroom. Aside from analyzing usage data, they’re also planning to survey faculty and students associated with the courses impacted by the pilot program.

 

Leveraging the power of the academic consortia

 

Another interesting facet of the student affordability movement is the perspective of academic consortia. Given that these organizations are less beholden to campus stakeholders than their library members are, academic consortia are perhaps even better positioned to make strides in the student affordability movement.

 

Jill Morris, Associate Director of the Pennsylvania Academic Library Consortium (PALCI), shared critical insights on this subject at the Charleston session, confirming that student affordability has been a hot topic for PALCI and consortia.

 

“There’s been a vacuum of leadership in this space.  Why shouldn’t it be us?”

 

With 68 academic and research Libraries in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and West Virginia, PALCI focuses on maximizing its members’ access to collections by resource sharing and increasing economy of scale. Textbook initiatives lend themselves well to this paradigm and members are actively encouraging it. At the consortium’s June 2018 Member Meeting, there was wide support and requests amongst members that PALCI drive leadership in this area.

 

“We’re interested because our membership is interested,” says Morris.

 

In alignment with these objectives, PALCI is exploring direct publisher purchasing programs and considering a pilot in this area. “We see it as a really interesting opportunity,” Morris reflected in response to the presentation on NYU’s e-Textbook pilot.

 

Plus, entering and executing large group agreements with publishers is already something consortia do regularly; licensing and negotiating access to textbooks would be a natural extension of that.

 

Economy of scale is another critical advantage that consortia bring to the table, as bulk buying is always more cost effective than individual purchasing. From a financial perspective, an academic consortium like PALCI is also in a much less precarious position than a single institution is since they’re able to spread the risk across a large member base.

 

“Our members don’t want to, and shouldn’t have to, go it alone.”

 

What does the future hold?

 

Experimentation, pilot projects and collaboration among internal and external stakeholders is critical to advancing the student affordability conversation. Publishers, librarians, consortia and campus leaders must continue to work together to find sustainable solutions that enable affordable access while upholding the standards and integrity of world class teaching and learning materials.  After all, student success is counting on it.

 

To learn more about how libraries are impacting student success, download our recently published white paper, Adapting Academic Libraries to the Culture of Assessment.

 

Image Credit: Peng GE/Getty Images

 

    Helen Eassom
Helen Eassom
Author Marketing, Wiley

Twitter can be an invaluable tool for collaboration, expanding your professional network, and staying on top of the latest news and conversations in your field. Many academics are also using the social network to live-tweet from conferences. This can be a great way to share what you’re learning with your followers and engage with other conference attendees. On the other hand, if you’re unable to attend a conference or a specific session, following tweets from those who are there can still allow you to get involved. We’ve put together the following infographic which lists a few simple tips and rules for live-tweeting from conferences.

 

Live-tweeting from conferences.jpg

 

Share your best live-tweeting tips in the comments below.

 

    Janani Ahmed
Janani Ahmed
Medical Student, Western Michigan University School of Medicine

The “drinking from a firehose” analogy is often made to describe medical school. There have been more than a few times when I’ve felt that I’m not so much drinking from the firehose, but drowning in its unforgiving stream.

 

It is easy to get caught up in the stress of the everyday of medical school and lose sight of what we need to stay healthy and successful. As I’ve progressed through medical school, I’ve found a few things that keep me grounded and my head above water.

 

  1. book and coffee.jpgWork smart, not hard (well, actually, you need to work hard too)
    You won’t have time to outline every recommended textbook and meticulously memorize every detail. For many of us, the way we used to study simply doesn’t apply anymore, and this can be frustrating.

    Figuring out a way to move through material efficiently is key and it is important to identify what methods work best for you.

    Personally, I like to look over major topics in review resources before I dive deep into course materials. This method saves me time because I get the “big picture” more quickly, and can work through the details with some context.
  2. Commiserate with your peers
    Your classmates, whether your best friends or casual acquaintances, are your most important resource. A 10-minute break to lament on how you’ll never get through this week’s reading or laugh over the awkward thing you said to a standardized patient can do wonders for your morale. Medical school challenges you in new ways, and realizing that others feel the same way is helpful.
  3. Celebrate big and small wins
    “Today’s accomplishments are yesterday’s impossibilities.”  - Robert H. Schuller

    Medical students are notoriously hard on themselves and sometimes hold themselves to impractical standards. Whether your milestones are passing the next big test or getting through a difficult lecture, it is essential to acknowledge and celebrate these steps and keep yourself moving forward.
  4. Prioritize your downtime
    While medical school can take a toll on every aspect of your life, it is also a great time to learn to prioritize the things that are important to you and maintain activities and relationships that make you the person you are.
    Before I began medical school I swore I would stick to a routine where I cooked healthy meals and exercised every day despite the new workload. To be honest, I cook less than I used to and only sometimes do I half-heartedly jump on an elliptical as I review notecards. However, I can almost always find time to catch up with a good friend or get emotionally invested in competitive cooking shows with my husband.

    While I’ll always encourage cultivating a healthy lifestyle, I realized that the things that keep you sane are different for everyone and finding time for the things I care about keeps me positive and motivated.


What are your strategies for keeping your sanity amidst a huge workload? Share your thoughts in the comments below

 

Image Credit: perfectlab/Shutterstock

 

    Paige Panter
Paige Panter
PhD Researcher, Durham University

Peer review can seem daunting to an early career researcher. At this stage of our careers, it often seems one-sided: a process carried out by other people behind closed doors. As a second year PhD student, I admit I hadn’t really thought about the process beyond asking myself “has this paper been peer reviewed?” until I saw the workshop: Peer Review: The Nuts and Bolts, advertised by Sense about Science. At this point, at the beginning of publishing my own work and knowing I wanted to continue in research, it seemed like the right time to learn more about, and get involved with, peer review.

 

The workshop, held at Glasgow Caledonian University in October 2017 was a great opportunity for Early Career Researchers to get together and discuss peer review and why and how we do it.

 

Hero ImagesGetty Images.jpg

So what exactly is peer review? Chris Graf, Director of Research Integrity & Publishing Ethics at Wiley, kicked off the workshop by saying how peer review is a “practical and social exercise.” Peer review is an integral part of the scientific process—in order for our science to be robust, we must make sure the quality and validity stands up, so we know we can trust the evidence. Peer review is also about give and take, and increasingly it may become the case that if you publish papers, you should be peer reviewing one in return.

 

How does peer review actually work? The process was briefly described by Dr Ian Hartley, Editor-in-Chief of Bird Study. First, the paper is submitted to the journal, the editor or associate editor of which then selects the reviewers. The reviewers provide reports which the associate editor considers and then passes to the editor. It is then down to the editor to make the final decision as to whether the paper is published, rejected, or should be resubmitted. There are various models of peer review which are used for different subjects or differ depending on the journal.

 

Whilst choosing the correct reviewers for the paper, editors will sometimes have to ask a dozen people before finding two available. The questions to ask according to the selection criteria include: are they independent; do they know the subject area; do they have a good publication record?

 

What makes a good reviewer? A great piece of advice given by Ian was to write a review in the way you would like to receive it. Be polite and constructive, identify the strengths, weaknesses, and novelty of the paper, and most importantly, be punctual. If you don’t feel you can commit the time, suggest someone else who could. It’s also not uncommon for the editor to ask what your level of expertise is. Interestingly, the person who is top of his/her field is not always the best reviewer— often an early career researcher is most up to date with the literature and can provide the best revisions.

 

Why peer review? Peer review is a part of your personal development as a researcher. Dr Amy Nimegeer, Qualitative Public Health Scientist at the University of Glasgow, gave some other great reasons for getting involved. First, it sharpens up your critical appraisal skills, which helps you improve your own papers and grant applications. Second, as the process is constantly improving, a researcher’s contribution to peer review is increasingly being tracked, meaning a good review record could help you get that position you’re after. The piece of advice I took home is that if you are passionate about your field, it means you serve as a “gatekeeper” for that research community, only letting good, robust research through.

 

How do I get started? The best thing to do if you want to become a reviewer is to ask your supervisor for practice. Have a look at the next paper he/she reviews. Give it a go and then you can discuss your ideas together. If you’re looking for some tips, there are lots of different websites that give you advice on how to carry out peer review. Visit the Sense about Science website and check out their guide “Peer review: the nuts and bolts.” Lots of publishers will also produce their own guidelines for carrying out peer review, containing quality criteria to look out for depending on the study. Like most things, the more you practice, the better you will be, and eventually your supervisor can begin to recommend you for reviews. It's never too early to start thinking about peer review.

 

Image Credit: Hero Images/Getty Images

 

     Chris Graf
Chris Graf
Director, Research Integrity and Publishing Ethics, Wiley

We had questions about Registered Reports. So I recently spoke with David Mellor from the Center for Open Science for some answers. Here they are. And we have a special message for Wiley journal editors (which we repeat at the end): Please, speak with your publisher about our Registered Reports toolkit so together we can make this option available for researchers in your communities.

 

david mellor.jpgQ. Thanks for agreeing to speak with us, David. So what’s all the fuss about preregistration?

A. A preregistration is a time-stamped research plan that you can point to after conducting a study to prove to yourself and others that you really are testing a predicted relationship.

 

Preregistration has been around for a while. Statisticians have been warning us for decades that commonly used tests could misrepresent scientific evidence if we only report some of the answers, let the data inform the hypotheses we’re testing, or switch outcomes. These problems were affecting the credibility of drug trials, and so specifying in advance has been required by law for clinical studies in many countries for about 20 years. However, similar tools can be applied to basic research that informs policy or that affects our understanding of the way the world works, and so preregistration can increase credibility in these situations too.

 

Q. Seems like yet another hoop for researchers to jump through… What’s the point? Why bother?

A.It is certainly a new step in the workflow for some. However, everyone wants to produce the most rigorous and credible findings. Preregistration makes the distinction between confirmatory research and exploratory research clearer. Confirmatory research tests a very specific prediction. Exploratory research looks for something unanticipated. Both are vital to the advancement of knowledge. However, using the tools we have for confirmatory hypothesis testing when reporting exploratory, preliminary results makes the research more publishable, but at the expense of credibility. Addressing this conflict motivates our work.

 

Q. Oh, I see. There are likely benefits to research as a whole. But are there benefits for researchers who preregister?

A.There are several benefits for the individual researcher. The first comes from better planning. Every step that goes into a preregistration: writing the hypotheses, defining the variables, and creating statistical tests, are steps that we all have to take at some point. Making them before data collection can improve the researcher’s study design.

 

We built a structured, easy to use system that guides the researcher through this process on the Open Science Framework. Because this step is so new and so capable of improving science, the Laura and John Arnold Foundation is supporting $1000 awards for one thousand researchers who publish preregistered research through the Preregistration Challenge. This education campaign is our way of introducing this concept to researchers who are not familiar with the practice.

 

fig 1.png

 

The other major benefit for the researcher comes from working with a journal that offers Registered Reports. These journals (there are currently 80) will consider accepting the study before results are known. Submitted research plans are evaluated through peer review based on 1) the importance of the research question and 2) the ability of the proposed methods to answers those questions. If both of those criteria are positively evaluated, the paper can be given an in-principle acceptance, which is a promise to publish regardless of outcome.

 

This is a huge benefit to the researcher. The researcher gets earlier feedback on their proposed study, when it has a chance to actually improve the work. The decision to publish is based on the quality of the work and the importance of the research question instead of the outcome, which is very attractive for anyone looking to publish.

 

fig 2.png

 

Q. Even so, I’m still not convinced. What indication do we have that researchers are even remotely interested in preregistration?

A. Clinical researchers have been using this process for a long time. But it is new to researchers in basic science or pre-clinical fields. We’ve provided tools to any researcher since 2013 and have seen explosive growth in the number of preregistrations on the OSF.

 

fig 3.png

 

The OSF is designed for researchers in any field, but there is a lot of demand for preregistration among discipline-specific registries, such as those run by the American Economics Association, international impact evaluations, and education. There are even tools made by proponents of preregistration to help researchers make concise preregistrations.

 

Q. Now we’re getting there. So what role might a journal play in preregistration?

A. There are four specific steps that journals can take, and they’re summarized in the policies outlined in the Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) Guidelines.

    1. The first is to simply have researchers disclose whether or not any empirical work was preregistered.
    2. The next step would be to include comparisons between the preregistered protocols and reported findings to evaluate whether or not the research plan was followed. Linking to a preregistration at least allows this to happen after publication, but we’d love it for these comparisons to occur during peer review.
    3. The third step is to require preregistration for any relevant work. Journals that publish clinical research take this step, and others can as well.
    4. The final step is to offer Registered Reports as an option for researchers to use.

 

Q. And how does this fit within the “open research” agenda?

A. Open Science is about connecting each part of the research that went into the final results. Traditionally, we didn’t have the means to easily share data, or to point to time-stamped research plans, or disseminate materials beyond the appendix section of a printed journal. However, now we have the means to realize that ideal workflow, and to make science work in the way it was meant to work.

 

Q. What does this all mean for early career researchers?

A. In 10 years I think the field will have different expectations. Researchers will be expected to demonstrate reproducible work by pointing to a body of work that contains all of the essential parts: preregistered plans, materials identified with persistent and unique IDs, datasets with clear descriptors, code for running tests on those data, preprints showing preliminary findings, and finally the peer reviewed manuscript that guides the reader through the complete and accurate narrative.

 

We’re on the cusp of that now. It is possible to cite that complete workflow for those who are on the cutting edge. But it also takes people caring about science and about transparency so that decisions to publish, award grants, and offer jobs are made based on the reproducibility and transparency of the scholar’s opus.

 

Q. OK… I’m convinced that this is worth trying. So how can a journal help researchers with preregistration?

A. Besides the four specific steps already mentioned, journals can do a lot to make this happen sooner. They can use Open Science Badges to allow researchers to signal when they are taking these steps. They can let their authors know that preregistration is valued by sharing news about the Preregistration Challenge on their website or social media platforms. They can point to example preregistrations to guide researchers.

 

fig 4.png

 

Q. You can count me in! So… what’s our “take home”?

A. Whether you’re an early career researcher or a seasoned scholar; journal editor or author, there are steps that you can take to make science better. Raise awareness, talk to your colleagues, do one thing in your next project that is a bit more open than your last, and in the near future we will have made a huge difference.

 

Thanks, David. We’ll add new journals that launch Registered Reports to the 5 Wiley journals listed already on your site here. For researchers who publish in Journal of Neuropsychology (published for the British Psychological Society by Wiley) launch of Registered Reports is imminent. And we have more journals queuing up.

 

And for Wiley journal editors, here’s our closing message. We have a Registered Reports toolkit to help launch Registered Reports quickly. Please speak with your publisher and we’ll get things organized. Thank you.

 

David Mellor (pictured) works at the Center for Open Science on incentive programs with researchers, journals, publishers, and funders. He received his PhD in Ecology and Evolution and has a background in behavioral ecology and citizen science. Find him online on Twitter and ORCID.

 

Filter Blog

By date:
By tag: