Search

Context: The retraction of research papers, for whatever reason, is a growing phenomenon. However, although retracted paper information is publicly available via publishers, it is somewhat distributed and inconsistent., Objective: The aim is to assess: (i) the extent and nature of retracted research in Computer Science (CS) (ii) the post-retraction citation behaviour of retracted works and (iii) the potential impact upon systematic reviews and mapping studies., Method: We analyse the Retraction Watch database and take citation information from the Web of Science and Google scholar., Results: We find that of the 33,955 entries in the Retraction watch database (16 May 2022), 2,816 are classified as CS, i.e., ≈ 8%. For CS, 56% of retracted papers provide little or no information as to the reasons. This contrasts with 26% for other disciplines. There is also some disparity between different publishers, a tendency for multiple versions of a retracted paper to be available beyond the Version of Record (VoR), and for new citations long after a paper is officially retracted (median = 3; maximum = 18). Systematic reviews are also impacted with ≈ 30% of the retracted papers having one or more citations from a review., Conclusions: Unfortunately, retraction seems to be a sufficiently common outcome for a scientific paper that we as a research community need to take it more seriously, e.g., standardising procedures and taxonomies across publishers and the provision of appropriate research tools. Finally, we recommend particular caution when undertaking secondary analyses and meta-analyses which are at risk of becoming contaminated by these problem primary studies., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist., (Copyright: © 2023 Shepperd, Yousefi. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)

A thermal stability analysis method of meta-aramid insulating paper based on computer molecular dynamics technology is designed in this paper. First, the raw materials and equipment for preparing meta-aramid insulating paper were determined to prepare meta-aramid insulating paper. Then, the internal structure and morphology of meta-aramid insulating paper are analyzed for the subsequent stability analysis. Finally, the basic principle of computer molecular dynamics technology is analyzed, which is used to analyze the thermal stability of meta-aramid insulating paper, mainly from the stability of its crystal region. The experimental results show that the proposed method is effective and feasible in analyzing the thermal stability of aramid insulating paper between samples. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Taking notes during learning has benefits both during class (through writing things down to encode information) and after class (by using written notes as external storage for revision). Comparisons of note‐taking methods (i.e., using paper or a computer) have mainly shown that paper leads to better learning. However, previous studies have mostly been conducted in laboratory contexts. Aims: The current study investigates university students' perceptions of the efficacity of their own preferred note‐taking method, along with the strategies they employ. Sample: Data were collected from 108 university students. Methods: Students answered a questionnaire about their note‐taking strategies during initial note‐taking (in class) and revision (after class). Results: The results show that students who take notes on paper do not consider their method to be more effective, but they report engaging in more reformulation and less multitasking. Students who take notes on a computer are more likely to reformat their notes, and thus to reformulate at a later stage. For all students, review sheets are mostly done on paper. Conclusions: These results suggest that although students are not necessarily aware of the benefits of reformulation associated with handwriting on paper during initial note‐taking, when revising, they tend to choose handwriting and benefit from reformulation when aiming for deeper processing. Therefore, revision activities remain mainly paper‐based. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The ability to publish is a career-critical skill but requires the acquisition of a wide and disparate skill set. The Write a Scientific Paper (WASP) course was created in Malta in 2010, an intensive, three-day event. WASP is an accredited event held in Malta, London, and Bahrain. The COVID pandemic forced WASP to go online. This study compared satisfaction with WASP online as opposed to in-person by analyzing course feedback pre- and post-pandemic. Methods: Google forms are used to collect anonymous feedback on a Likert scale for various aspects of each WASP. The period 2017 to 2022 was used to compare four courses on-site and five courses online. Feedback on: Rate lectures, handouts, WASP overall and how likely are you to recommend WASP was compared. Results: Response rates were >60% and almost all Cronbach's Alpha values were >0.7. High satisfaction scores were achieved in all four questions (>4/5). There were no significant differences except in lectures, which scored well but fared slightly worse overall online. Conclusions: Migrating online does not necessarily lead to change/s in presentation contents but transforms delivery. Our results indicate that WASP is accepted online but the slightly lower lectures score implies that WASP might be better delivered in-person than online. However, students remained happy to recommend WASP and this accords with other studies that overall, student satisfaction with online education is common. It is hoped that as the pandemic recedes, webinars complement and not continue to totally replace traditional in-person meetings.

The integration of online platforms in (bio)chemical engineering education has increasingly become a matter of fact at all educational levels. Examples such as virtual laboratories in tertiary education have shown their benefits, such as the decreased cost and resources needed as well as providing a safer environment for practical experimentation. However, students or stakeholders are not usually involved in developing the virtual laboratory, even if, when given the opportunity, they can provide valuable feedback for improvement and acquire ownership over the platform. Hence, when proposing a novel educational process virtual laboratory that targets teaching bioprocess modeling to undergraduate students, the best approach is to involve the students in the development as its future users. To this end, in this work, four co-participatory design experiences are presented that show the journey from a paper prototype to an online educational virtual laboratory (www.biovl.com). Qualitative and quantitative data have been collected in two different universities through surveys, semi-structured interviews, and informal conversations among the students and the developer. The students’ perspectives were found to provide valuable feedback about the platform’s content, usability, and functionality. For example, interest in adding bioprocess-related coding activities, or suggesting to change the platform name, were opinions collected and carefully considered. These suggestions can be easily integrated since the software is at the early stages of the virtual laboratory prototype. Although the usability and functionality features of the platform are under continuous advancement, this work’s findings show that the students are interested in contributing to the virtual laboratory’s development. Therefore, it opens the door to modifications and improvements, which are strongly based on the users’/students’ perceptions and perspectives as the virtual laboratory’s co-designers. Although the primary target of the BioVL prototype is to teach bioprocessing modelling, several advanced tools such as virtual and augmented reality (VR and AR) are being considered to be included at a future stage. Furthermore, the educational strategy proposed in this work can be replicated by those who want to develop other virtual laboratories.

This study investigated whether reading comprehension would differ when the texts are studied and tested on screen or on paper. Participants were 69 college students who were attending a college in midwestern United States. Participants read two expository texts each, under comparable paper and screen conditions and answered comprehension questions. Test forms and the order of the conditions were counterbalanced. The correlations between reading outcomes and reader characteristics were examined. Participants also completed a survey on their views on the two media (paper or screen). The results did not indicate a significant difference on students' reading comprehension as a function of medium and reader characteristics. However, students reported preferring paper-based reading for complex material. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]