Science 2.0
Clicks: 285
ID: 265665
2008
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Popular Article
30.0
/100
285 views
41 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
PopularRanked #25 of 69 articles by views in scientific american
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Science 2.0 generally refers to new practices of scientists who post raw experimental results, nascent theories, claims of discovery and draft papers on the Web for others to see and comment on. Proponents say these "open access" practices make scientific progress more collaborative and therefore mo …
Abstract Quality Issue:
This abstract appears to be incomplete or contains metadata (45 words).
Try re-searching for a better abstract.
| Reference Key |
mm2008scientificscience
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Waldrop MM;; |
| Journal | scientific american |
| Year | 2008 |
| DOI |
DOI not found
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
research
National Center for Biotechnology Information
NCBI
NLM
MEDLINE
pubmed abstract
nih
national institutes of health
national library of medicine
publishing
information dissemination
internet / trends*
pmid:18444327
doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0508-68
m mitchell waldrop
cooperative behavior
science / trends*
|
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.