Paul Silvia, associate professor of psychology, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, for Pacific Standard reviews Dr. Roberta Ness’ Innovation Generation: How to Produce Creative and Useful Scientific Ideas (Oxford UP), which employs the acronym PIG In MuD:
- Phrase a question based on interest, observation, and knowledge.
- Identify the frames and find alternatives.
- Generate all possible solutions.
- Incubate.
- Meld your single best idea back into the process of normal science.
- Disseminate your innovative finding.
This brief video by Dr. Ness for TEDxHouston is engaging and informative.
Dr. Ness is dean of the School of Public Health, University of Texas at Houston.
Filed under: News, Review, Writing Tips | Leave a Comment »
Inside Higher Ed: Scholarly Publishing
Three articles in Inside Higher Ed today came to our attention.
The controversial proposed law originating in the Republican-controlled House of Representatives, the Research Works Act, which would have prohibited the government from requiring open access publication of studies funded by the federal government, lost a key supporter, Elsevier Publishing and has been withdrawn by the bill’s co-sponsors. Steven Kolowich’s “A Significant Flinch” reports on the controversy and the fate of the bill, reminding readers that Elsevier’s support, crucial for the success of the bill, evaporated after a substantial global boycott of the mega-publisher.
Felicia LeClere’s essay “Grant Review Panels as Prom Committees,” despite its snarky title, extolls what she has observed while serving on grant review committees, suggesting that review panels work fairly more often than not.
And what about the anonymous reviewers of journal article manuscripts? Brian Rathbun’s “Dear Reviewers, a Word?” speaks to them, asking them to temper their rejections.
Filed under: Commentary, Grant Writing Tips, News, Review | Leave a Comment »