Hacker News Reader

Comment by jcr | Hacker News Reader

From the abstract, it looks like an interesting paper to read but unfortunately, it's stuck behind a paywall and my searches have been unable to find a freely available copy.

View on HN

Your taxes (if US citizen) paid for the research and it was peer reviewed for free by (I believe) academics in the public service but we all know the immense burden and expense involved in typesetting and publishing the results in print or on the internet. At least that is how it appears. The solution to this scandal lies with the researchers themselves.

The price of information http://www.economist.com/node/21545974

Where does it say that this research project was funded by the govt.? But I agree, important research, even if privately funded, ought to be freely available.

It's a safe assumption for essentially all biomedical research, but specifically, the senior author's website:

http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/Labs/Ghetti/PWT/index.cfm?Sect...

It is a shame that life saving research sponsored by the govt. is locked down.

Not that it helps now, but within 12 months the article will be available here:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24910347

NIH-funded researchers are required to deposit pre-proof manuscripts (text and images without final journal formatting) in the PubMed repository within 12 months. Often, this is facilitated by journals themselves as a checkbox in the submission system. (They provide this service in large part so that they can wait as long as possible to submit to PubMed)

If you are willing to post an email address, or someway to get it to you, I can get you the paper.

A lot of research is still stuck behind paywalls. Ironically, the research is often publicly funded. My belief is that public research grants should be conditional on open publication.

http://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2013/jan/17/open-acc...

A paywall? I didn't get one. http://www.nature.com/npp/journal/vaop/naam/pdf/npp2014134a....

ah you found a link to it. excellent.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com