Aufbau von und Diversität in Forschungsteams

Teil der Operation Frühjahrsputz 2014, in deren Verlauf angefangene und nie beendete Postings einfach so veröffentlicht werden.

Research: It’s more than just the science

Researchers outline not only why it’s important to pursue science collaboratively, but how to create and maintain science teams to get better research results.

Siehe auch:

Kendra S Cheruvelil, Patricia A Soranno, Kathleen C Weathers, Paul C Hanson, Simon J Goring, Christopher T Filstrup, and Emily K Read 2014. Creating and maintaining high-performing collaborative research teams: the importance of diversity and interpersonal skills. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 12: 31–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/130001

Collaborative research teams are a necessary and desirable component of most scientific endeavors. Effective collaborative teams exhibit important research outcomes, far beyond what could be accomplished by individuals working independently. These teams are made up of researchers who are committed to a common purpose, approach, and performance goals for which they hold themselves mutually accountable. We call such collaborations “high-performing collaborative research teams”. Here, we share lessons learned from our collective experience working with a wide range of collaborative teams and structure those lessons within a framework developed from literature in business, education, and a relatively new discipline, “science of team science”. We propose that high-performing collaborative research teams are created and maintained when team diversity (broadly defined) is effectively fostered and interpersonal skills are taught and practiced. Finally, we provide some strategies to foster team functioning and make recommendations for improving the collaborative culture in ecology.

Simon J Goring, Kathleen C Weathers, Walter K Dodds, Patricia A Soranno, Lynn C Sweet, Kendra S Cheruvelil, John S Kominoski, Janine Rüegg, Alexandra M Thorn, and Ryan M Utz 2014. Improving the culture of interdisciplinary collaboration in ecology by expanding measures of success. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 12: 39–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.1890/120370

Interdisciplinary collaboration is essential to understand ecological systems at scales critical to human decision making. Current reward structures are problematic for scientists engaged in interdisciplinary research, particularly early career researchers, because academic culture tends to value only some research outputs, such as primary-authored publications. Here, we present a framework for the costs and benefits of collaboration, with a focus on early career stages, and show how the implementation of novel measures of success can help defray the costs of collaboration. Success measures at team and individual levels include research outputs other than publications, including educational outcomes, dataset creation, outreach products (eg blogs or social media), and the application of scientific results to policy or management activities. Promotion and adoption of new measures of success will require concerted effort by both collaborators and their institutions. Expanded measures should better reflect and reward the important work of both disciplinary and interdisciplinary teams at all career stages, and help sustain and stimulate a collaborative culture within ecology.

PeerJ: Editorial Board

Im PeerJ-Blog wurden die ersten Mitglieder des ‘Editorial Board of Academic Editors’ und des ‘Academic Advisory Board’ bekannt gegeben.

Die Academic Editors betreuen die Publikationen, suchen Peer Reviewer, begleiten den Reviewprozess und treffen auch die Entscheidung, ob das betreffende Werk veröffentlicht wird.

Die Mitglieder des Advisory Board sind beratend tätig. Darunter befinden sich u.a. drei Nobelpreisträger (Bruce A. Beutler, Mario R. Capecchi und Harald zur Hausen).

Von (bisher) 16 Advisors sind 13 Männer und drei Frauen; zehn arbeiten in den USA, vier in Großbritannien und zwei in Deutschland. PeerJ beklagt auch die mangelnde Vielfalt:

Finally, we would like to acknowledge that we are aware that the diversity of our Editorial Board (in gender, race and age) could be improved upon. Clearly this is not unique to PeerJ and is, in fact, an issue in the wider Academic community. With that said, we do intend to improve upon this and ultimately to build as balanced of an Editorial Board as possible.

Bisher sind alle Mitglieder aus der Biologie oder der Medizin. Die Schar der Academic Editors ist schon etwas bunter.