I know there is a good list of all paper peer-reviewed journals but I would like to know is there one specially for creative commons based online journals? I am kind of trying to figure out which is better to publish in terms of access to “outsiders”-people who aren’t research scientists and most likely will never care about research journals but if I post a link to my paper on a social media site would make the effort to see it. Is there anyone here who has experience with such audience? Publishing not for the colleagues, but for the general public. You know people these days don’t like to pay to view something on the Internet and if your audience isn’t a member of a faculty impact factor is crap. But I wish to know can my papers go through at least some kind of(even very rudimentary)peer-review process. This is why I am looking for a list of free online journals who have at least someone with academic background on their editorial board.

Does such a thing exists?

Not sure if this is an obvious question, or if someone has asked this. If so please tell me.

Suppose I and A have a (math) paper. There are two parts, and I believe the first part is done by me, and the second part is done by A.

Now someone asked me a few questions.

  1. Is first part your part/ your work?
  2. Is second part your part/ your work?

Easy to see I have a few options here.

a. That is my part.

b. That is not my part.

c. That is our joint work.

I suppose, if I claim my part to be my part, I should not claim A’s part as my part or our joint work. And claiming my part to be my part will also lead to a problem when we have another author B who doesn’t really has his part. That is, probably we worked together and he didn’t produce a part. If I claim my part, I might have to end up claiming B doesn’t have a part, which doesn’t seem to be good.

So the question is, how should I answer such question, when people ask me which part is mine? Also sorry for the bad presentation of the question, and any edits are welcome.

As someone who is just starting to read in the field, I found that most academic papers are quite ‘stuffy’. They seem to use a great deal of complicated language and jargon needlessly.

I read Should academic papers necessarily carry a sober tone? and understand that jokes should be kept to a minimum but what about:

  • Simple language,
  • Metaphors/Allegories/Similes,
  • Casual language (speaking to the reader, using contractions, etc).

I think if you can contribute new knowledge to a field, and make it accessible to an ‘average’ educated user who isn’t an expert in your field, then why wouldn’t you?

Is casual tone unheard of in papers? Is it frowned upon? Do I ultimately need to learn to write in a more formal manner to get taken seriously in future works?

I will soon write a new article with new collaborators (my first paper with other people, I’m in math). For some context, I know one of them well, but I’ve never met the others in person.

I use Git to manage all my papers. I’m wondering if I should suggest the use of Git to them? If so, how much should I press the issue, what should I say when suggesting it?

I can use it alone and apply their changes manually, but it would be infinitely easier if everyone just used a VCS — and not just for my own personal comfort, because Git does make writing the paper easier, IMO.

The main issue is Git’s learning curve. I can offer to make everything as simple as possible (set up the repository myself, help out with technical issues they might have, direct them to tutorials), but academics are busy people, and they might not want to learn a whole new system for just one paper (even though I believe that were I they, I would then use Git for everything…).

I do not have any experience doing statistics with data from a meta-analysis. However, I am working on a research project at the moment where I must look for a significant difference between groups in the meta-analysis. But project advisor is off at the moment and I would like to begin this part of the project before he returns. So, I was wondering if someone with experience doing meta-analyses can help me?

There are 3 groups in this meta-analysis (group A,B and C). Each group has a different population and different number of people in each group. Each study in the meta-analysis gives me a proportion of individuals with Thyroid cancer for each group (A,B and C). I would like to find if there is a significant difference in prevalence of Thyroid cancer between the 3 groups. I am a bit confused about how to do this? Do I use a T-test to find the sig. difference in each individual study? Do I find the weighted average of the proportions in each group and then do the t-test? Would it be best to use another statistical test?

Thank you!

I only know four people who have definite plans for academic careers and I doubt they’re a representative sample, so I was wondering what kind of marks people here who are in academia (or plan on having careers in academia) received in their undergraduate degrees.

Note: I’m in the UK where we are awarded percentages that fall under classifications (e.g. 70%+ is a first) – not sure how familiar people outside of the UK are with our system, but this page explains. https://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/content.php?r=15857-degree-classifications I’m not really familiar with systems outside of the UK beyond knowing that a GPA of 4 at university is rare.