By Dr. I. A. Nasir:
Faster publication accelerates the pace of research. In science and research, we always stand over the shoulders of previous research done in that specific or related field of knowledge. Publication of scientific outcomes increases reach of the scientists to new boundaries, aspects, prospects, dimensions, discoveries, second thoughts, innovation and sometimes to no innovation of course. Publication of a research must be synchronized with it in real time. I mean, there is no use if you get pages of a journal printed with your researched stuff after a year or in 6 months because this time lag clearly create chances for other unaware scientists to repeat it. But sadly this is increasing especially in the case of basic characterization studies mainly because of increased labs, researchers, projects and post-graduate research students.
If you do a research for your degree, write thesis, make a beautiful and memorable hard book of that then place it in university library without publishing an article. You do a great harm to you and science. You just increased chances of reinventing the wheel in some other corner of the world or might be in next lab. I mean, no one is going to library, dust the thesis and then sit on table to read all the stuff you poured out. If one consider opposite, he is in poor condition of dismay. Scientists like rapid development so they do require quick answers. Abstract of your paper can do it more efficiently then summary of your unread thesis. Loss of bucks during repetition and redundancy of the same research work is also on researcher account. This can be avoided.
And if it is project, then publishing results is as much fruitful as submitting progress report to the funders. In here, most of the researchers find writing research more difficult than doing it due to certain reasons that might include poor communication writing skills, explaining hesitation, critically reviewing own research and sense of higher chances of rejection by the editors and publishers. These problems should be killed for the science sake.
And publishers and editors are not to be spared. They reject more than they accept for the precious pages of their journals. This situation can be partially rationalized by counter argument of editors that they have to receive and review so many articles for publication which results in sufficient time lagging and killing of several other a bit "less-important" articles. But in any case, fair contribution to science should not be discarded.
Publication and letting people know about research is as important as performing it, otherwise who cares that what you did with test tubes and pipette tips.
Research, Fast Publication, Faster Research
Commentaries and Correspondence
By Dr. I. A. Nasir:
Faster publication accelerates the pace of research. In science and research, we always stand over the shoulders of previous research done in that specific or related field of knowledge. Publication of scientific outcomes increases reach of the scientists to new boundaries, aspects, prospects, dimensions, discoveries, second thoughts, innovation and sometimes to no innovation of course. Publication of a research must be synchronized with it in real time. I mean, there is no use if you get pages of a journal printed with your researched stuff after a year or in 6 months because this time lag clearly create chances for other unaware scientists to repeat it. But sadly this is increasing especially in the case of basic characterization studies mainly because of increased labs, researchers, projects and post-graduate research students.
If you do a research for your degree, write thesis, make a beautiful and memorable hard book of that then place it in university library without publishing an article. You do a great harm to you and science. You just increased chances of reinventing the wheel in some other corner of the world or might be in next lab. I mean, no one is going to library, dust the thesis and then sit on table to read all the stuff you poured out. If one consider opposite, he is in poor condition of dismay. Scientists like rapid development so they do require quick answers. Abstract of your paper can do it more efficiently then summary of your unread thesis. Loss of bucks during repetition and redundancy of the same research work is also on researcher account. This can be avoided.
And if it is project, then publishing results is as much fruitful as submitting progress report to the funders. In here, most of the researchers find writing research more difficult than doing it due to certain reasons that might include poor communication writing skills, explaining hesitation, critically reviewing own research and sense of higher chances of rejection by the editors and publishers. These problems should be killed for the science sake.
And publishers and editors are not to be spared. They reject more than they accept for the precious pages of their journals. This situation can be partially rationalized by counter argument of editors that they have to receive and review so many articles for publication which results in sufficient time lagging and killing of several other a bit "less-important" articles. But in any case, fair contribution to science should not be discarded.
Publication and letting people know about research is as important as performing it, otherwise who cares that what you did with test tubes and pipette tips.
Sharing options: