Science topics: Scientific Communication
Scientific Communication - Science topic
Explore the latest questions and answers in Scientific Communication, and find Scientific Communication experts.
Questions related to Scientific Communication
I am passionate about differents subjects and conduct my own personal research for myself, just because I am curious. I wonder if this type of research would be considered as valid or ethical by the scientific community if it comes from a student who is still not holding a degree.
dear scientific community
I use high score for XRD analysis, but I need to get an idea about the best software
thank you in advance for your collaboration
We often struggle to select the “best” statistical modeling solution in ecological research. The ease of doing complex statistics like generalized linear mixed models (GLMM) in R with advanced computers revolutionizes our computing ability. Still, if I dig deep inside, sometimes I feel that following “all” preconditions for model selection is challenging. For example, it mainly happens when the target variable follows a nonlinear distribution in which current software and programming environments like R, Stata, SPSS, or SAS do not provide a perfect distribution function of the target variable. As a result, we often need an “approximate” distribution for the target variable in the modeling. It may further lead to the wrong decision on the selection of the link function, which can violate the assumption of linearity between transformed expected response and explanatory variables. Recently, we have faced a significant problem in studying the influence of multiple biotic and abiotic variables on the crown dieback of trees in urban and peri-urban forests (n = 2968 trees). The crown dieback followed a bimodal nonlinear distribution and each explanatory variable had different exponential probability distribution. As a result, traditional techniques, like GLMM, could not be used after having a lengthy discussion, literature review, and a lot of “playing” with R!
Some statisticians suggest using generalized additive modeling (GAM) in this situation. However, my colleagues and I will be new to GAM, so we must first spend some time understanding the theory and technicalities.
Therefore, my questions to the scientific community are:
1. When to use GAM?
2. What should be the preconditions of the data, if any?
3. Is there any good open access repository where we can learn more about using GAM, case studies, data, or freely available code?
Your support will be highly appreciated.
Kindly discuss your ideas and viewpoints on the origin of life and the RNA world hypothesis.
What are the contradictory views on why researchers are still unsure about the origin of life through RNA or such analogous molecular intermediate pre-cursors preceding its existence?
"The general notion of an “RNA World” is that, in the early development of life on the Earth, genetic continuity was assured by the replication of RNA and genetically encoded proteins were not involved as catalysts. There is now strong evidence indicating that an RNA World did indeed exist before DNA- and protein-based life. However, arguments regarding whether life on Earth began with RNA are more tenuous. It might be imagined that all of the components of RNA were available in some prebiotic pool and that these components assembled into replicating, evolving polynucleotides without the prior existence of any evolved macromolecules. A thorough consideration of this “RNA-first” view of the origin of life must reconcile concerns regarding the intractable mixtures that are obtained in experiments designed to simulate the chemistry of the primitive Earth. Perhaps these concerns will eventually be resolved, and recent experimental findings provide some reason for optimism. However, the problem of the origin of the RNA World is far from being solved, and it is fruitful to consider the alternative possibility that RNA was preceded by some other replicating, evolving molecule, just as DNA and proteins were preceded by RNA." - Robertson and Joyce
[This is as per the explanation by Michael P Robertson and Gerald F Joyce in the article: "The origins of the RNA world." published in the Cold Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol. 4, a003608 (2012).]
The scientific community must resolve this contradicting conjecture through rational discussion and debate backed by strong experimental evidence on what must be the pre-cursor molecule to the Origin of Life if it is not RNA!
Of course, the samples' Cts do not fall within the standard curve.
Just curious about the scientific community's impressions on this topic because we recently discussed it in our lab.
I am a student of biotechnology and an independent SARS CoV-2 researcher from India. For finding the academia research status and analysis of the integration of innovation with research, I have created a set of Multiple choice type questions about your experience as a researcher. The google form requires nothing but your honesty and openness for research. Feel free to ask questions and DM. The questions will assist in gauging the level of innovation and writing in academia.
If possible, please do forward this little form to your fellow researchers and other amazing scientists. I would be highly grateful.
I would like to pursue a career as a Biomedical/Scientific communicator and that requires me to get some recognised writing experience before I apply for such a position in any company. I am a current BSc Biomedical Science student graduating next year (summer 2023) but my previous background is science-business related and at a Master's level. I do a lot of academic writing which is outside of the course-related requirements, as I like doing some research and learning more from doing so. I share my findings with work colleagues and relatives only so far and am in process of starting my blog online. Advice is greatly appreciated!
Dear scientific community,
i am currently trying to make more sense of the voluntary disclosure theory and the associated models. As far as i understood, the theory relies on the principal agent theory and incorporates the benefits for a company to reveal and provide more information then required by the lawmakers and other authorities. My questions are:
- Can the additional corporate reports and blog posts on sales, strategic partnerships or other aspects of the enterprise evolvement be assigned to this theory? Or is this theory strictly for accounting/ market popolicymaking?
- Is there any good literature review or paper describing the state of research on this theory?
- Is there any known paper transferring this theory into the setting of any kind of ecosystems such as platform ecosystems?
- Is there any research call to instantiate this theory for specific entrepreneurial phenomena?
I would be thankful for any advice.
Thank you a lot in advance.
All about article retraction in academic publishing
Retraction is removing an article from the scientific record at any point after its publication. Retraction is distinct from withdrawal, which occurs prior to publication. Also, in contrast to withdrawal, retractions are visible to the scientific community, as the original papers are typically preserved as part of the publication record.
What methods can you recommend for determining the amount of carbon (C) when studying the chemical composition of BIOchar products from various wastes, which is one of the developing agricultural technologies in the world?
Dear Colleagues and Friends from RG,
What are the main problems in the development of science?
What are the key problems of research development?
What are the limitations for research work?
What do you think are the main problems with publishing research results?
Are these financial constraints or other problems?
How can these problems be solved?
What do you think about it?
What's your opinion on this topic?
I invite everyone to the discussion,
Thank you very much,
If one uses his/her publications as chapters of his/her thesis then will it account for self-plagiarism? And if the answer is "yes" then why Ph.D students are ask to publish their work before writing their thesis.
For the first time in the practice of a scientific communication, I offer to transform a published article in presentation with much more illustrations and additional comments (including voice comments) to facilitate understanding of the ideas contained in a scientific paper. What is your opinion about?
The presentation: ProtoPhysiology and the origin of life (multimedia article) https://youtu.be/fSZ2h5-IJgI - 38 min
The presentation is the audio-video form of my paper: Matveev, V.V. (2017) Comparison of fundamental physical properties of the model cells (protocells) and the living cells reveals the need in protophysiology, International Journal of Astrobiology, 16(1), pp.97–104. doi: 10.1017/S1473550415000476; URL: http://journals.cambridge.org/abstract_S1473550415000476
Greetings for the day !
My name is Shard and I completed B.S. Marine Engineering from Birla Institute of Technology, Pilani, Rajasthan, in 2006 and then M.S. Information Technology (Application Development) from Sunderland University, United Kingdom, in 2010. I also did my second master's degree i.e, MSc Mathematics from Shoolini University in 2021.
I'm a Research Scholar in Yogananda School of AI, Computer and Data Sciences and currently pursuing the Ph.D. degree in Mathematics at Shoolini University, Solan, Himachal Pradesh, India. Also, working as Assistant Professor in Shoolini University since 2014.
My areas of interest in research includes "Technology adoption using mathematical models and statistical tools like SPSS and also waste management energy".
I'm actively looking for research collaborations with national/international collaborators to be the contributor in the scientific community.
Dear scientific community, I need to delate in a data frame derivated from satellite products (Copernicus program) some missing values (NA). There are several techniques to do this, but which is the best from your experience? I would add that I am using R studio for my data analysis.
Hi scientific community,
I have defrosted (from -20ºC) one bottle of cRPMI (complete RPMI media) then I have prepared all the aliquots (10 mL) under sterile conditions and all of them have been preserved at -20ºC.
I have defrosted two aliquot one week after aliquoting and both are very pink (colour appearance). It could be by using an aliquots preservation at -20ºC after defrost?
All the opinions/experiences will be wellcome.
Thanks in advance.
Dear scientific community,
What is your view on adopting the Blockchain and Non-Fungible Token (NFT) technologies in Biological Sciences? and how it can transform the genome storage or genome bank (governments of many countries are planning)?
Also, how this technique can be adapted to the local level or, say at the hospital level, to store any particular portion of human DNA in the worst-case scenarios like accidents or any disasters.
Also is it possible to donate blood can be stored in the hospitals and it can be connected through the NFT and once the owner wants to sell it can (Anyhow the blood business is unethical but if it can be tokenised people might move more towards donating it, also the hospitals are making money out of taking blood freely)
Also, you can suggest on your behalf, what are the latest area (with respect to biological sciences) where these techniques can be applied.
Gray literature vs. scientific literature
-What are the advantages and disadvantages of gray literature compared to scientific literature.
-What are the repositories that you know about gray literature.
-What is the importance of gray literature for developing countries
Gray literature is "materials and research produced by organizations outside of the traditional commercial or academic publishing and distribution channels. Common gray literature publication types include reports (annual, research, technical, project, etc.), working papers, government documents, white papers and evaluations"
Scientific literature "comprises scholarly publications that report original empirical and theoretical work in the natural and social sciences. Within an academic field, scientific literature is often referred to as the literature. Academic publishing is the process of contributing the results of one's research into the literature, which often requires a peer-review process".
People are searching for certainty in Science and that’s the opposite of what leads to scientific breakthroughs. How to deal with this?
Scientific articles published in esteemed newspapers hold many informations that can be of great value which often includes biodiversity documentation, sporadic incidents, demographic data and many more that are seldom being cited and eventually consign to oblivion.
Do you think that these datas, only those that are relevant and authentic, should be cited and a proper archive and citation protocol should be constituted.
Kindly could you comment here that how this Research Gate Academic Platform was important, beneficial and helpful for you to build up your academic life up to now.
was this helpful for changing your,
1. Citation number
2. Research Interest
3. Build up more connections in the academic world
4. Your knowledge
5. Recommending your research activities
Thank you and Best regards.
What kind of scientific research dominate in the field of Scientific research in the era of Industry 4.0?
Please, provide your suggestions for a question, problem or research thesis in the issues: Scientific research in the era of Industry 4.0.
I invite you to the discussion
Recently, there is a new trend in the scientific community is to publish on Preprint servers, but the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature does not seem to fit such a trend (or is not designed for such a trend). If anyone is familiar with this issue, could you please let me how taxonomists have to handle this trend?
Differentiating Science from Pseudoscience is becoming a challenge at so many levels these days. How can we separate the two and acknowledge a grey area in between?
- the questionable behaviors and actions of some researchers and faculty members in the world of academia are gaining momentum. most of them in the forms of publications, (there might be more, but not In front of eyes)
- we clearly see that many journals, even top ones allow their EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS publish astonishing number of articles in where they edit.
- take it into consideration that journals are autonomous, outsiders can not ask the reasons
- but yet an alarming issue is that if we seek the names of those people in other journals that they don't serve (in the same field) , we almost fail to find any articles from them...
- how is it possible? what could be the value of such papers? how to trust them? what could be their aim(s)?
There is probably no other science portal that would offer all the same functions for researchers as the Research Gate portal.
Do you agree with me on the above matter?
In the context of the above issues, I am asking you the following question:
Does the Research Gate research portal offer the most information services for researchers that researchers and scientists need?
I invite you to the discussion
Thank you very much
Would someone share some posters used for scientific communication in the following discipline:
reuse of water
Water environmental etc.
Can I publish a book out of my already published papers?
I mean, by gathering and compiling some of my related papers into a book form, without modifying them!
1- Would be any problem with that?
2- can you suggest a good place for that!
Please, share your experience and knowledge in this topic for the whole scientific community benefit :)
Many thanks for everyone in advance,
Hello to all scientific community, I kindly request you very urgent help. Who kindly give me brief information how to differentiate the four stage of Tuta absoluta’s larvae (First instar, second instar, third instar and fourth instar)? How can we measure their lengthiness? As scientific procedure. Thank you for you cooperation
If you have a recommendation of someone and a summary of the importance of their contribution to science, I would like to learn of these great researchers.
I ask because I found out only recently that my very first research advisor, Dr. Bob Behringer, had passed. He was an amazing, personable figure in granular materials physics and his story is here: https://today.duke.edu/2018/07/physics-professor-robert-p-behringer-dies-69. I was recommending his research to a colleague who had a question about force chains and that's when we learned the news. He was only 69 but he had been a part of the Duke University community for nearly 50 years.
It was too late for my colleague to ask Dr. Behringer his question, but maybe this discussion will help raise awareness of some influential research from some great people. Maybe we can reach out to them with our questions before it is too late. And if it is too late because they have recently departed, their work will live on through those who know about their research.
Many scientists suggest that a good way to analyze the level of innovation in action, generate innovation in financial institutions, eg in banks, is conducting surveys among managers and department directors, departments in these institutions.
How should such surveys be carried out? What method of surveys is the most effective? Do online questionnaire forms are an effective instrument for carrying out surveys?
What other research techniques can be used to investigate the level of innovation in operation, generate innovation in financial institutions?
What is important in building international research teams?
On what foundations should long-term scientific cooperation between scientists be developed?
I have enjoyed listening to podcasts to learn about scientific communication, research methodology, peer review, open access, preprints, scientometrics, and other topics. I am interested if anyone has a podcast they like that discusses any of these topics. Here are some that I have listened to so far:
The Scholarly Kitchen Podcast
Science Communication Journal Club Podcast
I've spend the last decade trying to articulate solutions to Big Questions in science,
particularly explaining why Relativity and Quantum Mechanics aren't hostile towards each other but rather misunderstood concepts.
I feel I have a good understanding of how the universe formed and evolved, what Gravity is, and several other topics that can be explained easily and simple.
It drives me crazy not knowing how to reach out to the scientific community and share ideas.
Journals and call for papers require fancy formats and equations that I just don't have. I just want to publish short, simple, explainations for problems in casual English.
Where do I do this?
What are or what should be the goals of scientific communication? Does it really work? Is its efficiency actually significant when compared to the results of science education and scientific literacy?
Why do reviewers always ask for TEM images for synthesized materials. For example a material like ZnO or Fe3O4. If the material has been synthesized by a known procedure which already exists in literature and the structure & morphology being already confirmed by XRD and SEM. What is the need of TEM. In a country like India, TEM images are very difficult to obtain. Unless there are some structural defects in the material, which can only conformed by TEM, I dont think TEM is an absolute necessity for writing a good paper. The scientific community must judge the paper based on quality of work, importance of the research and impact of the research on society and scientific domain. I dont believe that just by including a TEM image any paper becomes good. Many reviewers may not even know how to analyze a TEM image.
Dear RG Academics who Travel,
This is an important topic because many academics relish going to desirable places for conferences. My husband and I used to travel to scientific conferences but so much red tape is involved he and I are glad to attend mostly on video conferencing technologies (yes, like Zoom and others whose names I don't know. No intent to favor one or the other technology company)
It is good to remember that social bragging rights do not equal additions to knowledge (i.e., what exotic place one has traveled lately.). Yet, local economies are helped by all kinds of conferences and the money that they bring.
There are costs and benefits either way, so please share your ideas about continuing in-person conferences when there is little we cannot do via remote presentation, informal conferring and virtual "hallway" chatter.
Look look forward to your ideas.
In Academia, we have gotten used to dialogs like this one:
A- Look, that person over there, is very important, a genius.
B- Yes? Why?
A- Published in Science and Nature.
B- Ohh! And what about?
A- Have no idea …. But man! Science and Nature!... what a genius.
B- Yes…. What a genius.
The repercussion of a scientific idea, probably now more than ever, will depend on what journal the idea is published. It seems there are no alternatives. If you have a good idea, it must be published in a top-ranked journal. Otherwise, your idea, and you, are not perceived as good as you may think or deserve. Consciously or unconsciously, journals are perceived as something more relevant than the ideas they publish. They are perceived as labels of quality.
The higher the ranking of the journal you publish in, the better your idea (and you) will be celebrated by colleagues. That (weird, unjust, and even unethical) paradigm has been dominating the international scientific community for many years in Academia. But what is more important?: the journal, the idea, or the authors? There seems to be a great deal of confusion around that.
For many (most?) colleagues and institutions, counting the number of papers in top-ranked journals still is the best way to identify the best scientists that should be perceived as role models within the scientific community. Some weigh also the leading role of the authors in their papers, some weigh the number of citations received. But the critical factor seems to be always in what top-journal you have published and how many times you did it.
However, there are disciplines that seem to be outside this loop. Often, colleagues from the Social Sciences tell me they do not worry about international top-ranked journals as much as we (in Biological Sciences) do. I´m sure it doesn’t work the same in different countries, as I see some researchers from the Soc Sc frequently publishing in top-ranked journals.
So, do journals really determine what ideas will prevail over others? Is this problem properly addressed by the international scientific community? What alternatives do scientists have? Join the discussion and share your ideas!
Dear scientific community,
What literature about political communication or social media, or political communication through social media can you advise me to read? Thank you very much.
Hope you all are doing well in this global pandemic. Can you please tell me the expected month in 2021, when JCR Year: 2020 Selected Editions: SCIE,SSCI Selected Quartiles: data will be get updated?
Thanking you in anticipation.
Hello scientific community
Do you noting the following:
[I note that when a new algorithms has been proposed, most of the researchers walk quickly to improve it and apply for solving the same and other problems. I ask now, so why the original algorithm if it suffer from weakness, why the need for a new algorithm if there are an existing one that solved the same problems, I understand if the new algorithm solved the unsolved problem so welcome, else why?]
Therefore, I ask, is the scientific community need a novel metaheuristic algorithms (MHs) rather than the existing.
I think, we need to organized the existing metaheuristic algorithms and mentioned the pros and cons for each one, the solved problems by each one.
The repeated algorithms must be disappear and the complex also.
The dependent algorithms must be disappeared.
We need to benchmark the MHs similar as the benchmark test suite.
Also, we need to determine the unsolved problems and if you would like to propose a novel algorithm so try to solve the unsolved problem else stop please.
Thanks and I wait for the reputable discussion
Recently, citizen science projects take a big part of the scientific community all around the World. Thus, non-scientists can meaningfully contribute to scientific research. Is it a good thing?
For relevant background to this question, readers are encouraged to see my RG project (and Project Log) titled "Healthy Children". A paradigm-shift is urgently needed. Something about the current pandemic is different from prior "outbreaks". What is different about this one? We really do need some answers to this question, ASAP. The status quo is unsustainable. The "new normal" is intolerable. An unfettered, uncensored discussion by the scientific community is urtgently called for.
Indices like NDVI, NDBI are widely adopted by the scientific community to identify distinct land cover types. Prominently, Otsu's threshold estimation is adopted. But how do we select the lower and upper limits of the threshold for a given index (manually) and are there other better techniques that can be adopted?
In my opinion, scientific research is the most important source of emerging innovations, new technological solutions and improvements in production processes that contribute to civilization development and technological progress, and also constitute an important source of added value of production processes in the economies of developed countries in knowledge-based economies. In the future, research should play a particularly important role in knowledge-based economies. For example, research should generate innovative ecological and new renewable energy solutions in the future to reduce adverse climate change resulting from a progressive global warming process.
In view of the above, I would like to ask you: Can research be considered as the most important factor generating technological value added in knowledge-based economies?
Please, answer, comments. I invite you to the discussion.
I would greatly appreciate your comments about our abstract and poster #2775 presented at 52 Lunar and Planetary Science Conference held in Houston, in March 15-19 this year.
We presented the first results of our examinations of the unusual achondrite-like find, most likely the meteorite from early watery Mars. We found an unusual 15 mm large fossil in it that according to our preliminary micro-Raman spectroscopy examinations contains carbon in nano-diamond particles characteristic for meteorites exposed to huge impact shocks. This and our other data so far are - in our understanding so unusual - that they should deserve more interest from scientific community. In fact, Is it possible that this find contains the long searched for traces of extraterrestrial early life?
Would anybody be interested in helping us to answer this question?
Jerzy (George) Sawicki
Victoria, BC, Canada
Given the recent issues by the Astrazeneca vaccine, how can the scientific community ensure that there is transparency in the test process? What sort of sampling should be done and how can mobile technologies and artificial intelligence play a part?
Einstein's theory of relativity is now accepted by the scientific community. In 2020, Penrose was awarded one half of the Nobel Prize in Physics for the discovery that black hole formation is a robust prediction of the general theory of relativity.
(Submitted to Science Magazine) Seven new Features of Black Holes impart a great Risk on the LHC
Otto E. Rossler
Division of Theoretical Chemistry, University of Tubingen, Morgenstelle 8, 72076 Tubingen, F.R.G.
The most recent chapter in the fascinating story of black holes is offered. Johnny Wheeler’s witty profundity in the footsteps of his mentor Einstein still shines through. The “no-hair theorem“ is clipped from 3 to 2 surviving “hairs“ (mass and angular momentum remain, charge goes). And an unbelievable oversight of the scientific community maintained for 7 decades is exposed: an infinite slow-down of infalling astronaut clocks so that horizons become effectively unreachable. The other five new features are: nonevaporation; threshold reduction; exclusive risk to earth; quantum protection of neutron stars; and exponential growth inside matter. An attempt at falsifying this 7-link chain in at least one element is encouraged as a precondition for the Large Hadron Collider’s planned second start.
(April 17, 2009, revised May 16, 2009)
Full text: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download;jsessionid=8EC981EED45CC0801F026F3F4F689164?doi=10.1.1.514.1978&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Oct. 12, 2019
I am looking for advice concerning a (supposedly) known practical issue : article overloads. While doing my PhD I was convinced that everything who went through publication was worth reading and understanding. My opinion as evolved since then for very practical consideration : lack of time to read biblio and absolute necessity to "pre-screen" something before deciding if it's worth reading or not.
Concerning scientific paper, the prescreening can be tricky. Since the format is very standardized as well as the wording (nothings sounds more like a paper than a paper), I often end up reading half a dozen page on a paper, annotates parts, spend time... before deciding I shouldn't spend time on it.
Do you have some "tricks" to share in order to lower that waste of time? While these "tricks" might be completely non-scientific of course, I still would enjoy them
Nature Letters has historically been a "safety valve" for scientific publication in that it provided a way for a Nature Editor to allow the publication of short and possibly controversial pieces that might potentially be important, but that would find it difficult or impossible to pass normal peer-review.
In October 2019 Nature announced that the suspension of the Letters section was now a permanent feature of the journal's new redesign.
- " ... From now on, all our research content will also be published in the 'Article' format; the shorter, 'Letter' format has been retired. "
This is, obviously, the end of an era. Was the format redundant? Did the science community not produce enough interesting but controversial material to keep it going? Are scientists today more conservative than they used to be and less willing to take risks with their reputations? Does this leave the scientific community without a respected "official" channel for communicating controversial ideas and results?
Call for collaboration!
Recently we uploaded the whole genome sequences of four potential wheat blast biocontrol bacteria in the Open Wheat Blast Website (please see at http://s620715531.websitehome.co.uk/owb/?page_id=828)
We expect participation global scientific community in elucidating the underlying molecular mechanisms of the plant probiotics to control wheat blast. Our ultimate goal is to develop and deploy environmentally safe biocontrol agent against fearsome wheat blast in Bangladesh and beyond.
Please share this message with the relevant researchers in your network.
So many approaches being used by researcher for the advancement of nutritional profiling in pulse crop, however, transgenic approach as it known for sustainable basis for alleviating malnutrition from the world not yet been approved and not yet to develop transgenic crops in pulse under biofortification. Lets share your views here for the benefiting of scientific community.
Dear Colleagues, I hope someone can provide some answer :
I recently had notified by Research Gate that ELSEVIER editorial did notified them that they needed to take one Scientific Article I had on my Research Items down, due to violation of ELSEVIER's Copyright.
This article was published on the Journal "Nano Energy", of ELSEVIER's, and I appear as the first autor.
Is there a way to keep one of this articles on your RG Items without infringing the Copyrights of ELSEVIER ?
Can I try to upload it again? This time under the "Private" mode (not open sharing, but via request)
Or it's better to leave the matter alone? Meaning that all ELSEVIER's editorial articles cannot be shared freely on Research Gate ?
Thank You! Best Regards !
Yes, in my country, the Scopus indexing base is considered one of the most important. The Scopus database is recognized as the main scientific database for the indexation of scientific publications characterized by high citation. However, on a global scale, the bases of indexing scientific publications recognized in various countries by various centers and scientific institutions are at least a dozen or so. However, these various indexing bases are not usually fully comparable, they are functionally differentiated and thanks to that they are only partially substitutable, but more often they are complementary. The question of complementarity should be developed. Then it will serve the development of scientific research and international cooperation of scientific communities.
In view of the above, I am asking you with the following question: Is the Scopus database recognized in your country as the main database for the indexation of scientific publications?
And if not the Scopus database, which other database of publications and scientific journals is considered the most important in your country?
Do you agree with me on the above matter?
What do you think about this topic?
I invite you to discussion and scientific cooperation.
Thank you very much.
I am interested in publishing a recent scientific study (brief report) that may have some political ramifications. I am searching for a non-peer reviewed journal or publication platform. This study will benefit the general public as much as the scientific community.