scholarly journals Transparent evaluation of scholarly communications

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Quintana ◽  
James Heathers

The processes behind the evaluation of scholarly communications are mostly conducted behind closed doors, with only the final published output accessible to readers. The criteria used to decide which manuscripts are sent out for peer-review and ultimately accepted for publication are often vague and hard to interpret. Without access to peer-review reports and editorial comments, it is also unclear how published manuscripts have been assessed. In this conversation, we will discuss the benefits of transparent scholarly communication and the challenges of implementing fully-transparent processes. We will also cover the how social media and podcasts can be used to demystify the publication process by providing an open forum for discussing the myriad publication processes that are typically unwritten, such as rebutting reviewer comments.

2020 ◽  
pp. 76-89
Author(s):  
Ilana Redstone

The three beliefs have created a situation where certain ideas, claims, and questions are protected from criticism, and therefore from open inquiry. As a corollary, academic publications that present ideas running counter to these beliefs are subject to what is in essence an extra round of social media–driven review that starts after a paper has already successfully navigated the traditional peer-review process and been published. This dynamic acts as a form of censorship that can impact a journal’s immediate handling of the paper in question. In addition, the very existence of postpublication social media review will act to shape the behavior of researchers and journal editors. The result is an environment with substantial constraints on free inquiry.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-42
Author(s):  
Kathryn A. Kaiser ◽  
Michelle Urberg ◽  
Maria Johnsson ◽  
Jennifer Kemp ◽  
Alice Meadows ◽  
...  

Abstract The Metadata 2020 initiative is an ongoing effort to bring various scholarly communications stakeholder groups together to promote principles and standards of practice to improve the quality of metadata. To understand the perspectives and practices regarding metadata of the main stakeholder groups (librarians, publishers, researchers and repository managers), we conducted a survey during summer 2019. The survey content was generated by representatives from the stakeholder groups. A link to an online survey (17 or 18 questions depending on the group) was distributed through multiple social media, listserv, and blog outlets. Responses were anonymous, with an optional entry for names and email addresses for those who were willing to be contacted later. Complete responses (N=211; 87 librarians, 27 publishers, 48 repository managers, and 49 researchers) representing 23 countries on four continents were analyzed and summarized for thematic content and ranking of awareness and practices. Across the stakeholder groups, the level of awareness and usage of metadata methods and practices was highly variable. Clear gaps across the groups point to the need for consolidation of schema and practices, as well as broad educational efforts in order to increase knowledge and implementation of metadata in scholarly communications. Peer Review https://publons.com/publon/10.1162/qss_a_00133


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. 2277-2301 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. E. Day ◽  
P. Corbett ◽  
J. Boyle

Characterisation of gender differences throughout peer-review publication process as revealed by thorough analysis of Royal Society of Chemistry submissions, publications and citation data.


Author(s):  
Md. Monirul Islam ◽  
Abu Zobayed ◽  
Md. Imran Nur Manik ◽  
Mohammad Asadujjaman

Background: The present study has been carried out to find out the people’s perception about the COVID-19 pandemic and the effects of this pandemic on their daily lives. Methods: A Google form was used to create an online survey questionnaire distributed via personal relationships and social media. Data were collected using questionnaires consisting of socio-demographic status of participants, COVID-19 concepts and changes in the participants’ lifestyle. A total of 1088 respondents took part in the survey, and the results were evaluated using several statistical approaches. The results were presented in a variety of tables and graphs. Results: Males made up 53.3% of the participants, while females made up 46.7% who were from villages (29.87%), cities (53.77%), and semi-urban areas (16.36%). Most participants reported that they got information about the COVID-19 pandemic from social media, and they cited 'fever' as an indicator of the sickness. Although the amount of physical interactions with friends and family has not dropped much, working conditions and employment status have significantly altered. The majority of the participants claimed they have no concerns about the COVID-19. Conclusion: For up-to-date information regarding COVID-19, people in Bangladesh from all walks of life rely largely on social media. COVID-19 awareness isn't enough to inhibit the spreading of the virus from community to community. Employees' work schedules have also been drastically altered. To prevent transmission, we should all follow the safety rules strictly.               Peer Review History: Received: 4 November 2021; Revised: 17 December; Accepted: 28 December, Available online: 15 January 2022 Academic Editor: Dr. Muhammad Zahid Iqbal, AIMST University, Malaysia, [email protected] UJPR follows the most transparent and toughest ‘Advanced OPEN peer review’ system. The identity of the authors and, reviewers will be known to each other. This transparent process will help to eradicate any possible malicious/purposeful interference by any person (publishing staff, reviewer, editor, author, etc) during peer review. As a result of this unique system, all reviewers will get their due recognition and respect, once their names are published in the papers. We expect that, by publishing peer review reports with published papers, will be helpful to many authors for drafting their article according to the specifications. Auhors will remove any error of their article and they will improve their article(s) according to the previous reports displayed with published article(s). The main purpose of it is ‘to improve the quality of a candidate manuscript’. Our reviewers check the ‘strength and weakness of a manuscript honestly’. There will increase in the perfection, and transparency.  Received file:                Reviewer's Comments: Average Peer review marks at initial stage: 5.5/10 Average Peer review marks at publication stage: 7.0/10 Reviewers: Dr. Eyassu Mathewos, School of public health, college of health sciences and medicine, Wolaita Soddo university- P.O. Box 158, Wolaita Soddo, Ethiopia. Dr. Barkat Ali Khan, Kampala International University , Uganda, [email protected] Similar Articles:  COVID-19: PHARMACOLOGICAL AND THERAPEUTIC APPROACHES COVID-19 IN MEXICO: PREPARING FOR FUTURE PANDEMICS


2015 ◽  
Vol 39 (5) ◽  
pp. 649-663 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andy Tattersall

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is twofold, first, to discuss the current and future issues around post-publication open peer review. Second, to highlight some of the main protagonists and platforms that encourages open peer review, pre-and post-publication. Design/methodology/approach – The first part of the paper aims to discuss the facilitators and barriers that will enable and prevent academics engaging with the new and established platforms of scholarly communication and review. These issues are covered with the intention of proposing further dialogue within the academic community that ultimately address researchers’ concerns, whilst continuing to nurture a progressive approach to scholarly communication and review. The paper will continue to look at the prominent open post-publication platforms and tools and discuss whether in the future it will become a standard model. Findings – The paper identifies several problems, not exclusive to open peer review that could inhibit academics from being open with their reviews and comments of other’s research. Whilst identifies opportunities to be had by embracing a new era of academic openness. Practical implications – The paper summarises key platforms and arguments for open peer review and will be of interest to researchers in different disciplines as well as the wider academic community wanting to know more about scholarly communications and measurement. Originality/value – This paper looks at many of the new platforms that have been previously ignored and discusses issues relating to open peer review that have only been touched on in brief by other published research.


Author(s):  
Markus Wust

This qualitative study investigates how faculty gather information for teaching and research and their opinions on open access approaches to scholarly communication. Despite generally favorable reactions, a perceived lack of peer review and impact factors were among the most common reasons for not publishing through open-access forums.Cette étude qualitative examine comment les membres du corps professoral recueillent l’information pour l’enseignement et la recherche, et leurs opinions envers les approches de la communication scientifique à libre accès. Malgré des réactions généralement favorables, le manque perçu de révision par les pairs et les facteurs d’impact comptent parmi les motifs habituellement évoqués pour ne pas publier sur ces tribunes à libre accès. 


2020 ◽  
Vol 54 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-2
Author(s):  
Shubhanshu Mishra

Information extraction (IE) aims at extracting structured data from unstructured or semi-structured data. The thesis starts by identifying social media data and scholarly communication data as a special case of digital social trace data (DSTD). This identification allows us to utilize the graph structure of the data (e.g., user connected to a tweet, author connected to a paper, author connected to authors, etc.) for developing new information extraction tasks. The thesis focuses on information extraction from DSTD, first, using only the text data from tweets and scholarly paper abstracts, and then using the full graph structure of Twitter and scholarly communications datasets. This thesis makes three major contributions. First, new IE tasks based on DSTD representation of the data are introduced. For scholarly communication data, methods are developed to identify article and author level novelty [Mishra and Torvik, 2016] and expertise. Furthermore, interfaces for examining the extracted information are introduced. A social communication temporal graph (SCTG) is introduced for comparing different communication data like tweets tagged with sentiment, tweets about a search query, and Facebook group posts. For social media, new text classification categories are introduced, with the aim of identifying enthusiastic and supportive users, via their tweets. Additionally, the correlation between sentiment classes and Twitter meta-data in public corpora is analyzed, leading to the development of a better model for sentiment classification [Mishra and Diesner, 2018]. Second, methods are introduced for extracting information from social media and scholarly data. For scholarly data, a semi-automatic method is introduced for the construction of a large-scale taxonomy of computer science concepts. The method relies on the Wikipedia category tree. The constructed taxonomy is used for identifying key computer science phrases in scholarly papers, and tracking their evolution over time. Similarly, for social media data, machine learning models based on human-in-the-loop learning [Mishra et al., 2015], semi-supervised learning [Mishra and Diesner, 2016], and multi-task learning [Mishra, 2019] are introduced for identifying sentiment, named entities, part of speech tags, phrase chunks, and super-sense tags. The machine learning models are developed with a focus on leveraging all available data. The multi-task models presented here result in competitive performance against other methods, for most of the tasks, while reducing inference time computational costs. Finally, this thesis has resulted in the creation of multiple open source tools and public data sets (see URL below), which can be utilized by the research community. The thesis aims to act as a bridge between research questions and techniques used in DSTD from different domains. The methods and tools presented here can help advance work in the areas of social media and scholarly data analysis.


2020 ◽  
Vol 17 ◽  
pp. 15-19
Author(s):  
Bishnu Bahadur Khatri

Peer review in scholarly communication and scientific publishing, in one form or another, has always been regarded as crucial to the reputation and reliability of scientific research. In the growing interest of scholarly research and publication, this paper tries to discuss about peer review process and its different types to communicate the early career researchers and academics.This paper has used the published and unpublished documents for information collection. It reveals that peer review places the reviewer, with the author, at the heart of scientific publishing. It is the system used to assess the quality of scientific research before it is published. Therefore, it concludes that peer review is used to advancing and testing scientific knowledgeas a quality control mechanism forscientists, publishers and the public.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document