If you need help with online teaching or other challenges in academia arising from the COVID-19 crisis, we have prepared this FAQ to get you started.
67

IMHO it depends on why you want to make it available. If your primary reason is that you want to make information available more publicly, you could produce a "revised edition" of the thesis and add a preface stating that this is a substantially revised and edited version of your thesis - just like other books do. If you just correct typos and grammar, ...


66

The short answer is: we let publishers profit off of our work because many of us are egocentrics seeking prestige. At least it was the major reason at the creation of the modern academic publishing system. The rest of us can do little to change this, since our careers depend on it. However, I think this could change soon since more and more academics are ...


61

Making the paper accessible to everyone who can't look behind the paywall might hurt the journal's publishing company a little bit by diverting some demand. However, it won't really hurt the people you have been dealing with. Moreover, the journal has given you explicit permission to publish a pre-print, so you're not going against their stated request. At ...


57

I am a high school student who has worked on multiple (well, 4 to be exact) pure math and CS papers. All of them deal with fairly significant problems, so some of them have been published by now too. Wow. That's awesome! Today, I saw a paper which looked quite similar to a paper that I published back in May. I was shocked to notice that the author ...


45

It's not necessarily crazy for academia.edu to ask for these things (although, as I say below, I certainly don't think users should agree to these terms). I imagine their lawyers advised them to use an agreement that covers all possible use cases as their business model evolves. For example, if they decided to charge their users membership fees, and only ...


45

Aside from giving excellent talks at important conferences, here are several other ideas. I've seen all of these work (although rarely all for the same paper). Maintain a freely available copy (or at least an arXiv link) on your personal web page. Keep your CV up to date, including links to freely available version of all your papers. Make sure Google ...


45

I can't even imagine a situation in which criticizing published academic materials on their merits would be wrong or immoral. How would it be different from criticizing someone's selection of an econometric or statistical model to use on their data? This happens constantly in academic literature, and in fact is crucial to the process of research. The ...


43

This varies substantially, depending on the sort of book, how well the author negotiated (each book involves an individually negotiated contract), the price of the book, etc. Based on one Springer contract I'm familiar with, here's a first approximation. I can't say for sure how representative it is, but it's at least one data point, and I'd guess it's ...


40

This often happens when a document uses the CMYK color space and the black is set as (0,0,0,100). When you go print in a monochrome environment, the document's color information is converted to grayscale first. Because black ink on white paper can't actually create gray, a halftoning process is applied, where the shades of gray are hinted at by using a ...


40

Why are so many people publishing [on ArXiv]? You have to be careful with terminology when making statements like that. ArXiv is certainly "publishing" in the literal sense of "making public" but would you say that you'd "published a book" if you'd just put it on your website? Probably not. My question is, why were journals used to begin with? Because ...


38

No, you shouldn't just submit to the arXiv instead of journals. Articles in the arXiv are not considered published in the traditional sense, and they are not peer reviewed. In fields that use the arXiv, papers are typically submitted there and to a journal (but you can do this only if the journal's policies permit it, so you should check if you aren't ...


34

Translations are considered a "derivative work." Preparation of a derivative work is one of the exclusive rights attached to the copyright holder. If the article you wish to publish is not in the public domain or under a license that allows preparation of derivative work, you must get permission from the copyright holder to translate it. (Unless one of the ...


33

It's of questionable legality, but it's not going to lead to prosecution. For me personally using sci-hub has led to new research results in fields outside of my specialization that will (very likely) appear in leading peer reviewed journals. One problem I'm not sure about is whether it's wise to say in the acknowledgements: "I thank Alexandra Elbakyan for ...


31

Is it unethical to make considerable changes to the text No, it's not unethical, but if you make changes it would be useful to include a note or a preface disclosing that that is an amended version of your original thesis, and if your conclusions have changed considerably after further experience, you can explain why.


31

As an example, you may be interested in the morning paper, which does exactly that daily for one paper in systems / software engineering / programming languages / AI. Notably, from the entire setup it is very clear that the author of the blog is not the one who originally did the research. The original paper and authors are very clearly named, right at the ...


30

You have two issues to deal with. If you properly cite and attribute the ideas to the original author, you avoid plagiarism issues. If you don't copy too much, but properly quote, from the paper then you avoid copyright issues. But, ideas are free to use and to adapt. Simplifying what you find in a paper is a good thing to do. One doesn't obtain ...


29

What do you expect from a good bachelor's thesis? The expectations for a bachelor's thesis vary from country to country and from field to field. However, I think the main points can be summarised as follows: the author shows a good understanding of the given problem the author is aware of the existing literature in the field, can discuss the literature ...


27

First of all, ArXiv covers mathematical disciplines (specifically: Physics, Mathematics, Computer Science, Quantitative Biology, Quantitative Finance and Statistics), not all academic fields. So, the question, which seems to pose this as a general inquiry about the need for journals, is overly broad in the context of offer ArXiv as an alternative. Second ...


25

It's difficult to answer this question effectively because it is premised on some incorrect assumptions. Let me begin by correcting them: There is no such thing as an "official" scientific publication. There is no Board Of Serious Scientists who determines which publications are legitimate and which are not. Science is a marketplace of ideas, and many ...


24

I suggest you first of all check the copyright transfers you signed the publisher's FAQ on rights you retain as author Many publishers nowadays allow you to self-archive the version of the manuscript that passed the review. Some do not allow self-archiving on public repositories (but e.g. Elsevier makes an exception explicitly for arXiv). For a quick ...


23

guifa is correct in their analysis of why this happens, but I would like to note that there is often an easy fix available once you know what is going on and so long as the PDF is saved as text rather than as a scanned image. When you go to print from the PDF, click Properties from the Print menu, and on the advanced tab hopefully you'll see something like ...


23

Any reputable online-only journal will have a plan for data retention that goes beyond what's visible to the user. There will be backups somewhere. Print journals may have the advantage of having a physical repository copy existing, but even those are not necessarily of "archival quality" (that is, printed on acid-free paper and using techniques that ...


22

The biggest criticism I have heard so far among colleagues is the price tag: Standard access: $2,400 Open access: $4,200 But people who are willing to publish in things like Frontiers are used to this order of magnitude. At least with JoVe you understand a part of the price, as a filming team apparently visits your lab and helps with the storyline. ...


22

Based on our work with them, it seems to be a high quality publication. We published a JoVE article last year and several of the protocols we use in the lab are adapted from other JoVE articles. So it seems effective in its mission. The video format really works for certain protocols, and it may make it easier for people to reproduce your work (thereby ...


22

The important thing in such matters is to be honest. Releasing a revised version clearly marked as such is perfectly ethical. Releasing a revised version while leading people to belive it's the original thesis that you submitted to the university years ago would IMO be unethical.


21

The text you found tells you that you must not claim some affiliation which you do not actually have. So either leave the affiliation field empty, or enter something like "Independent Researcher". You will then probably have to go through the endorsement procedure. For that, you need some researchers that have published in the category you are aiming for ...


20

My answer is close to $0.00. I published a book with Springer in 2007, and it is a standard work found in most university libraries. I have never received a royalty cheque, as there was a threhshold number for sales. However, now sales are close to zero, as the book is available electronically via SpringerLink and other platforms, and Springer essentially ...


20

It is possible for you to submit things to arXiv, even without your name on them, but do note that you need to be "endorsed" to submit to the site. That basically means that someone with a good submission history in the same subject category has to vouch for you by filling out a short form on the site. Any professor or (probably) senior postdoc in the field ...


19

Peer review, as the others have said. Mathematicians can consult dozens (if not hundreds) of false proofs of the Riemann Hypothesis on Arxiv. Such things are (mostly) rejected by the journals. Journals which publish them soon get a bad reputation. Imagine if all the amazing new health claims form the Internet could not be distinguished from serious ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible