scholarly journals Revisão por pares aberta

2021 ◽  
Vol 26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Francisca Clotilde de Andrade Maia ◽  
Maria Giovanna Guedes Farias
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Biomed Central ◽  
Open Access Journals ◽  
Article Processing Charges ◽  
E Mail

Objetivo: A revisão por pares aberta é um dos modelos de avaliação vem sendo discutido na literatura científica, por estar em consonância com os princípios da ciência aberta. Diante disso, este estudo objetiva identificar o modelo de revisão adotado pelos periódicos científicos indexados no filtro open peer review do Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), a fim de analisar se essas revistas contemplam as setes características apontadas por Ross-Hellauer (2017a). Método: Baseou-se na abordagem quanti-qualitativa, com uso do método exploratório e das técnicas de coleta de dados: pesquisa documental e entrevista não-estruturada. No DOAJ procedeu-se com o download de metadados e visitas aos websites de cada periódico a ser analisado. Já a entrevista não-estruturada foi efetivada por e-mail e mídia social dos editores. Para a análise dos dados adotou-se a análise de conteúdo, com o estabelecimento de categorias. Resultados: Apontam que a maior parte da amostra dos periódicos é oriunda do Reino Unido, está sob responsabilidade da editora BioMed Central (BMC), publicam em inglês, cobram o pagamento de taxa Article Processing Charges (APC) e cobrem a área Ciências da Saúde. As características identidades abertas e pareceres abertos são as mais adotadas pelos periódicos científicos da amostra. Além disso, de acordo com os editores, as revisões abertas são mais justas e atuam como um tutorial de ensino sobre como realizar um parecer científico. Os resultados demonstram ainda que a revisão aberta impacta na qualidade do manuscrito, resulta em avaliações melhores, mais construtivas, menos negativas e atua como uma alternativa para valorizar o trabalho voluntário dos avaliadores. Conclusões: Conclui-se que o modelo de revisão aberta mostra-se ser uma alternativa viável e que, com base nos resultados, pode-se considerá-lo como um modelo eficaz e que proporciona diversas contribuições para o processo de revisão por pares, em especial, para torná-lo mais transparente e justo.  

Massive Open Access Publications

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matheus Pereira Lobo
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Substantial Reduction ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Science Culture ◽  
Open Access Journals ◽  
Article Processing Charges

A huge collaborative open science model is proposed. Many authors collaborating in a paper leads to a substantial reduction for the Article Processing Charges (APCs) in the Open Access Journals. This can significantly stimulate research within a healthier citizen and open science culture.

PEDAGOGY AND MODERN EDUCATION (ICPME) September 2019: сб.науч.тр./ RELF Group & OEAPS Inc.; редкол.: Каапо Кумпулайнен (отв.ред.) [и др.]. - Варшава, Польша : OEAPS Inc., 09. 2019. - 114 С. ISBN: 978-1697070392

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Гульдар Фанисовна Ибрагимова ◽  
Ольга Алексеевна Ковалевич ◽  
Раиса Николаевна Афонина ◽  
Елена Алексеевна Лесных ◽  
Яна Игоревна Ряполова ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Open Access Publishing ◽  
Impact Factors ◽  
Publication Ethics ◽  
European Academy ◽  
Creative Commons ◽  
Authorship Credit ◽  
Open Access Journals ◽  
Publishing Ethics ◽  
Article Processing Charges

Conference paper Covered by Leading Indexing DatabasesOpen European Academy of Public Sciences aims to have all of its journals covered by the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) and Scopus and Web of Science indexing systems. Several journals have already been covered by SCIE for several years and have received official Impact Factors. Some life sciencerelated journals are also covered by PubMed/MEDLINE and archived through PubMed Central (PMC). All of our journals are archived with the Spanish and Germany National Library.All Content is Open Access and Free for Readers Journals published by Open European Academy of Public Sciences are fully open access: research articles, reviews or any other content on this platform is available to everyone free of charge. To be able to provide open access journals, we finance publication through article processing charges (APC); these are usually covered by the authors’ institutes or research funding bodies. We offer access to science and the latest research to readers for free. All of our content is published in open access and distributed under a Creative Commons License, which means published articles can be freely shared and the content reused, upon proper attribution.Open European Academy of Public Sciences Publication Ethics StatementOpen European Academy of Public Sciences is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Open European Academy of Public Sciences takes the responsibility to enforce a rigorous peerreview together with strict ethical policies and standards to ensure to add high quality scientific works to the field of scholarly publication. Unfortunately, cases of plagiarism, data falsification, inappropriate authorship credit, and the like, do arise. Open European Academy of Public Sciences takes such publishing ethics issues very seriously and our editors are trained to proceed in such cases with a zero tolerance policy. To verify the originality of content submitted to our journals, we use iThenticate to check submissions against previous publications.Mission and ValuesAs a pioneer of academic open access publishing, we serve the scientific community since 2009. Our aim is to foster scientific exchange in all forms, across all disciplines. In addition to being at the root of Open European Academy of Public Sciences and a key theme in our journals, we support sustainability by ensuring the longterm preservation of published papers, and the future of science through partnerships, sponsorships and awards.

scholarly journals quantitative analysis of the open access business and economics journals

2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fayaz Ahmad LOAN ◽  
Refhat- UN-NISA ◽  
Asmat ALI
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Online Survey ◽  
English Language ◽  
Actual Number ◽  
Open Access Journals ◽  
Economic Journals ◽  
The World ◽  
Economics Journals ◽  
Article Processing Charges ◽  
Linguistic Assessment

The main purpose of the paper is to study the publishing trends of the open access business and economics journals available in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). The online survey was conducted for collection of data and quantitative method was applied for data analysis. The data were collected from the December 10-20, 2013 about more than six hundred business and economic journals and later presented in tabular forms to reveal the findings in accordance with desired objectives. The findings show that 607 business and economics journals are listed in the DOAJ and are published fromthe 67 countries of the world. The maximum number of journals (88, 14.50%) is published from Brazil, and during the first decade (2001-2010) of the 21st century (382, 62.93%). The linguistic assessment shows that the open access business and economics journals are mostly monolingual (405, 66.72%) and the majority of these are published in English language (498, 82.04%). The results also reveal that the majority of the business and economics journals (415, 68.37%) doesn’t charge publication fees to authors whereas almost one-fourth (147, 24.22%) of the journals demand article processing charges. The study does not explore the whole World Wide Web, but only the DOAJ and therefore, figures do not represent the actual number of the open access business and economics journals available online. The study is very beneficial for the business and economics scientists, academicians, researchers, information experts and open access advocates across the globe.

scholarly journals Reforming Science Publishing

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Khaled Moustafa
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Scientific Community ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Publishing Industry ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Open Access Journal ◽  
The Past ◽  
Open Access Journals

Over the past few years, different changes have been introduced into the science publishing industry. However, important reforms are still required at both the content and form levels. First, the peer review process needs to be open, fair and transparent. Second, author-paid fees in open access journals need to either be removed or reconsidered toward more affordability. Third, the categorization of papers should include all types of scientific contributions that can be of higher interest to the scientific community than many mere quantitative and observable measures, or simply removed from publications. Forth, word counts and reference numbers in online open access journal should be nuanced or replaced by recommended ranges rather than to be a proxy of acceptance or rejection. Finally, all the coauthors of a manuscript should be considered corresponding authors and responsible for their mutual manuscript rather than only one or two.

scholarly journals Few Open Access Journals Are Compliant with Plan S

Publications ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Erik Frantsvåg ◽  
Tormod Eismann Strømme
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Open Access ◽  
Large Majority ◽  
Open Access Journals ◽  
Humanities And Social Sciences ◽  
Article Processing Charges

Much of the debate on Plan S seems to concentrate on how to make toll-access journals open access, taking for granted that existing open access journals are Plan S-compliant. We suspected this was not so and set out to explore this using Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) metadata. We conclude that a large majority of open access journals are not Plan S-compliant, and that it is small publishers in the humanities and social sciences (HSS) not charging article processing charges (APC) that will face the largest challenge with becoming compliant. Plan S needs to give special considerations to smaller publishers and/or non-APC based journals.

Evolving landscape of scholarly journals in open access environment

2019 ◽  
Vol 68 (6/7) ◽  
pp. 550-567
Author(s):  
Sumeer Gul ◽  
Sangita Gupta ◽  
Tariq Ahmad Shah ◽  
Nahida Tun Nisa ◽  
Shazia Manzoor ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Time Lag ◽  
High Income ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Finnish Meteorological Institute ◽  
Open Access Journals

Purpose Open access journals (OAJs) offer immediate, free and unrestricted online access to the scholarly literature. The purpose of this study is to trace the status and characteristics of OAJs published across the globe. Various trends that have evolved in OAJ market have been studied. Design/methodology/approach The study is based on data collected from one of the largest OA journal directory – Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). The data were downloaded on 02 January 2018 and details of OAJs added to DOAJ till 31 December 2018 were harvested, codified and further analyzed in SPSS software. A Microsoft-Excel template application – MAKESENS – developed by Finnish Meteorological Institute (Finland) in 2002, was explored to perform Mann–Kendall Test and Sen’s Slope Estimates. Findings A less score of OAJs offer access to their archival content. An increasing trend is witnessed in the OAJ publishing with Elsevier, Sciendo and BioMed Central (BMC) as the top publishers. Majority of publishers are from high-income zone countries, followed by upper-middle and lower-middle zone countries. Majority of OA publishers are from the UK, Indonesia and Brazil. A lesser score of journals offer article processing charges and/or author submission charges. Majority of OAJs from high- and lower-middle-income zone countries levy submission/processing charge to authors compared to OA journals from upper-middle- and lower-income zone countries (p < 0.01). OJS stays a prioritized platform for hosting OA journal content. Portico and CLOCKSS/LOCKSS are mostly used for long-term preservation purposes. Majority of OAJs from high-income zone countries participate in digital arching initiatives compared to ones from other income zones. Majority of the journals adopt a peer review (double-blind peer review, blind peer review, peer review and open peer review) process for validation of their scholarly content. The time lag between submission and publication ranges from one to 53 weeks, with majority of OAJs having a time lag of 11-20 weeks. Creative Commons Licenses are mainly adopted by OAJs. Research limitations/implications As the study is based on the data offered by DOAJ, any gaps in the DOAJ data will also get reflected in the study. Further, there might be other OAJs also that have yet to show compliance with DOAJ standards and get indexed with it. Originality/value The study tries to showcase the current status and characteristics of OAJs.

scholarly journals ‘No comment’? A study of commenting on PLOS articles

2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 82-100
Author(s):  
Simon Wakeling ◽  
Peter Willett ◽  
Claire Creaser ◽  
Jenny Fry ◽  
Stephen Pinfield ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Public Library ◽  
Community Perceptions ◽  
Substantial Variation ◽  
The Public ◽  
Broad Scope ◽  
Open Access Journals ◽  
Academic Discussion

Article–commenting functionality allows users to add publicly visible comments to an article on a publisher’s website. As well as facilitating forms of post-publication peer review, for publishers of open-access mega-journals (large, broad scope, open-access journals that seek to publish all technically or scientifically sound research) comments are also thought to serve as a means for the community to discuss and communicate the significance and novelty of the research, factors which are not assessed during peer review. In this article we present the results of an analysis of commenting on articles published by the Public Library of Science (PLOS), publisher of the first and best-known mega-journal PLOS ONE, between 2003 and 2016. We find that while overall commenting rates are low, and have declined since 2010, there is substantial variation across different PLOS titles. Using a typology of comments developed for this research, we also find that only around half of comments engage in an academic discussion of the article and that these discussions are most likely to focus on the paper’s technical soundness. Our results suggest that publishers are yet to encourage significant numbers of readers to leave comments, with implications for the effectiveness of commenting as a means of collecting and communicating community perceptions of an article’s importance.

scholarly journals How Frequently Are Articles in Predatory Open Access Journals Cited

Publications ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bo-Christer Björk ◽  
Sari Kanto-Karvonen ◽  
J. Tuomas Harviainen
Keyword(s):  
Quality Assurance ◽  
Open Access ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Random Sample ◽  
Academic Publishing ◽  
Scientific Quality ◽  
Scientific Impact ◽  
Predatory Journals ◽  
Open Access Journals ◽  
Citation Statistics

Predatory journals are Open Access journals of highly questionable scientific quality. Such journals pretend to use peer review for quality assurance, and spam academics with requests for submissions, in order to collect author payments. In recent years predatory journals have received a lot of negative media. While much has been said about the harm that such journals cause to academic publishing in general, an overlooked aspect is how much articles in such journals are actually read and in particular cited, that is if they have any significant impact on the research in their fields. Other studies have already demonstrated that only some of the articles in predatory journals contain faulty and directly harmful results, while a lot of the articles present mediocre and poorly reported studies. We studied citation statistics over a five-year period in Google Scholar for 250 random articles published in such journals in 2014 and found an average of 2.6 citations per article, and that 56% of the articles had no citations at all. For comparison, a random sample of articles published in the approximately 25,000 peer reviewed journals included in the Scopus index had an average of 18, 1 citations in the same period with only 9% receiving no citations. We conclude that articles published in predatory journals have little scientific impact.

The citation advantage for open access science journals with and without article processing charges

2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 118-130
Author(s):  
Mohammad Reza Ghane ◽  
Mohammad Reza Niazmand ◽  
Ameneh Sabet Sarvestani
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Human Anatomy ◽  
Science Class ◽  
H Index ◽  
Journal Citation Reports ◽  
Open Access Journals ◽  
Thomson Reuters ◽  
Article Processing Charges ◽  
Citation Metrics ◽  
Citation Advantage

In this study of access models, we compared citation performance in journals that do and do not levy article processing charges (APCs) as part of their business model. We used a sample of journals from the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) science class and its 13 subclasses and recorded four citation metrics: JIF, H-index, citations per publication (CPP) and quartile rank. We examined 1881 science journals indexed in DOAJ. Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Reports and Web of Science were used to extract JIF, H-index, CPP and quartile category. Overall, the JIF, H-index and CPP indicated that APC and non-APC open access (OA) journals had equal impact. Quartile category ranking indicated a difference in favour of APC journals. In each science subclass, we found significant differences between APC and non-APC journals in all citation metrics except for quartile rank. Discipline-related variations were observed in non-APC journals. Differences in the rank positions of scores in different groups identified citation advantages for non-APC journals in physiology, zoology, microbiology and geology, followed by botany, astronomy and general biology. Impact ranged from moderate to low in physics, chemistry, human anatomy, mathematics, general science and natural history. The results suggest that authors should consider field- and discipline-related differences in the OA citation advantage, especially when they are considering non-APC OA journals categorised in two or more subjects. This may encourage OA publishing at least in the science class.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document