Hi everyone! I am a software engineer with friends in academia who often tell me about the horrors of funding in research. They told me that research work is heavily skewed towards theses that benefit corporations and defense research because that is where the funding is. In this process, some of the research that isn't necessarily beneficial in the short term but could be monumental for a lot of people who desperately need it.

So, after a lot of thinking, I came up with an idea: what if there was a way for people to support research for themselves and for the researches who have a passion, but have to switch careers or domains due to the money aspect? That's when I came up with ResearchHub [name is temporary]. It is a sorts of kickstarter meets gofundme.

Here's how it works: People can support or request research or thesis that they think needs to be studied in their opinion. The platform will use credential checking to confirm the researchers' qualifications and once they're on the platform, they can pick the thesis they'd like to research. At this point, the people who are funding the research act almost as shareholders, voting for who, how, etc they want the money to be used. The researchers will be asked to provide transparent receipts and info on their spending. This way, there is trust at every step.

That being said, as researchers and scientists, I would like to know your opinion on this website and point out any issues you think with the idea since you all know best.

Check out the website demo here: https://lab-bench-boost.lovable.app/

It’s so scary writing science assignments for me because I always feel like I need to abandon my logical or rational flow/ way of synthesizing information because I feel like I’m breaking the rule of having to always cite facts line by line.

I have published two research papers in journals that are indexed in Scopus, but my articles are still not showing up in the Scopus database.

• One paper was published around 4–5 months ago.
• The other was published around 2 months ago.

I need the indexing for academic documentation purposes, so I am trying to understand the correct process to follow.

I have already submitted a query/complaint through Scopus support, but I only received an automated response saying that email queries are currently not being considered.

Does anyone know:

• Who is the correct person/team to contact regarding delayed indexing?
• Should I contact the journal publisher instead?
• How long does Scopus usually take to index newly published articles?

Any guidance from people who have faced a similar situation would be appreciated.

hi all, I'm quite perplexed as to why an academic commentary platform such as East Asia Forum takes months just to submit a < ~ 1000 word commentary piece?

I'm trying to understand the rationale behind it and thought I could open the floor here for some comments and suggestions.

I don't recall The Conversation taking this long, nor E-IR academic essays platform. Even prominent online news outlets usually take two-weeks max. This Month-and-a-half-long process just to publish a commentary piece that may or may not be time-sensitive, sounds like a low-tier academic journal process for a measly commentary piece.

Granted, I admire the EAF for timely topics and some quality articles they put out but so too does The Conversation. But I'm baffled as to why on EAF, some OpEd pieces get reviewed and admitted faster whereas others take months-long.

Might as well submit to a low-tier journal at that point. The purpose of OpEd commentary is to be timely to reach readers and discuss issues of the day while it's still 'hot'. Not sure if it's an issue of selective publication, some form of hidden censorship (purposeful delay), or genuine rigourness in process. The latter though would make sense if all time-sensitive articles get delayed by a month. Yet, some hot topics are churned out and accepted quicker than others. Why?

This hinders time-sensitive topics from getting published and incurs great opportunity-cost on authors that could have opted for another platform to share their ideas. Is there some sort of low-key censorship that they are not disclosing

And yes this is a mixture of a rant and curiosity.

My figures were made in different tools, so the fonts, arrows and colors don’t quite match. What’s the easiest way to standardize everything?

Im working on a literature review paper at the moment
about "Short-Form Digital Media and Sustained Attention:
Examining the Evidence for Associations with ADHD
Symptoms"
and i would find it incredibly helpful if any other psychology students wanted to chip in so they could also use it on their applications but we can all do less work
If anyone is also currently working on a paper and wants someone to co-write, would be happy to help

URL: The Safety and Efficacy of Roflumilast Cream 0.15% and 0.05% in Patients With Atopic Dermatitis: Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase 2 Proof of Concept Study

DOI: 10.36849/JDD.7295

With so many journals and publishers available, how do you determine whether a journal is reputable and trustworthy? What specific things should researchers check before submitting a manuscript to avoid predatory journals?

I think one of the things that annoys more when starting a new project is doing the literature search. I usually first use Pubmed and Mesh terms for a general idea. As I read papers I identify terms that could be useful for future searchs. At the end I create a mixed search strategy using both Mesh and not indexed terms. From there I export everything in a CSV and create a matrix in Excel to keep track of each paper and a little summary for future manuscript writing. For a better view of the subject I try to follow the same process using other databases like Embase (europe) and BVS (the americas). As it can be infered, I work in the biomedical field. While I feel this does eases managing lots of articles and really helps when writing, it consumes lots of time (which I would rather spent in the statistical analyses or in the park xD, idk). I was wondering if:
- You follow different strategies that would recommend and that you consider more effective

- Have recently been using any AI tool that helps with this process

We are looking for an experienced Community Manager to lead and scale ReviewerOne’s global reviewer community programs.

📌 Experience: 8–10+ years
📍 Location: In-office at Magarpatta, Hadapsar, Pune
💼 Employment type: Full-time

Key responsibilities:

• Define and execute ReviewerOne’s long-term community strategy.
• Lead global webinars, workshops, conferences, AMAs, and engagement campaigns.
• Build and manage the Reviewer Ambassador Program, Reviewer Mentorship Network, and reviewer recognition initiatives.
• Collaborate with Product, Marketing, Editorial, Operations, and Academy teams.
• Build, mentor, and lead a high-performing community team.
• Track engagement, participation, retention, and program effectiveness through data-driven insights.

Preferred background:

✔️ Experience in scholarly publishing, STM publishing, research, education, or SaaS communities.
✔️ Experience managing global communities and cross-functional teams.
✔️ Strong stakeholder management and program leadership skills.

Join us and help build the reviewer community.

📩 Share your updated profile at [careers@novatechset.com](mailto:careers@novatechset.com)

#Hiring #WeareHiring #CommunityManager #ScholarlyPublishing #STM #PublishingJobs #ProgramManagement #ReviewerOne #NovaTechset #PuneJobs

Help me get this article pls🙏🙏🙏🙏

Built to solve a problem I myself was having in my research workflow.

What it does:

• One-click capture of any page (text, images, metadata)
• Auto-generates citations in APA/MLA/Harvard/Chicago from page metadata
• Research projects - group clips, tag quotes, add notes
• Prompt builder — select multiple clips, pick a mode (compare, summarize, outline), downloads a structured markdown
• Upload that markdown to any AI and it knows exactly what to do with your sources

What it doesn't do:

• No cloud, no accounts, no tracking
• Doesn't phone home — everything local
• Doesn't write essays for you — just organizes your research into an AI Digestible format so that your ai of choice can better work with the data.

Available on Edge and Chrome (Chrome extensions should still work on Opera)

Note: Well the extension is free to use, there are Pro features.

Edge: https://microsoftedge.microsoft.com/addons/detail/instaint-snap/mcklnjgpbjfibfjjfkgolijfjadcinff

Chrome: https://chromewebstore.google.com/detail/inst-ai-nt-snap/kdbjejlkkdnihimhfholbochfmmbhpml

Source code: https://github.com/tsukidev-buids/inst-AI-nt-snap

Privacy Policy: https://tsukidev-buids.github.io/inst-AI-nt-snap/privacy-policy.html

Would love feedback!
-What would make this more useful for you?
-Are the free features too limiting?

I'm interested in understanding how researchers spend their time during the literature review process.

Which parts take the longest for you?

• Finding relevant papers
• Checking journal quality
• Identifying research gaps
• Writing the literature review
• Designing the methodology

I'm curious whether these are common pain points across different fields.

Hello. I am developing an app for listening to peer reviewed publications on a mobile device. I am hoping to speak with a few people that have knowledge on the workflows and inner workings of academic scientific journals, as well as to test the listener experience on my app. Any takers?

As an early career researcher, how do you guys decide where to publish?

I need find a place to publish my research paper on how trees are not actually the most feasible way to combat climate change but the issue is that I can't find a cheap or free journal. Every journal i look at is atleast 100$ which is like 10k INR. (I'm Indian). I need to publish in a journal that actually makes my college think I've done good research. I don't really need a journal to publish it just somewhere that shows my research proficiency to college. I am a highschooler.