Comments, Questions and Suggestions

Mica Clarke, PhD student, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology: Q&A on plagiarism and citations

"A huge part of research is building knowledge of the literature, to identify research questions and direct future studies. It is important that we acknowledge the work of other researchers in the field by citing correctly, i.e. referencing where the ideas or findings you are describing came from. Plagiarism is when another author’s work is discussed but not clearly referenced in text. There are many different styles of referencing and preferred styles differ between disciplines. It is normal to have little knowledge of these when starting university, and it is worth taking time to understand referencing requirements by about these by reading through papers and seeking resources or courses available to you at your UCL library. My tip to get on top of citing sources and avoiding plagiarism is to use a reference manager like Mendeley or EndNote. Several reference managers available to download for free which insert references and bibliographies (reference lists) into your documents in a consistent format, according to your selected reference style. UCL libraries offer courses on how to use these tools too! "

Professor Dimitri Kullmann, Head of PGR, UCL Queen Square Institute of Neurology: Q&A on sharing research

1. How important do you think it is for published research to be accessible and verified, what are the dangers of false data being released?

For research to have an impact it is essential to communicate the outcome to a wide audience. This means not only getting the headline out but also showing how the conclusions were drawn, and ideally allowing the reader to drill down to the original data. It can, however, be difficult to reconcile the need for transparency with protection of valuable datasets that may represent many years of effort and could be used for other analyses. Furthermore, although pre-print repositories such as bioRxiv are rapidly expanding, they are essentially unfiltered and readers can have difficulty distinguishing the signal from the noise. Peer-reviewed journals provide three main services known as the three C's that distinguish them from pre-print repositories: to Convene, to Certify and to Curate. With modern technology it is increasingly possible to link figures and tables in published articles to the datasets, and many journals now insist on Data Availability Statements to enhance transparency.    

2. Do you think it's important to have a digital profile, what are your tips on creating one?

Science is, for better or worse, closely linked to reputation, and it is important for authors of articles to earn the trust and respect of their readers. Many institutions have web-pages that list individual principal investigators or laboratories, but for early- or mid-career scientists who may be moving between institutions, it can be difficult to establish digital visibility. I strongly encourage authors to obtain an ORCID (Open Researcher and Contributor ID) identifier, especially if they have a common family name, or one that is easily mis-spelled. In addition, a stand-alone website can be useful to host a CV and links to publications, and can also double-up as repository of data acquisition or analysis code, lab photos and a blog.   

3. What do you think it the best medium for sharing research?

Publication in a conventional peer-review journal provides a degree of certification that an article is important and correct, and continues to be the main mode of communicating the outcome of research. Nevertheless, there is a very large number of journals, and they differ with respect to visibility and specialisation, whether they offer Open Access publication, and how much they charge for such publication or for a subscription. Navigating this choice can be difficult. A good rule of thumb for choosing a journal is to ask where you consistently read work that influenced your way of thinking about the subject. Quite often it will not be the journal with the highest Impact Factor.

4. How do you measure the impact of published research?

Ultimately, the impact of published research takes time to emerge, because progress in science depends on replication and refutation. This process operates on very different timescales in different subjects, because of the relative ease with which experiments can be set up or observations gathered. The delay in evaluating the impact of research has led to an unhealthy reliance on the Impact Factor of the journal where the research was published as a surrogate measure of its importance, to the point where people ask "What's it in?" more often than "What in it?". Many institutions and funders have signed up to the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (DORA), which aims to halt the practice of evaluating the value of articles according to the impact factor where they were published, but there is a long way to go before appointment and funding panels truly comply with its principles.