@Daniel_Cleather what a paper!
1 Like
@Enrico.Fucci has a new paper: ‘No effect of different styles of mindfulness-based meditation on EEG auditory mismatch negativity in expert and novice practitioners’ Fucci_et_al_2021_Replication_MMN_meditation_preprint_v1.pdf (666.4 KB)
2 Likes
@john.larocco hosted and presented the Lightning Talk session at Ronin yesterday. Here is the recording of his presentation:
2 Likes
@antonio.schettino co-authored a preprint in which IGDORE, Ronin and several other Open Science organisations have been acknowledged:
https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/n2ryp
4.3.3. What do we do? A slow science perspective
A broader response may be offered by the slow science philosophy (Stengers, 2013). One core idea of this philosophy is to encourage a sustainable research praxis (Salo & Heikkinen, 2018). This includes emphasising the collective aspects of science rather than self-protecting our ideas, fostering reflection about our practices and the relevance of our research questions. By definition, slow science promotes more open science, where the goal is not to try to ‘fix’ but to rethink academia.
Importantly, slow science is not about forcing scientists to slow down their publication pace, even though some have explicitly suggested that this might be a desirable option (Frith, 2020). It is not about returning to some idealized golden age where scientists could focus deeply on their work, immune from the needs of society and productivity imperatives. Instead, slow science is about resisting the culture of speed and the idea of “wasting time” in research with futilities (Stengers, 2013). Unfortunately, overwork and multitasking have been traditionally celebrated, and work-life balance and mental health have not been taken seriously (Berg & Seeber, 2015). There is a need to question those narratives and how time pressure and time fragmentation (Ylijoki & Mäntylä, 2003) affects creativity and critical thinking on top of jeopardising wellbeing (Maestre, 2019). To foster those discussions and reflections, there has to be spaces where one can imagine and experiment with alternatives to the current system, even at a local level.
Putting those words into actions might seem unrealistic. However, initiatives already exist for paving the slow science way (see Table 1: Resources for GSP). Some examples are research frameworks that have emerged from group discussions at conferences: the DORA initiative (a.k.a. The Declaration of Research Assessment) promotes ways of evaluating researchers that go beyond single use of publication metrics, or the HIBAR Research Alliance, that aims to make research and innovation more integrated and aligned with society’s critical problems. Other initiatives include discussion groups where scholars discuss and rethink academia and imagine a healthier research culture. Among them are such groups as Slow Science in Belgium or the Better Science initiative in Switzerland. Finally, some researchers have created independent institutes: the RONIN Institute that promotes research outside traditional institutions, or IGDORE, the Institute for Globally Distributed Open Research and Education, with a more integrated objective, that is,improving the quality of science, science education and scientists’ quality of life. Close to this philosophy, the Center for research and integrity (CRI) is exploring new ways of doing research, learning, or teaching while connecting with other parts of the society (industries, citizens, etc).
These existing networks, discussion groups, or more radical alternatives are all concrete examples that individual scientists can, at their level, promote healthier research practices. These examples should encourage scientists to explore other practices, question their relationship to academia, and start conversations with colleagues. For instance, the Café Culture Initiative promoted by the Wellcome Foundation offers a concrete way to do it. A discussion kit was developed to foster discussions about reimagining the research culture and working together. Some results about the research culture as experienced by researchers are already available on the Wellcome Foundation website.
In a nutshell, more needs to be done than just ‘fixing academia’ or improving scientific practice. Narratives, research frameworks, and practices need to be actively rethought. As summarized by (Lancaster et al., 2018), “Making science better is not just about “creating better incentives”, but a collective cultural shift beyond viewing competition and individualistic success as the sole defining feature of science.”
Furthermore, academia is part of a larger ecosystem where every part must carry equal weight to keep a good balance. We need to emphasize our connections with the non-academic worlds and consider societies’ needs and concerns.
Thanks for letting me know @keithtse 
3 Likes
Yaser Issa has a new paper:
2 Likes
@Jelle has a new paper:
www.doi.org/10.5603/ARM.a2021.0065
https://journals.viamedica.pl/advances_in_respiratory_medicine/article/view/ARM.a2021.0065
1 Like
New preprint by @pcmasuzzo : https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/8brjg
Open Access Beyond Article Processing Charges(1).pdf (515.3 KB)
2 Likes
@Michelle presented a joint presentation with Walter David from Ronin at the NATO MSCOE MESAS conference last month: Operationalizing a Medical Intelligence Platform for Humanitarian Security.pdf (2.4 MB)
(thanks for the h/t @zoya.marinova has recently done an interview in which she talks about her career as a freelance medical writer:
1 Like
