By: Rebecca Cerio and Adele Blackler
Our weekly linkpost, bringing you interesting and informative links on science policy issues buzzing about the internet.
Whistleblower Uses YouTube to Assert Claims of Scientific Misconduct – Allegations of image manipulation are by no means new, but this video alleging nearly 60 incidences by one lab does it particularly effectively. One thing to note is that these instances are mostly (if not totally) drawn from the published figures: these are infractions that could have been caught by a sufficiently keen-eyed reviewer. (by Dennis Normile via AAAS ScienceInsider)
White House Gives Up on NOAA Science Chief Nomination – “Under U.S. Senate rules, a single lawmaker can place a “hold” on a nomination, effectively preventing a vote.” This hold can be put on for any reason. In this case? The senator involved was “uncomfortable confirming a high-level science advisor […] while there remain significant outstanding concerns over scientific integrity at federal agencies and the White House, including with regard to the recent drilling moratorium and the ongoing bottleneck in permitting, which I would characterize as a continuing de facto moratorium.” The objecting senator was Senator David Vitter (R-LA). (by David Malakoff via AAAS ScienceInsider)
Time for a New Type of Peer Review? – Travis Saunders on Science of Blogging has a radical suggestion to address the problems with conventional peer review: accept everything, score for methodology, and publish each article with its score and reviewers’ comments. “This new system would make paper quality exceedingly clear; …would incentivize high quality research, rather than “sexy” findings;…[and] would make it ok to replicate prior work or publish null findings.” The author is asking for ideas, comments, and constructive criticism, for those inclined to join the thought experiment.
Have an interesting science policy link to share? Let us know in the comments!