digital science

Digital Science launched: closing the gap between science and technology?

Martin Fenner
December 18, 2010 1 min read

Two weeks ago Eva Amsen wrote in a thoughtful blog post (https://web.archive.org/web/20120612094223/http://blogs.nature.com/eva/2010/12/05/a-metaphor-for-science-and-technology?):

There’s a gap between science and technology, and it’s growing.

Eva argues that – contrary to popular belief – there is actually a divide between science and technology. Scientists are on average not really comfortable using technology, and many computing tools aimed for scientists really miss the point of what scientists really care about.

Canada Science and Technology Museum logo by cstmweb (https://web.archive.org/web/20120612094223/http://www.flickr.com/photos/cstmweb?), on Flickr.

Two days later, on December 7, Digital Science (https://web.archive.org/web/20120612094223/http://www.digital-science.com/?), a new division of Macmillan Publishing launched. From the press release (https://web.archive.org/web/20120612094223/http://international.macmillan.com/MediaArticle.aspx?id=2598?):

Digital Science will focus on providing world-class software tools and services to scientists, managers and funders with the ultimate aim of making research more productive through the use of technology.

Initial products include the chemical text-mining tool SureChem Portal (https://web.archive.org/web/20120612094223/http://www.surechem.org/?), the laboratory research management system BioData (https://web.archive.org/web/20120612094223/http://www.biodata.com/?) and the research information system Sympletic Elements (https://web.archive.org/web/20120612094223/http://www.symplectic.co.uk/products/publications.html?). You might see some familiar faces when you look at the Digital Science team pictures (https://web.archive.org/web/20120612094223/http://www.digital-science.com/meet-the-team/?).

As a big fan of using technology for science I am looking forward to what Digital Science will do in the coming months. I am particularly interested in their answer to the questions asked by Eva. Have they found a better way to understand what technologies scientists really want? Or are tools for digital science something that the majority of scientists don’t really care about?

Related posts:

(n.d.-a). In web.archive.org. Retrieved February 21, 2021, from https://web.archive.org/web/20150923191606/http://www.bl.uk/aboutus/stratpolprog/legaldep/
(n.d.-b). In web.archive.org. Retrieved February 21, 2021, from https://web.archive.org/web/20170831024033/https://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2012/01/30/an-arxiv-for-all-of-science-f1000-launches-new-immediate-publication-journal/
arXiv.org e-Print archive. (2016). In web.archive.org. https://web.archive.org/web/20161013002949/https://arxiv.org/
F1000 launches fast, open science publishing for biology and medicine : News blog. (2016). In web.archive.org. https://web.archive.org/web/20161004092538/http://blogs.nature.com/news/2012/01/f1000-launches-fast-open-science-publishing-for-biology-and-medicine.html
Home : Nature Precedings. (2016). In web.archive.org. https://web.archive.org/web/20161012221933/http://precedings.nature.com/
In which I suggest a preprint archive for clinical trials Gobbledygook. (2016). In web.archive.org. https://web.archive.org/web/20161019024534/http://blogs.plos.org/mfenner/2010/10/16/in-which-i-suggest-a-preprint-archive-for-clinical-trials/
Twitter. It’s what’s happening. (2016). In web.archive.org. https://web.archive.org/web/20161010225105/https://twitter.com/

Other Formats

ePub PDF JATS