Are there any examples of behaviors that are labeled as "non-adaptive?" If so, what are possible causes of this kind of behavior?

I am trying to analyze hierarchical data of Chilean flamingos kept in captivity. I would like to calculate Landau's linearity index. Nonetheless, I am stuck with the R Script.

I am trying to import my data to R, but I do not understand how to do it. I found a script example where a file called "behaviour_data.csv" is used. I tried to retrieve these data from the package 'socialh' but could not; it seems this data is unavailable from the package. Therefore, it would be really helpful if someone could guide me with this problem.

Just received a major revision decision on a article submitted to an international journal with a high impact factor. The reviews are contradictory, one applauds our efforts and other is very critical. I am in a dilemma now, how do I balance the two reviewers and at the same time hold my ground of argument to quench my thirst for a novel contribution?

Dear Colleagues,

There are several signs of distortion in the scientific publication practice. Simultaneously with the commercialization of scientific activity (resulting in predatory and semi-predatory journals and the boom of conferences which lead to nowhere) and with the pressure to publish (without any pressure to read and understand other's work) the citation practice also becomes distorted. This is further aggravated by a scientific evaluation system based on citations, which pushes journal editors to select papers not on their scientific merit but on their expected impact (I have heard that there are even software applications which help estimating the expected impact). All these "developments" lead to the emergence of "citation circles", self-citations, meaningless reviews and several other phenomena increasing the publication "noise" and reducing the value of publications. A part of the problem is that several citations are not to the point. Referees are not paid for their efforts (which is understandable) and only few of them have time enough to check the relevance of the citations (especially if there are many of them). But, even if the citation is relevant, it is very rare that the author seriously reads and discusses the cited paper and compares his/her results with other publications - unless if the publication is devoted to prove or disprove a specific "competitor" publication. I would be glad to hear the opinion and experience of others on this topic.

I would understand a no-payment-for-review policy for journals that don't charge APC and avail publications through open access.

But journals that sell publications and/or charge APCs should be paying experts who review the works before publication. NO?

Dear All,

Can anyone recommend me an article which uses the thematic analysis of the deductive/theoretical type? Or more broadly I am looking for an article based on qualitative methods, in which the researched problem is analyzed from a perspective of a theory.

regards,

tymoteusz

Imaging an assessment scale with multiple cut-off scores, mild, moderate, severe symptomology, and it is used as the gold standard versus a newly developed scale. How do you run the ROC/AUC analysis ? considering also that since this is the first study with the new scale, you may be limited in sample size.