Trois académies (l'Académie des sciences, la Royal Society, la Leopoldina) viennent d'émettre un avis en vue de publications scientifiques de qualité.
Je relève, dans ce texte, les paragraphes suivants :
Some of the changes are beneficial to science, such as the move toward open access and open data. But others are the consequence of more negative effects such as the incessant pressures on researchers to publish more and more articles and to choose journals with very high impact factors. The pressures have given rise to a greatly increased volume of published articles and publication biases towards articles on fashionable or eye-catching subjects and away from high-quality articles reporting detailed studies, negative findings or replications.
The well-established scientific journals are inundated by manuscrips attracted by high impact factors. The first pass selection for these journals is frequently not made by the classical peer review system, but rather by fast screening methods that are often influenced by how fashionable the manuscript is.
The principles for high quality are:
1. Efficient and high-quality dissemination of scientific information
2. The avoidance of all forms of conflict of interest
3. The necessity to ensure fair reviewing of articles
4. Keeping the handling and decision-making processes regarding scientific articles entirely under the control of well-recognised scientists.