This document summarizes a discussion among communication scholars about current issues and future prospects in academia. It identifies four main issues to focus on: knowledge valorization, open science, replication of previous findings, and dealing with publication pressure while resisting biases. New initiatives are presented to address these issues, such as open data storage platforms and altmetrics to measure impact beyond citations. Concerns about these changes are acknowledged, such as risks to careers from conducting replication studies or risks of ideas being stolen without data sharing. The discussion aims to help young scholars navigate these challenges and transitions in academic standards and practices.

1. “We need to talk.”
A discussion for the new generation of
communication scholars about current
issues and future prospects in academia
Anika Batenburg
Annemarie van Oosten
Elise van Nederveen Meerkerk
Noelle Aarts
Etmaal van de Communicatiewetenschap,
Wageningen, February 3, 2014

2. Why should we talk?
Last year @ Etmaal: ‘sloppy science’ panel
discussion … what happened since?

3. “We need to talk.”

4. Criticism
• From the media
• From young scholars
• From senior scholars

5. 4 main issues we should focus on:
•
•
•
•
knowledge valorization
open science
replication of previous findings
dealing with publication pressure &
resisting verification bias (quality vs
quantity)

6. New initiatives

7. New initiatives
• Open Science Framework (open data storage)

8. New initiatives
• Figshare (doi’s for all research output; publish
presentations, infographics, negative data etc)

9. New initiatives
Open Access MegaJournals
• Online-only open access journal
• No restrictions on subject areas or topics
• Selects content based only on scientific and
methodological soundness
• ‘significance’, ‘impact’, or ‘degree of advance’
do not affect the decision to publish

10. New initiatives
• Altmetrics, Impact Story (Online citations)

11. New initiatives
• Science Exchange (marketplace: “order
experiments from the world's best labs”)

12. New initiatives
• Crowd-funding

13. New initiatives
• Communities

14. Let’s create Scientist 3.0
knowledge
valorization

15. Discussion statements
“Sure, I would like to do more replication
studies, and I would like to do more innovative
and risky research, but…
.. If I start doing this right now I won’t get
published and will damage my career.”

16. Discussion statements
“We should not focus as much on the impact
factor, and instead look for different quality
indicators (e.g., Altmetrics) and societal impact”

17. Discussion statements
“A focus on other (or additional) quality
indicators than the number of scientific
publications will only increase the already high
pressure because we would have to excel in even
more areas (e.g., writing blogs, Twitter, social
media, connections to society) .”

18. Discussion statements
“Science is business, and being a scientist is just
a job. And all jobs have high pressures and
competition. We should just deal with it.”

19. Discussion statements
“Data sharing, pre-registration of research
ideas.
It all sounds very nice, but how do I know
someone else is not going to steal my hardearned research ideas and data?”

20. Discussion statements
“Experts say….
… but (what) should we (young
scholars) DO?”

21. Thank you!
j.m.f.vanoosten@uva.nl
a.e.batenburg@vu.nl
www.facebook.com/InnovationsInAcademia