Blog

Representing the needs of early career researchers in the developing world. Mohlopheni Jackson Marakalala, Wellcome Trust International Intermediate Fellow, Africa Health Research Institute (South Africa); and Associate Professor in the Division of Infection and Immunity, University College London, is a member of the Early Career Researchers (ECRs) Advisory Board for Wellcome Open Research.

As an ECRs advisory board member he wants to encourage and support early career researchers in their academic endeavours, by promoting open research and raising awareness on the benefits the practice can provide.

What inspired you to apply for and join the Wellcome Open Research ECR advisory board?

I saw this is an opportunity for me to represent the needs of early career researchers in the developing world. As a member of the Wellcome Open Research ECR advisory board, I hope to promote open research practises among early career researchers in sub-Saharan Africa and to encourage our policy-makers to take advantage of such an openly accessible platform.

What are the benefits for researchers for publishing on Wellcome Open Research?

Wellcome Open Research provides a transparent publication platform that is freely accessible without journal subscription barriers. This increases visibility for the researchers. Also, researchers don’t have to worry about covering publication costs, as the article processing charges are directly covered by Wellcome.

Have you published on Wellcome Open Research? If so, why would you encourage others to do so?

I have not yet published on Wellcome Open Research, but I am very excited to publish my future research on the platform. I have had a great experience publishing in open research journals and platforms and look forward to continuing along this path of openness.

Have you experienced any difficulties or challenges in publishing research?

I have not, but I have come across many early career researchers who struggled with lengthy and complicated editorial processes associated with traditional publishing models. These are often ECRs who have just finished their training and in the process of getting their next jobs. Thus, a rapid publication model will be especially beneficial for them.

How do you think open research can benefit the community?

Most of the communities in low- and middle- income countries, including those carrying severe burden of diseases, struggle to afford costly journal subscriptions and are therefore unable to gain access to the research locked behind the paywalls. Open research will enable such communities to access important research findings that can help inform better policies on issues relevant to local challenges.

What do they think needs to change to help ECRs? As an ECR advisory board member, how do you hope to resolve these issues?

In addition to obvious needs for grant funding, ECRs need access to recent trends/findings in their field without barriers of journal subscriptions. They also need better understanding of the complex editorial/reviewing processes that often hamper their confidence in the process. As an ECR advisory board member, I hope to help arrange webinars and workshops giving advice on the best ways to increase open research and promote Wellcome Open Research.

What are your thoughts on Plan S and its aim for all research results to be openly available to the scientific community?

I think this is a good plan that will increase open accessibility of science and timeous translation of research into solutions/policies. This will help solve the challenge in which many important research findings don’t reach broader audiences as they are locked behind paywalls.

Why is open peer review important?

It increases transparency and accessibility, which can improve the quality of peer review. The availability of reviewers’ comments means that signed reports tend to be better written and more constructive than anonymous, behind-the-scenes reviews. 

How can we improve the quality of peer review?   

By encouraging more to participate in open peer review and increasing the interaction between reviewers and researchers, should not only help to guide future reviewers, but could support open discussions between the authors and reviewers to achieve the best possible output for the research.