Group items matching
in title, tags, annotations or urlQ&A: Martin Eve on Why We Need a Public Library of the Humanities and Social Sciences - 0 views
Post-Publication Peer-Review Already Exists, Already Has Incentives, and Is Already Robust « The Scholarly Kitchen - 0 views
Publications - 0 views
Expanding Public Access to the Results of Federally Funded Research | The White House - 0 views
Giving It Away: Sharing and the Future of Scholarly Communication - 0 views
-
Authors Kathleen Fitzpatrick Abstract Debates about open-access scholarly publishing often focus on the costs of scholarship, whether costs incurred by publishers in producing books and journals or costs faced by libraries in acquiring those publications. Taking those costs as the centre of such discussions often results in an impasse, as the financial realities of publishing-particularly within disciplines that are less well-funded than STEM fields (science, technology, engineering and mathematics)-seem to present an insurmountable obstacle to greater openness. What if, however, we were to refocus the discussion on values rather than costs? How might such a shift in focus lead us to think differently about the motives and benefits involved in scholarly communication, and how might this lead us to recognize the generosity that keeps the engine running? Keywords open access, scholarly communication, generosity, Research Works Act (RWA), Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI), humanities publishing
Peer Review: Fetishes, Fallacies, and Perceptions - 0 views
-
"uthors Robin Derricourt Abstract The key to a successful program of scholarly book publishing lies with the knowledge, creativity, and drive of the commissioning (acquisitions) editor. Peer review is a useful tool for testing and confirming the editor's judgment and arguing the case for publication, but the role of peer review alone can often be overrated. Too many funding and appointment systems are based on a fetishised image of this concept. Despite the debates and changing perceptions about scholarly books, it is editorial excellence that underlies the quality and importance of a list. While journals rely more on the formal process of peer review, the role of the entrepreneurial journal editor also remains important to scholarly communication. Keywords peer review, book publishers, editors, creativity "