Archives des mots-clés : Scholarly Publishing

Can scholarly publishers change the world? The role of the SDGs within the publishing industry

Posté le par

Authors : Stephanie Dawson, Agata Morka, Charlie Rapple, Nikesh Gosalia, Ritu Dhand

The United Nation’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) aim to eradicate poverty and inequality, protect the planet, and ensure health, justice, and prosperity for all, emphasizing inclusivity. Within the realm of scholarly publishing, the panel discussion Can scholarly publishers change the world? The role of the SDGs within the publishing industry held at Academic Publishing in Europe 2024, highlighted the business advantages of aligning with SDGs and made a plea to reshape the narrative beyond mere moral obligation as well as to galvanize stakeholders to take action and promote engagement, offering a clear direction.

This paper expands on the panel discussion, which was moderated by Stephanie Dawson, CEO, ScienceOpen. Panellists were Agata Morka, Regional Director, Publishing Development, PLOS, Charlie Rapple, Chief Customer Officer and Co-founder, Kudos, Nikesh Gosalia, President Global Academic and Publisher Relations, Cactus Communications, and Ritu Dhand, Chief Scientific Officer, Springer Nature.

URL : Can scholarly publishers change the world? The role of the SDGs within the publishing industry

DOI : https://doi.org/10.3233/ISU-240017

Open Access APCs Are Already a Scam”: Knowledge and Opinions of Open Access and Article Processing Charges From Faculty at a Large Public University

Posté le par

Authors : Heidi M. Winkler

Introduction:

In the 2020s, open access (OA) continues to act as a challenging force in the ever-shifting landscape of scholarly communication. The objective of this study was to survey faculty at an R1 research institution about their perspectives on OA publishing, article processing charges (APCs), and knowledge of the institutional repository (IR).

Methods:

This study employed an anonymous online survey of 415 faculty members, with a response rate of 12.77% (53 responses). The survey collected both quantitative and qualitative data from respondents.

Results and Discussion:

Results showed engagement with OA publishing but skepticism of APCs as a reasonable alternative to subscription-based funding models. Survey respondents were also mostly unaware of the library’s IR self-archiving service.

Conclusion:

For-profit OA business models do not serve academics, and they and scholarly communications librarians should better collaborate to advocate for transitioning away from APCs. The article concludes by sharing how the author changed practice based on the results of the study.

URL : Open Access APCs Are Already a Scam”: Knowledge and Opinions of Open Access and Article Processing Charges From Faculty at a Large Public University

DOI : https://doi.org/10.31274/jlsc.17647

Enhancing Research Methodology and Academic Publishing: A Structured Framework for Quality and Integrity

Posté le par

Authors : Md. Jalil Piran, Nguyen H. Tran

Following a brief introduction to research, research processes, research types, papers, reviews, and evaluations, this paper presents a structured framework for addressing inconsistencies in research methodology, technical writing, quality assessment, and publication standards across academic disciplines. Using a four-dimensional evaluation model that focuses on 1) technical content, 2) structural coherence, 3) writing precision, and 4) ethical integrity, this framework not only standardizes review and publication processes but also serves as a practical guide for authors in preparing high-quality manuscripts. Each of these four dimensions cannot be compromised for the sake of another.

Following that, we discuss the components of a research paper adhering to the four-dimensional evaluation model in detail by providing guidelines and principles. By aligning manuscripts with journal standards, reducing review bias, and enhancing transparency, the framework contributes to more reliable and reproducible research results. Moreover, by strengthening cross-disciplinary credibility, improving publication consistency, and fostering public trust in academic literature, this initiative is expected to positively influence both research quality and scholarly publishing’s reputation.

Arxiv : https://arxiv.org/abs/2412.05683

The roles of special issues in scholarly communication in a changing publishing landscape

Posté le par

Authors : Robyn M. Gleasner, Akshay Sood

This paper aims to enhance the understanding of the role of special issues in the evolving landscape of academic publishing, offering insights for publishers, editors, guest editors, and researchers, including how new technologies influence transparency in publishing processes, open access models, and metrics for success.

Based upon original analysis, the paper also discusses the importance of special issues and opportunities to support diversity, equity, and inclusivity in special issue publishing programmes. The goal is to contribute to the discussion of maintaining research integrity through special issues, acknowledging their significance in scholarly communication, while offering suggestions for the future.

URL : The roles of special issues in scholarly communication in a changing publishing landscape

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1635

Fundamental problems in the peer-review process and stakeholders’ perceptions of potential suggestions for improvement

Posté le par

Authors : Cigdem Kadaifci, Erkan Isikli, Y. Ilker Topcu

Academic papers are essential for researchers to communicate their work to their peers and industry experts. Quality research is published in prestigious scientific journals, and is considered as part of the hiring and promotion criteria at leading universities. Scientific journals conduct impartial and anonymous peer reviews of submitted manuscripts; however, individuals involved in this process may encounter issues related to the duration, impartiality, and transparency of these reviews.

To explore these concerns, we created a questionnaire based on a comprehensive review of related literature and expert opinions, which was distributed to all stakeholders (authors, reviewers, and editors) who participated in the peer-review process from a variety of countries and disciplines. Their opinions on the primary issues during the process and suggestions for improvement were collected. The data were then analysed based on various groups, such as gender, country of residence, and contribution type, using appropriate multivariate statistical techniques to determine the perceptions and experiences of participants in the peer-review process.

The results showed that unethical behaviour was not uncommon and that editors and experienced reviewers encountered it more frequently. Women and academics from Türkiye were more likely to experience ethical violations and perceived them as more ethically severe. Incentives and stakeholder involvement were seen as ways to enhance the quality and impartiality of peer review. The scale developed can serve as a useful tool for addressing difficulties in the peer-review process and improving its effectiveness and performance.

URL : Fundamental problems in the peer-review process and stakeholders’ perceptions of potential suggestions for improvement

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1637

Two scholarly publishing cultures? Open access drives a divergence in European academic publishing practices

Posté le par

Authors : Leon Kopitar, Nejc Plohl, Mojca Tancer Verboten, Gregor Štiglic, Roger Watson, Dean Korošak

The current system of scholarly publishing is often criticized for being slow, expensive, and not transparent. The rise of open access publishing as part of open science tenets, promoting transparency and collaboration, together with calls for research assesment reforms are the results of these criticisms. The emergence of new open access publishers presents a unique opportunity to empirically test how universities and countries respond to shifts in the academic publishing landscape. These new actors challenge traditional publishing models, offering faster review times and broader accessibility, which could influence strategic publishing decisions.

Our findings reveal a clear division in European publishing practices, with countries clustering into two groups distinguished by the ratio of publications in new open access journals with accelerated review times versus legacy journals. This divide underscores a broader shift in academic culture, highlighting new open access publishing venues as a strategic factor influencing national and institutional publishing practices, with significant implications for research accessibility and collaboration across Europe.

Arxiv : https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.06282

Enhancing peer review efficiency: A mixed-methods analysis of artificial intelligence-assisted reviewer selection across academic disciplines

Posté le par

Author : Shai Farber

This mixed-methods study evaluates the efficacy of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted reviewer selection in academic publishing across diverse disciplines. Twenty journal editors assessed AI-generated reviewer recommendations for a manuscript. The AI system achieved a 42% overlap with editors’ selections and demonstrated a significant improvement in time efficiency, reducing selection time by 73%.

Editors found that 37% of AI-suggested reviewers who were not part of their initial selection were indeed suitable. The system’s performance varied across disciplines, with higher accuracy in STEM fields (Cohen’s d = 0.68). Qualitative feedback revealed an appreciation for the AI’s ability to identify lesser-known experts but concerns about its grasp of interdisciplinary work. Ethical considerations, including potential algorithmic bias and privacy issues, were highlighted.

The study concludes that while AI shows promise in enhancing reviewer selection efficiency and broadening the reviewer pool, it requires human oversight to address limitations in understanding nuanced disciplinary contexts. Future research should focus on larger-scale longitudinal studies and developing ethical frameworks for AI integration in peer-review processes.

URL : Enhancing peer review efficiency: A mixed-methods analysis of artificial intelligence-assisted reviewer selection across academic disciplines

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1638