Biology subjects

McKiernan, E. C.

Publications and source records attributed to McKiernan, E. C..

6 recordsLinked to original sources

bioRxiv2025

A method for analyzing physiological data with multiple non-independent observations

Physiological studies often involve recording multiple observations (e.g., repeated muscle contractions or cardiac cycles) from the same subject. To compare groups of subjects, observations from one subject are then sometimes pooled with observations from other subjects in the same group, and analyses are performed on these pooled data. This approach presents a number of potential problems, including over-or under-representing certain subjects in the sample and non-independence of measurements. There are statistical methods available to deal with repeated measures, but many make assumptions about the distribution and completeness of data. Instead, we developed a method to deal with multiple observations from physiological data that ensures that each subject is represented only once in the analysis (i.e. it avoids pseudoreplication), and makes no assumptions about the distribution of the data. We demonstrate this method using two different physiological datasets: (1) muscle recordings taken from Drosophila melanogaster larvae during fictive crawling, and (2) electrocardiogram recordings taken from human volunteers before, during, and after exercise. Our results show the broad applicability and validity of this method.

physiology↗

bioRxiv2023

Promoting Transparent, Fair, and Inclusive Practices in Grantmaking: Lessons from the Open and Equitable Model Funding Program.

The Open Research Funders Group (ORFG) has been instrumental in promoting open and equitable scholarship to enhance academic researchs transparency and accessibility. In 2020, the ORFG formed the Equity & Open Science Working Group, leading to the launch of the Open & Equitable Model Funding Program in 2021. This program aimed to refine grantmaking processes for broader inclusivity and equitable open scholarship practices. The program gathered a cohort of 11 funding organizations and focused on applying various proposed interventions within existing funding programs to improve grantmaking practices. The initiative highlighted the importance of targeted intervention selection and the need for delimited goal-setting, revealing challenges in implementation due to limited resources and the complexity of the processes involved. Participants valued the pilot for its structured approach and opportunities for shared learning despite some facing complexities in fully implementing the interventions. The ORFGs future approach involves flexible intervention selection, effective resource management, and fostering a collaborative community, aiming for a more inclusive and practical application of open scholarship principles.

scientific communication and education↗

bioRxiv2022

A biophysical, minimal model to investigate age-related changes in CA1 pyramidal cell electrical activity

Aging is a physiological process that is still poorly understood, especially with respect to effects on the brain. There are open questions about aging that are difficult to answer with an experimental approach. Underlying challenges include the difficulty of recording in vivo single cell and network activity simultaneously with submillisecond resolution, and brain compensatory mechanisms triggered by genetic, pharmacologic, or behavioral manipulations. Mathematical modeling can help address some of these questions by allowing us to fix parameters that cannot be controlled experimentally and investigate neural activity under different conditions. We present a biophysical minimal model of CA1 pyramidal cells (PCs) based on general expressions for transmembrane ion transport derived from basic thermodynamical principles. The model allows directly varying the contribution of ion channels by changing their number. By analyzing the dynamics of the model, we find parameter ranges that reproduce the variability in electrical activity seen in PCs. In addition, increasing the L-type Ca2+ channel expression in the model reproduces age-related changes in excitability that are qualitatively and quantitatively similar to those observed in PCs from aged animals.

biophysics↗

bioRxiv2022

The role of collegiality in academic review, promotion, and tenure

Review, promotion, and tenure (RPT) processes at universities typically assess candidates along three dimensions: research, teaching, and service. In recent years, some have argued for the inclusion of a controversial fourth criterion: collegiality. While collegiality plays a role in the morale and effectiveness of academic departments, it is amorphic and difficult to assess, and could be misused to stifle dissent or enforce homogeneity. Despite this, some institutions have opted to include this additional element in their RPT documents and processes, but it is unknown the extent of this practice and how it varies across institution type and disciplinary units. This study is based on two sets of data: survey data collected as part of a project that explored the publishing decisions of faculty and how these related to perceived importance in RPT processes, and 864 RPT documents collected from 129 universities from the United States and Canada. We analysed these RPT documents to determine the degree to which collegiality and related terms are mentioned, if they are defined, and if and how they may be assessed during the RPT process. Results show that when collegiality and related terms appear in these documents they are most often just briefly mentioned. It is less common for collegiality and related terms to be defined or assessed in RPT documents. Although the terms are mentioned across all types of institutions, there is a statistically significant difference in how prevalent they are at each. Collegiality is more commonly mentioned in the documents of doctoral research-focused universities (60%), than of masters universities and colleges (31%) or baccalaureate colleges (15%). Results from the accompanying survey of faculty also support this finding: individuals from R-Types were more likely to perceive collegiality to be a factor in their RPT processes. We conclude that collegiality likely plays an important role in RPT processes, whether it is explicitly acknowledged in policies and guidelines or not, and point to several strategies in how it might be best incorporated in the assessment of academic careers.

scientific communication and education↗

bioRxiv2021

How faculty define quality, prestige, and impact in research

Despite the calls for change, there is significant consensus that when it comes to evaluating publications, review, promotion, and tenure processes should aim to reward research that is of high "quality," has an "impact," and is published in "prestigious" journals. Nevertheless, such terms are highly subjective and present challenges to ascertain precisely what such research looks like. Accordingly, this article responds to the question: how do faculty from universities in the United States and Canada define the terms quality, prestige, and impact? We address this question by surveying 338 faculty members from 55 different institutions. This studys findings highlight that, despite their highly varied definitions, faculty often describe these terms in overlapping ways. Additionally, results shown that marked variance in definitions across faculty does not correspond to demographic characteristics. This studys results highlight the need to more clearly implement evaluation regimes that do not rely on ill-defined concepts. Financial DisclosureFunding for this project was provided to JPA, MTN, ECM, and LAS from the OpenSociety Foundations (OR2017-39637). The funder had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript. Related MaterialsOther publications related to this project, including a series of infographics summarizing findings, can be found at: https://www.scholcommlab.ca/research/rpt-project/ Survey responses can be found at the following publication: Niles, Meredith T.; Schimanski, Lesley A.; McKiernan, Erin C.; Alperin, Juan Pablo,2020, "Data for: Why we publish where we do", https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/MRLHNO, Harvard Dataverse, V1 Data regarding RPT documents can be found at the following data publication: Alperin, Juan Pablo; Munoz Nieves, Carol; Schimanski, Lesley; McKiernan, Erin C.;Niles, Meredith T., 2018, "Terms and Concepts found in Tenure and Promotion Guidelines from the US and Canada", https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/VY4TJE, Harvard Dataverse, V3, UNF:6:PQC7QoilolhDrokzDPxxyQ== [fileUNF]

scientific communication and education↗

bioRxiv2019

Why we publish where we do: Faculty publishing values and their relationship to review, promotion and tenure expectations

Using an online survey of academics at 55 randomly selected institutions across the US and Canada, we explore priorities for publishing decisions and their perceived importance within review, promotion, and tenure (RPT). We find that respondents most value journal readership, while they believe their peers most value prestige and related metrics such as impact factor when submitting their work for publication. Respondents indicated that total number of publications, number of publications per year, and journal name recognition were the most valued factors in RPT. Older and tenured respondents (most likely to serve on RPT committees) were less likely to value journal prestige and metrics for publishing, while untenured respondents were more likely to value these factors. These results suggest disconnects between what academics value versus what they think their peers value, and between the importance of journal prestige and metrics for tenured versus untenured faculty in publishing and RPT perceptions.

scientific communication and education↗