I would encourage going from the concrete to the abstract. Maybe start with something inclusive to agree on. Then you can ask if removing a "brick from the wall" or a "wheel from the chariot" still leaves a wall or a chariot.
Can we all can agree that something with the following characteristic is "disseminated":
1. Published in the reviewed literature
2. Published in the open source free to all literature
3. Indexed in Pubmed and/or a number of other sources, i.e. easy to find
4. Primary data open source available
5. Well written so that all steps of experimental design and going from data to conclusions are transparent and repeatable.
6. Context is also communicated transparently. Including author context such as conflicts/potential conflicts of interest, author contributions.
7. Well and fairly referenced so that context in the field is well and honestly communicated.
8. Funding transparent
9. Forward linked so that citations and / or corrections / retractions stay linked
10. Transparent review process and transparent comment forums so that critique of the work is available and ongoing
11. Not just the form of review but their content. I.e. the work must have been competently reviewed in substance as well as form.
Hi Dennis, why are you asking these questions? Is this another project of yours?
If so, I have a suggestion. Directly contact scientists and ask these questions.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Microbiology
- Scientific Research