Further Reading
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 30 November 2018
Summary
A summary is not available for this content. As you have access to this content, full HTML content is provided on this page. A PDF of this content is also available in through the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Leading your Research Team in Science , pp. 205 - 214Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2018
- Creative Commons
This content is Open Access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/cclicenses/
References
Primary Sources
Cain, S (2012). Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World that Can’t Stop Talking. New York, NY: Crown Publishing Group.Google Scholar
Covey, SR (1989). The Seven Habits of Highly Effective People. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
Covey, SR (2004). The 8th Habit: From Effectiveness to Greatness. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
Eve, MP (2014). Open Access and the Humanities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316161012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, R, Ury, WL, Patton, B (1991). Getting to YES: Negotiating an Agreement without Giving In (2nd edn). New York, NY: Penguin Group.Google Scholar
Heath, C, Heath, D (2007). Made to Stick: Why Some Ideas Survive and Others Die. New York, NY: Random House.Google Scholar
Jansen, RC (2011). Developing a Talent for Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667053.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jansen, RC (2013). Funding Your Career in Science: From Research Idea to Personal Grant. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139626965.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kolb, DA (1983). Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Upper Saddle River, NJ: FT Press.Google Scholar
Maister, DH, Green, CH, Galford, RM (2000). The Trusted Advisor. New York, NY: Free Press, Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
Suber, P (2012). Open Access. (MIT Press Essential Knowledge Series). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Available at http://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/overview.htm.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ury, WL (2007). Getting Past NO: Negotiating with Difficult People (2nd edn). New York, NY: Penguin Group.Google Scholar
West, MA (2012). Effective Teamwork: Practical Lessons from Organizational Research (3rd edn). Leicester: BPS Blackwell.Google Scholar
Secondary Sources
McKiernan, EC (2017). Imagining the “open” university: Sharing scholarship to improve research and education. PLoS Biol 15(10):e1002614. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002614.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moher, D, Naudet, F, Cristea, IA, et al. (2018). Assessing scientists for hiring, promotion, and tenure. PLoS Biol 16(3):e2004089. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.2004089.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bik, HM, Dove, ADM, Goldstein, MC, et al. (2015). Ten simple rules for effective online outreach. PLoS Comput Biol 11(4):e1003906. https://doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003906.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hart, EM, Barmby, P, LeBauer, D, et al. (2016). Ten simple rules for digital data storage. PLoS Comput Biol 12(10):e1005097. https://doi:10.1371/journal.pcbip.1005097.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Martin, JL (2014). Ten simple rules to achieve conference speaker gender balance. PLoS Comput Biol 10(11):e1003903. https://doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003903.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Michener, WK (2015). Ten simple rules for creating a good data management plan. PLoS Comput Biol 11(10):e1004525. https://doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004525.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shaw, DM, Erren, TC (2015). Ten simple rules for protecting research integrity. PLoS Comput Biol 11(10):e1004388. https://doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1004388.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bosch, G (2018). Train PhD students to be thinkers not just specialists. Nature 554:277. https://doi:10.1038/d41586-018–01853-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, FS, Tabak, LA (2014). Policy: NIH plans to enhance reproducibility. Nature 505:612–13. https://doi:10.1038/505612a.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Editorial (2018). A code of ethics to get scientists talking. Nature 555:5. https://doi:10.1038/d41586-018–02516-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Editorial (2018). Checklists work to improve science. Nature 556:273–74. https://doi:10.1038/d41586-018–04590-7.Google Scholar
Flier, F (2017). Faculty promotion must assess reproducibility. Nature 549:133. https://doi:10.1038/549133a.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Merton, DK (1968). The Matthew effect in science. Science 159(3810):56–63. https://doi:10.1126/science.159.3810.56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Open Science Collaboration (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science 349(6251). https://doi:10.1126/science.aac4716.Google Scholar
Powell, K (2015). Interviews: Big ideas for better science. Nature 528: 589–90. https://doi:10.1038/nj7583-589a.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Price, M (2018). Proposal to rescue postdocs from limbo draws darts. Science 360(6386):253. https://doi:10.1126/science.360.6386.253.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Special issue (2015). Challenges in irreproducible research. Nature (growing online list of articles). www.nature.com/news/reproducibility-1.17552.Google Scholar
Special issue (2015). Interdisciplinarity. Nature. www.nature.com/news/interdisciplinarity-1.18295Google Scholar
Stephan, P, Veugeler, R, Wang, J (2017). Reviewers are blinkered by bibliometrics. Nature 544: 411–12. https://doi:10.1038/544411a.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sundin, J, Jutfelt, F (2018). Keeping science honest. Science 359(6383):1443. https://doi:10.1126/science.aat3473.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Urry, M (2015). Science and gender: Scientists must work harder on equality. Nature 528:471–73. https://doi:10.1038/528471a.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Woolston, C (2015). Conference tweeting rule frustrates ecologists: Complaints ensued when attendees at an ecology meeting were asked to get permission before live-tweeting. Nature 524:391. https://doi:10.1038/524391f.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woolston, C (2018). Science PhDs lead to enjoyable jobs. Nature 555:277. https://doi:10.1038/d41586-018–02696-6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bol, Th, De Vaan, M, Van De Rijt, A (2018). The Matthew effect in science funding. PNAS, published ahead of print April 23. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1719557115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eve, MP, Inglis, K, Prosser, D, Speicher, L, Stone, G (2017). Cost estimates of an open access mandate for monographs in the UK’s third Research Excellence Framework. Insights 30(3):89–102. https://doi:10.1629/uksg.392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaucher, D, Friesen, J, Kay, AC (2011). Evidence that gendered wording in job advertisements exists and sustains gender inequality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 101(1): 109–28.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Munafo, MR, Nosek, BA, Bishop, DVM, et al. (2017). A manifesto for reproducible science. Nature Human Behavior 1. https://doi:10.1038/s41562-016–0021.Google ScholarPubMed
Prins, P, De Ligt, J, Tarasov, A, et al. (2015). Toward effective software solutions for big biology. Nature Biotechnology 33:686–87. https://doi:10.1038/nbt.3240.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Redeker, M, De Vries, RE, Rouckhout, D, Vermeren, P, De Fruyt, F (2014). Integrating leadership: The leadership circumplex. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 23:435–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scheffer, M (2014). The forgotten half of scientific thinking. PNAS 111:6119. https://doi:10.1073/pnas.1404649111.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Trelles, O, Prins, P, Snir, M, Jansen, RC (2011). Big data, but are we ready? Nature Reviews Genetics 12(3):224. https://doi:10.1038/nrg2857-c1.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tuckman, BW (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin 63(6):384–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0022100.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wilkinson, MD, Dumontier, M, Aalbersberg, IJ, et al. (2016). The FAIR guiding principles for scientific data management and stewardship. Scientific Data 3:160018. https://doi:10.1038/sdata.2016.18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Akst, J (2015). #IceBucketChallenge payoff: A year after the viral ALS awareness campaign raised millions, researchers say they have something to show for the influx of funds. The Scientist, August 20.Google Scholar
Grant, B (2014). The working vacation: Sabbaticals are one of the perks of the academic life. They may seem daunting to implement, but the time away could prove invaluable to your career. The Scientist, April 1.Google Scholar
Grens, K (2015). Self-correction: What to do when you realize your publication is fatally flawed. The Scientist, December 1.Google Scholar
Lee, DN (2014). Scientists draw on personal experience to guide their curiosity. Scientific American, October 1.Google Scholar
Pritsker, M (2013). Opinion: Video saved the scientific publication. How visual materials and methods can save scientists time and money. The Scientist, November 11.Google Scholar
Thomas, JR (2015). Scientific misconduct: Red flags. Warning signs that scandal might be brewing in your lab. The Scientist, December 1.Google Scholar
Yandell, K (2014). Keeping up with IP. It’s never too early to start thinking about intellectual property rights — even for biologists doing basic research. The Scientist, September 1.Google Scholar
Vence, T (2015). Know your PIO. Scientists and public information officers share several common goals. Here’s how to collaborate effectively. The Scientist, January 1.Google Scholar
Albers, E (2016). There is no open science without the use of open standards and free software. June 2. http://blog.3rik.cc/2016/06/there-is-no-open-science-without-the-use-of-open-standards-and-free-software/.Google Scholar
Anonymous academic (2015). Academics, you need to be managed. It’s time to accept that. August 21. www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/2015/aug/21/academics-you-need-to-be-managed-its-time-to-accept-that.Google Scholar
Anonymous academic (2016). Academia is now incompatible with family life, thanks to casual contracts. December 2. www.theguardian.com/higher-education-network/2016/dec/02/short-term-contracts-university-academia-family.Google Scholar
Bodewits, K, Gramlich, F, Giltner, D (2018). The autopilot postdoc. Falling into a postdoc after a PhD is a waste of excellent credentials. March 26. http://blogs.nature.com/naturejobs/2018/03/26/the-autopilot-postdoc/.Google Scholar
Cameron, D (2013). Solving big-data bottleneck. Scientists team with business innovators to tackle research hurdles. February 7. https://hms.harvard.edu/news/solving-big-data-bottleneck-2–7-13.Google Scholar
Donald, A (2016). Writing reference letters. Do you want to be described as hard working? December 2. www.timeshighereducation.com/blog/gendered-adjectives-do-you-want-be-described-hard-working.Google Scholar
Dunleavy, P (2015). How to write a blogpost from your journal article. May 17. https://medium.com/advice-and-help-in-authoring-a-phd-or-non-fiction/how-to-write-a-blogpost-from-your-journal-article-6511a3837caa#.osq5tvb8r.Google Scholar
Elson, M (2016). Retaining copyright for figures in academic publications to allow easy citation and reuse. November 11. https://medium.com/@malte.elson/retaining-copyright-for-figures-in-academic-publications-to-allow-easy-citation-and-reuse-77c6e2b511fe#.o0odm3ek5.Google Scholar
Macfarlane, B (2014). No place for introverts in the academy? In today’s brave new world of university learning, students aren’t allowed to be shy. September 25. www.timeshighereducation.com/features/no-place-for-introverts-in-the-academy/2015836.article and www.timeshighereducation.com/features/the-story-of-a-shy-academic.Google Scholar
Martin, J (2016). Conference gender speaker balance. Show me the policy (part 2). December 9. https://cubistcrystal.wordpress.com/2016/12/09/show-me-the-policy-part-2/.Google Scholar
Masuzzo, P, Martens, L (2017). Do you speak open science: Resources and tips to learn the language. January 3. Peer J Preprints 5:e2689v1. https://doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.2689v1.Google Scholar
Miedema, F (2018). Setting the agenda: “Who are we answering to?” BMJ Blogs, January 24. http://blogs.bmj.com/openscience/2018/01/24/setting-the-agenda-who-are-we-answering-to/.Google Scholar
Retraction Watch (2017). “I placed too much faith in underpowered studies” Nobel Prize winner admits mistakes. February 20. http://retractionwatch.com/2017/02/20/placed-much-faith-underpowered-studies-nobel-prize-winner-admits-mistakes/.Google Scholar
Shmerling, RH (2016). Medical news a case for skepticism. April 22. www.health.harvard.edu/blog/medical-news-a-case-for-skepticism-201604229481.Google Scholar
Valatine, HA (2016). How to fix the many hurdles that stand in female scientists’ way. Women face discrimination of many kinds. We need a culture change. December 1. www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-to-fix-the-many-hurdles-that-stand-in-female-scientists-rsquo-way/.Google Scholar
10 Principles of citizen science, a collection of citizen science guidelines and publications: ecsa.citizen-science.net/documents.Google Scholar
Citizen science projects: www.socientize.eu (see also white paper).Google Scholar
Collective Labour Agreement Dutch Universities: www.labouragreementuniversities.nl (see also the full text of the agreement).Google Scholar
Crowdfunding platform to support open access: www.knowledgeunlatched.org/.Google Scholar
DORA (Declaration on Research Assessment): https://sfdora.org/.Google Scholar
European Open Science Cloud: http://ec.europa.eu/research/openscience/eosc.Google Scholar
How open is it? A guide for evaluating the openness of journals, SPARC, the Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition: https://sparcopen.org/our-work/howopenisit/.Google Scholar
Knowledge exchange and impact: https://info.lse.ac.uk/staff/services/knowledge-exchange-and-impact/KEI-Toolkit.Google Scholar
Aalbersberg, IJ, et al. (2018, February 15). Making Science Transparent by Default; Introducing the TOP Statement. http://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/SM78T.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Working Group of the Steering Group of Human Resources Management in the European Research Area (2015). Open, Transparent and Merit-Based Recruitment of Researchers: Checklist and Report: https://cdn5.euraxess.org/sites/default/files/policy_library/otm-r-checklist.pdf and https://cdn1.euraxess.org/sites/default/files/policy_library/otm-r-finaldoc0.pdf.Google Scholar
Peer Reviewers’ Openness Initiative: https://opennessinitiative.org/.Google Scholar
Public Engagement: www.publicengagement.ac.uk.Google Scholar
You have
Access
Open access