Science I must pay for does not exist.

[lawtonfogle]

If one can only see the abstract of a paper without paying $30+, then this means to those of us who don't have the money, the introduction, methods, results, and discussion of the that paper must be called into question, as we cannot verify it.

I would not call someone saying 'In my results, I find that X is true, just trust me on how I found it' science, I do not see how 'In my results, I find X is true, pay $30 to see how' is any different.

 

[Freodin]

Depends.

A short answer is: infrastructure.

The "science" might be free... but the means for you to access it isn´t.

Provides of such an access - printed or online - provide a service.


Aren´t you willing to pay for services that you use?

 

[AV1611VET]

If one can only see the abstract of a paper without paying $30+, then this means to those of us who don't have the money, the introduction, methods, results, and discussion of the that paper must be called into question, as we cannot verify it.

I would not call someone saying 'In my results, I find that X is true, just trust me on how I found it' science, I do not see how 'In my results, I find X is true, pay $30 to see how' is any different.

You'll take what science gives you -- and like it.

 

[sfs]

If one can only see the abstract of a paper without paying $30+, then this means to those of us who don't have the money, the introduction, methods, results, and discussion of the that paper must be called into question, as we cannot verify it.

I would not call someone saying 'In my results, I find that X is true, just trust me on how I found it' science, I do not see how 'In my results, I find X is true, pay $30 to see how' is any different.

[Strange -- my first response seems to have vanished.]
If you want to read an article, write to the author listed as the one "to whom correspondence should be addressed" (or the equivalent); an email address is generally provided. If you ask for a copy, most authors will be happy to send you a pdf.

 

[LifeToTheFullest!]

If one can only see the abstract of a paper without paying $30+, then this means to those of us who don't have the money, the introduction, methods, results, and discussion of the that paper must be called into question, as we cannot verify it.

I would not call someone saying 'In my results, I find that X is true, just trust me on how I found it' science, I do not see how 'In my results, I find X is true, pay $30 to see how' is any different.

Quit being such a freeloader.

 

[Hespera]

If one can only see the abstract of a paper without paying $30+, then this means to those of us who don't have the money, the introduction, methods, results, and discussion of the that paper must be called into question, as we cannot verify it.

I would not call someone saying 'In my results, I find that X is true, just trust me on how I found it' science, I do not see how 'In my results, I find X is true, pay $30 to see how' is any different.

if you want a big mac you have to pay for that too

or maybe it means they dont exist.............

 

[sfs]

if you want a big mac you have to pay for that too

or maybe it means they dont exist.............

One difference is that taxpayers have already paid for most scientific research, in the form of grants from government funding agencies. While I think the OP was not the best statement of the argument, I do favor wider public access to scientific papers.

 

[zingiber]

And for a paper with 50 references, the cost soon adds up!

 

[Split Rock]

If one can only see the abstract of a paper without paying $30+, then this means to those of us who don't have the money, the introduction, methods, results, and discussion of the that paper must be called into question, as we cannot verify it.

I would not call someone saying 'In my results, I find that X is true, just trust me on how I found it' science, I do not see how 'In my results, I find X is true, pay $30 to see how' is any different.

There are a couple of options here:
1. As already suggested, you can email the "author for correspondence" and they will most likley be willing to email you a pdf copy of the full paper.

2. You can find the paper at your local library, or at a university/college library.

Just out of curiosity, what makes you think you can critique a scientific paper, anyway?

 

[sfs]

There are a couple of options here:
1. As already suggested, you can email the "author for correspondence" and they will most likley be willing to email you a pdf copy of the full paper.

2. You can find the paper at your local library, or at a university/college library.

If the university library will let you in the door. Stanford will give you access (without borrowing privileges) for $30 a month, if you can convince them you're a bona fide researcher. At Harvard, your only option is to kidnap and impersonate a member of the Harvard community.

In many places, your best bet is probably Interlibrary Loan. Not really efficient for checking lots of papers, to be sure.

Just out of curiosity, what makes you think you can critique a scientific paper, anyway?

However hard getting papers is, reading them is usually harder.

 

[juvenissun]

If one can only see the abstract of a paper without paying $30+, then this means to those of us who don't have the money, the introduction, methods, results, and discussion of the that paper must be called into question, as we cannot verify it.

I would not call someone saying 'In my results, I find that X is true, just trust me on how I found it' science, I do not see how 'In my results, I find X is true, pay $30 to see how' is any different.

So you want free science? Ha, I wish it were true.

 

[LSky]

Which paper specifically are you trying to access?

 

[Split Rock]

If the university library will let you in the door. Stanford will give you access (without borrowing privileges) for $30 a month, if you can convince them you're a bona fide researcher. At Harvard, your only option is to kidnap and impersonate a member of the Harvard community.

State universites are usually more open to the public.

 

[sfs]

State universites are usually more open to the public.

Socialist institutions that they are.

 

[Nabobalis]

Which paper specifically are you trying to access?

Yeah, We/I could try to fetch it for you.

 

[lucaspa]

If one can only see the abstract of a paper without paying $30+, then this means to those of us who don't have the money, the introduction, methods, results, and discussion of the that paper must be called into question, as we cannot verify it.

That does not follow. By "call into question" you mean may not be scientifically valid. Just because you don't wish to pay the money to see them doesn't mean they are not scientifically valid.

It's like saying, well, I can't afford the NY Times so can't read the news. That means the event didn't happen.

This problem (and I sometimes share the frustration) has nothing to do with the nature of science, but with the economics of publishing. The journal is trying to break even with its publishing costs. It does this by 1) subscriptions and/or 2) advertising. Now, if you don't subscribe to the journal, the publisher wants to get reimbursed by charging you per article.

I would not call someone saying 'In my results, I find that X is true, just trust me on how I found it' science, I do not see how 'In my results, I find X is true, pay $30 to see how' is any different.

Very different. Remember, science is based on the fact that anyone can get the same results under approximately the same circumstances. That's why the Methods are there: so you can repeat the same circumstances. Now, just because you won't take the time to repeat the experiment doesn't mean it can't be repeated. It just means you won't. In this case, it means you won't pay the $30 to see the article and are limited to the abstract.

As I say, I share your frustration, but your gripe is with the publishers, not with science.

 

[lucaspa]

State universites are usually more open to the public.

Oh yes. I've walked into the libraries at SUNY New Paltz and SUNY Albany, spent the entire day there looking in journals I cannot get in my public library, making photocopies, etc. and had no problem. I can't check the journals out, but I didn't really want to. I only wanted to photocopy the article, and I could do that for less than a buck, not $30.

 

[lawtonfogle]

That does not follow. By "call into question" you mean may not be scientifically valid. Just because you don't wish to pay the money to see them doesn't mean they are not scientifically valid.

It's like saying, well, I can't afford the NY Times so can't read the news. That means the event didn't happen.

This problem (and I sometimes share the frustration) has nothing to do with the nature of science, but with the economics of publishing. The journal is trying to break even with its publishing costs. It does this by 1) subscriptions and/or 2) advertising. Now, if you don't subscribe to the journal, the publisher wants to get reimbursed by charging you per article.



Very different. Remember, science is based on the fact that anyone can get the same results under approximately the same circumstances. That's why the Methods are there: so you can repeat the same circumstances. Now, just because you won't take the time to repeat the experiment doesn't mean it can't be repeated. It just means you won't. In this case, it means you won't pay the $30 to see the article and are limited to the abstract.

As an example of the quintessential poor college student, there are many days I can't pay $30 to see the article, which is the bulk of the problem. It means this science is only available to those who can afford it, and while I can save up to afford a single $30 dollar article, when I am needing 20 or more articles, we start talking about more money than I make in any semester.

 

[AV1611VET]

It means this science is only available to those who can afford it, and while I can save up to afford a single $30 dollar article, when I am needing 20 or more articles, we start talking about more money than I make in any semester.

Then they whine because we're behind some other country (or countries) in the science polls.

 

[corvus_corax]

As an example of the quintessential poor college student, there are many days I can't pay $30 to see the article, which is the bulk of the problem. It means this science is only available to those who can afford it, and while I can save up to afford a single $30 dollar article, when I am needing 20 or more articles, we start talking about more money than I make in any semester.

Then they whine because we're behind some other country (or countries) in the science polls.

You both completely ignored the point of lucaspa's post.

AND you have both ignored what Nabobalis and Split Rock said.

"We want everything for free" is just pie in the sky wishful thinking.
Have fun with that
Might as well title this thread "Music I must pay for does not exist"
Or "Books I must pay for do not exist"
Crimminy.

Geez, even here in the small town I live in (less than 6000 people), to get access to the Library archives (you know, the rare, delicate collections), you have to pay a small fee (5-30$, depending), and THEN you have to be directly supervised while you carefully handle the papers or books with gloves.
And that's after you live here in county for 6 months (residency) to get a library card.
Yes, boys and girls, not all information is free.

Grow up, fork out the money (I have) and move on.