Scientific Communication Is Changing and Scientists Should Lead the Way Academic Article uri icon

abstract

  • There are two prototypes for introducing an idea of staggering genius. One is to produce a work that garners near universal derision but is later proven right. The other is to produce a work that garners near universal praise because it lays bare what everyone instantly realizes is the correct answer. Based on the diversity of opinions among the 21 commentaries to our target article (Nosek & Bar-Anan, this issue), it would seem that our vision of scientific communication accomplished neither of these. What it did accomplish, we hope, is to jump-start a pragmatically focused discussion for improving scientific communication. All commentators agreed that scientific communication can be improved; there was only occasional embrace of the status quo. When commentators voiced skepticism, it came in two flavors:(a)“Is this particular change a good idea?” sometimes …

publication date

  • January 1, 2012