If you missed the ASAPBio conference held at HHMI Feb. 16-17, 2016, there is still a lot of information on the website, including Readings and Comments, a 4-minute video What are Preprints?, a video archive of the live-stream, and much more. Paul Ginsparg, founder of the popular physics-math-computational biology preprint server arXiv, gave the keynote (included in the video archive), which had some very funny moments, such as when he said he was excited to see biologists finally join the 1990’s [when arXiv was founded]. I suspect several researchers will begin to use BioArXiv more after this conference. Some risks remain, especially for young researchers, since whether preprints “count” for tenure review and grant requests is still an open question in some cases. Feelings of competition and the fear of being scooped were also concerns, although Paul Ginsparg said you can’t be scooped after the preprint is public and dates of versions are obvious. I missed a lot of the conference, but I didn’t hear any discussion about starting the patent “clock” with distribution of a preprint, but that isn’t a concern in too many areas of biology. Publishers and funders may begin to change their reception of preprints also, at least several publisher and funder representatives attended the conference.
Here are a few links which you may enjoy:
- I found this Commentary especially interesting, although there are several others also: Fix the incentive structure and the preprints will follow
- I’m Excited! A Post Pre-Print-Posting-Powwow Post, post conference summary by Michael Eisen. His summary of the Cell Press policy on preprints is worth reading.
- What does a journal do?, related post by Lenny Teytelman
- #asapbio on Twitter
- Background: The Academic Journal is 350 years old. Any plans to retire?, blog post by Lenny Teytelman. In the paragraph which begins with “However, the ingredients for transforming the academic journal are all prepared on the kitchen counter,” he mentions a NISO webinar and shares his slide set The web is changing what we publish, how we publish, and what happens after publication. I really enjoyed his 30-minute part of the NISO webinar; I felt like it was a real summary of changes in scholarly communications, especially in the biomedical field. I can share the access info and password with anyone at WU if you email me [email@example.com], but I can’t post on this blog since some non-WU folks read it too.
- Background: Does it take too long to publish research? Nature 530(7589): 148–151 (11 February 2016) doi:10.1038/530148a