You have /5 articles left.
Sign up for a free account or log in.
Cambridge University Press is launching a new open-access journal to help address science’s reproducibility issues and glacial peer-review timelines. Experimental Results, announced today, gives researchers a “place to publish valid, standalone experimental results, regardless of whether those results are novel, inconclusive, negative or supplementary to other published work,” according to the press. It will also publish work about attempts to reproduce previously published experiments.
As for peer review, the journal will publish reviewers’ names and reviews to make the process more transparent. It plans to offer reviewers scorecards to make reviewing articles easier. Submissions are open here. Fiona Hutton, an open-access publishing official at the press and a former cancer researcher, said in a statement that scholarly communication “isn’t really reflective of the research process, because the focus is on publishing a concise narrative.” The reality, however, she said, is that “research results are often confusing, inconclusive or don’t fit a narrative” and are “damaged when the focus becomes the research paper rather than the research output itself.”
Digital Science and Ripeta also recently released a report on the importance of falsifiability and reproducibility in scientific research. Papers should be a “route” to test and recreate the research carried out, the analysis says. And while not all research materials need to be accessible, "achieving adequate transparency is essential to reproducibility."
