Is it fair that one doesn't get money for publications in journals

[damabo]

I have raised this question, and got one interesting answer: 'should obama get money for every newspaper story about him?'
However, I don't think that's a good analogy. I would personally think writing a book and getting money for it is more analogous to having a paper that you fully wrote on your own being published is a better analogy. the publisher is always somebody else, so why doesn't one get money for a publication with scientific articles vs a book?
Perhaps these journals require much work for peer-review and thus demand more money?

 

[Number Nine]

Researchers aren't paid for their papers for a variety of reasons, the three most important being...

1) That was never the purpose of the literature to begin with
2) Journals generally don't have any money with which to pay them
3) Academics are already paid to produce and publish original research, so why would they need to be paid twice?

 

[damabo]

Researchers aren't paid for their papers for a variety of reasons, the three most important being...

1) That was never the purpose of the literature to begin with
2) Journals generally don't have any money with which to pay them
3) Academics are already paid to produce and publish original research, so why would they need to be paid twice?

how about independent researchers? how do they make their money?

 

[Pythagorean]

Researchers are paid to make the papers in the first place...

 

[Ygggdrasil]

how about independent researchers? how do they make their money?

The same way other researchers make money: you propose a set of experiments to a funding agency, and if the funding agency thinks your ideas are worth pursuing, they will pay you to do those experiments and publish the results.

 

[damabo]

The same way other researchers make money: you propose a set of experiments to a funding agency, and if the funding agency thinks your ideas are worth pursuing, they will pay you to do those experiments and publish the results.

do you perhaps know some of these agencies?

 

[Pythagorean]

NSF and NIH are the big ones.

 

[Chi Meson]

Even though it is Wikipedia, this seems to have a good summary of scientific research funding. A lot of your questions should be answered
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Funding_of_science

 

[damabo]

NSF and NIH are the big ones.

National Science Foundation and National institution of health seem to be about medicine mainly? I am particularly interested in physics, philosophy or math, and perhaps inventorship.

 

[damabo]

Even though it is Wikipedia, this seems to have a good summary of scientific research funding. A lot of your questions should be answered

thanks. I assume I should look to private funded. It seems that it is mainly driven by profit, and not for knowledge for the sake of knowledge. So one would have to become an inventor to be in that kind of business.

 

[damabo]

"A 2005 study in the journal Nature[10] surveyed 3247 US researchers who were all publicly funded (by the National Institutes of Health). Out of the scientists questioned, 15.5% admitted to altering design, methodology or results of their studies due to pressure of an external funding source. In a contemporary study published in the New England Journal of Medicine[citation needed], a similar proportion of the 107 medical research institutions questioned were willing to allow pharmaceutical companies sponsoring research to alter manuscripts according to their interests before they were submitted for publication."

as I suspected a long time ago, especially with pharmaceutical industry...

 

[Evo]

What are your credentials? What is your academic background? Are you still in high school? All this makes a BIG difference in answering you since you seem to have no idea..

 

[damabo]

gonna go to bed now. see ya

 

[damabo]

What are your credentials? What is your academic background? Are you still in high school? All this makes a BIG difference in answering you since you seem to have no idea..

I'm graduating bachelor psychology, but I'm planning to do bachelor in physics, and even aspire for a PhD all the way. But who knows what happens along the road, I'm not the easiest fellow :)

 

[damabo]

you posted the guidelines, did I do something wrong?

 

[Evo]

you posted the guidelines, did I do something wrong?

In your other thread, oh yeah, but you know that. And you started this thread from your locked thread without permission.

 

[Pythagorean]

National Science Foundation and National institution of health seem to be about medicine mainly? I am particularly interested in physics, philosophy or math, and perhaps inventorship.

only NIH (but there are a lot of applications to medical from physics and engineering)

NSF is more general, with program areas like:
physics
chemistry
math
social
behavioral
biological
engineering
education
computer science

edit: oh yeah, I should mention I'm in the US.

 

[Chi Meson]

thanks. I assume I should look to private funded. It seems that it is mainly driven by profit, and not for knowledge for the sake of knowledge. So one would have to become an inventor to be in that kind of business.

Only a few people, such as Dean Kamen, get to have the title of "inventor." So yes, you will need to invent something, not just have an idea. You need to have a working product that people will want to buy.

Many more people are "researchers" who are checking out whether or not ideas are valid, or perhaps they are just looking through "piles of stuff" (like some pharmaceutical chemists) hoping to almost accidentally find something useful.

Then there's "theoretical" research which, despite the general misconception of the word "theory," requires a lot of actual hard data to either spur your ideas, or back up your results.

 

[R.P.F.]

Because the purpose of publishing is not to make money. Maybe you would understand better if you were actually doing physics. Hardly anyone doing real science ever thinks about the idea of getting paid for publishing a paper.

 

[turbo]

how about independent researchers? how do they make their money?

They don't. My collaborators and I put in over over two years researching and publishing a paper on apparently-interacting galaxies. We didn't have to pay to get published (Astronomy and Astrophysics - a highly respected Springer journal), but we never made a penny. I don't know how you got the opinion that the writers of scientific papers get paid for their work.

 

[damabo]

They don't. My collaborators and I put in over over two years researching and publishing a paper on apparently-interacting galaxies. We didn't have to pay to get published (Astronomy and Astrophysics - a highly respected Springer journal), but we never made a penny. I don't know how you got the opinion that the writers of scientific papers get paid for their work.

well, it seemed analogous to writing a book, which is also hard individual work. but for an academic job, of course, it seems unnecessary to pay the writer twice.

 

[damabo]

Because the purpose of publishing is not to make money. Maybe you would understand better if you were actually doing physics. Hardly anyone doing real science ever thinks about the idea of getting paid for publishing a paper.

well, if you have a high income or expect to get a high income that is true. If you don't I bet you would want to get paid for a paper you've worked hard on.

 

[damabo]

only NIH (but there are a lot of applications to medical from physics and engineering)

NSF is more general, with program areas like:
physics
chemistry
math
social
behavioral
biological
engineering
education
computer science

edit: oh yeah, I should mention I'm in the US.

well, I can always move to US of course :p. but I suspect things like theoretical physics or math can be done at a distance?

 

[turbo]

well, it seemed analogous to writing a book, which is also hard individual work. but for an academic job, of course, it seems unnecessary to pay the writer twice.

What you "Hope" for doesn't matter. My collaborators and I were not affiliated with any with universities and we had no grant-money. We did the work for free and published it. Two years of work with no monetary compensation. If you can persuade a university to steer some grant-money your way, that's fine, but you will not make money publishing papers in scientific journals. At least we didn't have to pay "per-page" costs in that journal. Some journals are brutal in that regard.

 

[Chi Meson]

well, I can always move to US of course :p. but I suspect things like theoretical physics or math can be done at a distance?

The only people who are paid to be a "theoretical physicist" are a select few among those who already have a PhD in Physics.

We are lucky to have a few of those few among few right here on PF.

 

[Evo]

well, if you have a high income or expect to get a high income that is true. If you don't I bet you would want to get paid for a paper you've worked hard on.

Obviously the OP has no intent of learning, he keeps spouting the same thing over and over.