Étiquette : Scholarly Publishing

Catégories
FR

De l’interopérabilité à la réutilisabilité des éditions électroniques

Auteurs/Authors : Ioana Galleron, Fatiha Idmhand

Si la qualité et la pertinence de l’édition scientifique numérique ont fait l’objet de plusieurs réflexions, sa « réutilisabilité » a été, jusqu’à présent, moins étudiée et pensée.

Cet article analyse les raisons pour lesquelles la prise en compte de cet aspect est toutefois incontournable, en dépit de la tension dans laquelle il entre avec la poursuite d’objectifs propres à l’équipe éditoriale.

Trois modes d’identification du point d’équilibre entre les besoins du ou des réalisateurs de l’édition et ses utilisateurs futurs sont évoqués : l’enquête préliminaire, le travail à partir d’une conceptualisation abstraite de l’activité scientifique et un mélange des deux.

Enfin, l’article offre un exemple de réflexion sur la réutilisabilité à partir des « scholarly primitives » de John Unsworth.

URL : https://journals.openedition.org/revuehn/350

Catégories
EN

Publishing at Any Cost? The Need for the Improvement of the Quality of Scholarly Publications

Authors : Maria José Sá, Carlos Miguel Ferreira, Ana Isabel Santos, Sandro Serpa

At a time of great dynamism among publishers of scientific publications, with the inevitability of Open Access and the ease of publishing online at low cost, it is possible to find publications with different levels of scientific respectability.

In this context, the improvement of the quality of scholarly publications emerges as a critical element for publishers, authors and academic institutions, as well as for society in general.

This opinion piece discusses Open Access journals with different levels of quality, focusing on the following quality-promoting measures: blacklists, author’s preparation, and institutional prevention.

The analysis allows concluding that the open review will be one of the key elements in the process of clarification and promotion of the level of quality and consequent scientific respectability of each of the Journals, of the thousands currently existing, a number that is likely to increase.

URL : https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1250057

Catégories
EN

Evaluation of untrustworthy journals: Transition from formal criteria to a complex view

Authors : Jiří Kratochvíl, Lukáš Plch, Martin Sebera, Eva Koriťáková

Not all the journals included in credible indexes meet the ethical rules of COPE, DOAJ, OASPA and WAMEand equally there may be trustworthy journals excluded from these indexes which means they cannot be used as definitive whitelists for trustworthy journals.

Equally the many methods suggested to determine trustworthiness are not reliable due to including questionable criteria. The question arises whether valid criteria for identifying an untrustworthy journal can be determined and whether other assessment procedures are necessary.

Since 2017, the Masaryk University Campus Library has been developing a suitable evaluation method for journals. A list of 19 criteria based on those originally suggested by Beall, COPE, DOAJ, OASPA and WAME were reduced to 10 objectively verifiable criteria following two workshops with librarians.

An evaluation of 259 biomedical journals using both the list of 19 and then 10 criteria revealed that 74 journals may have been incorrectly assessed as untrustworthy using the longer list.

The most common reason for failure to comply was in the provision of sufficient editorial information and declaration of article processing charges. However our investigation revealed that no criteria can reliably identify predatory journals.

Therefore, a complex evaluation is needed combining objectively verifiable criteria with analysis of a journal’s content and knowledge of the journal’s background.

URL : https://is.muni.cz/publication/1669782/en/Kratochvil-Plch-Sebera-Koritakova/Evaluation-of-untrustworthy-journals-Transition-from-formal-criteria-to-a-complex-view

Catégories
EN

A Provisional System to Evaluate Journal Publishers Based on Partnership Practices and Values Shared with Academic Institutions and Libraries

Author : Rachel Caldwell

Background

Journals with high impact factors (IFs) are the “coin of the realm” in many review, tenure, and promotion decisions, ipso facto, IFs influence academic authors’ views of journals and publishers. However, IFs do not evaluate how publishers interact with libraries or academic institutions.

Goal

This provisional system introduces an evaluation of publishers exclusive of IF, measuring how well a publisher’s practices align with the values of libraries and public institutions of higher education (HE). Identifying publishers with similar values may help libraries and institutions make strategic decisions about resource allocation.

Methods

Democratization of knowledge, information exchange, and the sustainability of scholarship were values identified to define partnership practices and develop a scoring system evaluating publishers. Then, four publishers were evaluated. A high score indicates alignment with the values of libraries and academic institutions and a strong partnership with HE.

Results

Highest scores were earned by a learned society publishing two journals and a library publisher supporting over 80 open-access journals.

Conclusions

Publishers, especially nonprofit publishers, could use the criteria to guide practices that align with mission-driven institutions. Institutions and libraries could use the system to identify publishers acting in good faith towards public institutions of HE.

URL : A Provisional System to Evaluate Journal Publishers Based on Partnership Practices and Values Shared with Academic Institutions and Libraries

DOI : https://doi.org/10.3390/publications8030039

Catégories
FR

Regards sur la publication scientifique francophone : le cas des revues

Auteurs/Authors : Ghislaine Chartron, Catherine le Guilloux, Dorothée Bellamy, Thomas Parisot

Quelle visibilité pour la recherche francophone sur les portails scientifiques internationaux? Quelles différences entre les sciences humaines et sociales et la médecine pour les publications francophones? Quelles perspectives pour le développement de la recherche francophone ?

Pour répondre à ces questions et en savoir plus sur la place du français dans les revues scientifiques, qu’il s’agisse des sciences humaines et sociales ou de la médecine, le GFII a le plaisir de vous présenter les conclusions de l’étude « Regards sur la publication scientifique francophone : le cas des revues », réalisée avec le soutien de la Délégation générale à la langue française et aux langues de France,  dirigée par Ghislaine Chartron, professeure au CNAM et directrice de l’Institut national des sciences et techniques de la documentation, avec la participation de Catherine le Guilloux, Dorothée Bellamy et Thomas Parisot de Cairn.

URL : http://www.gfii.fr/uploads/docs/rapport-Etude-Revues-francophones-CNAM-GFII-DGLF-final-juin2020.pdf

Catégories
EN

Analysing the Usage Data of Open Access Scholarly Books: What Can Data Tell Us?

Author : Alkim Ozaygen

This study explores data captured on the Internet related to OA scholarly books to provide a detailed overall picture of the dissemination of these books beginning from the point they were made OA.

To uncover the factors that impact on the digital uses of OA books, it explores relationships between book characteristics and the characteristics and motivations of the groups using and sharing books in digital landscapes.

URI : http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/79585

Catégories
EN

Pandemic Publishing: Medical journals drastically speed up their publication process for Covid-19

Author : Serge P.J.M. Horbach

In times of public crises, including the current Covid-19 pandemic, rapid dissemination of relevant scientific knowledge is of paramount importance. The duration of scholarly journals’ publication process is one of the main factors hindering quick delivery of new information.

While proper editorial assessment and peer review obviously require some time, turnaround times for medical journals can be up to several months, which is undesirable in the era of a crisis. Following initiatives of medical journals and scholarly publishers to accelerate their publication process, this study assesses whether medical journals have indeed managed to speed up their publication process for Covid-19 related articles.

It studies the duration of 14 medical journals’ publication process both during and prior to the current pandemic. Assessing a total of 669 articles, the study concludes that medical journals have indeed drastically accelerated the publication process for Covid-19 related articles since the outbreak of the pandemic. Compared to articles published in the same journals before the pandemic, turnaround times have decreased on average by 49%.

The largest decrease in number of days between submission and publication of articles was due to a decrease in the number of days required for peer review. For articles not related to Covid-19, no acceleration of the publication process is found.

While the acceleration of journals’ publication process is laudable from the perspective of quick information dissemination, it also raises concerns relating to the quality of the peer review process and the quality of the resulting publications.

URL : https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.18.045963