Views
Cell Press is currently showing off what it's calling "the article of the future" on it's website. By segregating out different parts of the "traditional" manuscript, linking them together in novel ways, and adding some promising new content, the publishing giant aspires to "take full advantage of online capabilities, allowing readers individualized entry points and routes through the content, while using the latest advances in visualization techniques." Does it work?
| Expand to read more... |
|---|
|
Kinda. There are a couple great ideas embodied in this project, most notably the graphical abstract (a figure designed to support and crudely sum up the written abstract) and the short audio interview with the author that will explore the rational and implications of the paper's(?) findings. The graphical abstracts available, unfortunately, did not seem to add much insight, and only one interview is available at this time. However, in the right hands and with the right subject matter, both of these ideas could really enhance communication of the article's message. I'm also a big fan of the comments section. This is something that, if this little OneSci journal ever finds its legs, I think will be an integral part of our publishing model. Of course, we plan on taking it a couple steps further... Most of the other revisions are really just minor tweaks of already standard content. I'm sure busy researchers will come to appreciate the ability to quickly navigate through different sections and figures of the article, and I actually like the option of viewing a summary of the methods in lieu of an in-depth retelling (because that's exactly what we need as responsible scientists: to gloss over the methods section). One idea that I was disappointed to not see make it is inclusion of the reviewer's comments. Why are these things never released to the public? I understand that many of the comments may have been addressed by the author and thus are obsolete, but I'd really like to hear what their peers - presumably investigators with a similar background to the author, and who have thoroughly read the article - have to say about this research. It would be so easy to throw these up as attached .pdfs. Why aren't we doing this already? I definitely applaud Cell for taking strides toward the next generation of science articles, regardless if these early versions seem a bit flat. Now, if we could just get them to quit charging all of us an arm and a leg to view the data we've all funded with our tax dollars (OneSci!). could not find wordpress article with a title like [The Other Future of Scientific Publishing%] |
| The above content has been placed in a collapsed box for improved usability. |