--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <LEnglish5@...> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, turquoiseb <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "salyavin808" <fintlewoodlewix@> > > > wrote: > > <snip> > > > > Another thing that annoys me as the amount journals charge to read > > > > papers, all you can access is the abstract and you can pay $20 for > > > > a read of the data. Should all be free to make it easier to > > > > research things. > > > > > > I agree. One could almost get the impression that the > > > researchers don't WANT people to view their actual data > > > and look into the details of their methodology, eh? > > > > One could, if one weren't aware of the fact that one > > factor in a researcher's prestige is the number of > > times his or her papers get cited in other researchers' > > papers. > > > > the NIH requires all papers that were published using NIH grants to be > available for free online. The Brits are going one step further and requiring > ALL research (I think) to be be available free online.
http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2012/7/16/british-research-goes-open-source.html
