Group items tagged

PKPs and OJs

Utilice la barra de navegación de arriba para moverse a través de los vídeos para el módulo de esta semana . Desplácese hacia abajo para espacios de discusión. Introducción Este video, de Elsevier , una de las editoriales más grandes del mundo, ofrece una breve descripción de la historia de la edición académica, y un vistazo a sus principales funciones de registro, certificación, difusión, preservación y uso.

Utilice la barra de navegación de arriba para moverse a través de los vídeos para el módulo de esta semana . Desplácese hacia abajo para espacios de discusión. Introducción Este video, de Elsevier , una de las editoriales más grandes del mundo, ofrece una breve descripción de la historia de la edición académica, y un vistazo a sus principales funciones de registro, certificación, difusión, preservación y uso.

Aún no entiendo el proceso de peer assessment en español, es el mismo que en inglés? sólo el link?

A report from Simba Information tallies the total value of the open access marketplace, putting OA at 2.3% of the total market for STM journals. It documents as well, without comment, that more an...

Resources for identifying Quality Open Access journals! There are some KEY questions to ask and to be answered when you are considering publishing in an Open Access journal

Yes, it needs proper evaluation before you select a journal for your article. It validates your article strength by its publisher type and name also.

Information Research, is an open access, international, peer-reviewed, scholarly journal, dedicated to making accessible the results of research across a wide range of information-related disciplines. It is privately published and edited by Professor T.D. Wilson. It is hosted, and given technical support, by Lund University Libraries, Sweden and editorial support by the University of Borås, Sweden.

This is a blog post from Pubpeer.com, a website that allows for crowd-sourced peer reviewing. This post details the website's insight about fake scientific evidence and sloppy science, and how open data can help mitigate these issues. It also mentions that after they allowed "anonymous" people to post, they received more "calling out" of bad science and poor methodology.

Online discussions and post-publication analyses are catching mistakes that sneak past editorial review. This article describes the pitfalls with editorial review and pre-publication peer review, and advocates for post-publication crowd-sourced reviewing through social media platforms.

I think having a comments section is a great way to provide feedback on the information provided. Often when I read articles the comments section allows me to understand different perspectives and interpretations of the information.

This article, while not necessarily explicitly, managed to hint at what I find to be a source of problematic practices/outcomes in the academy, publishing, etc. That is, it is not necessarily that traditional peer review processes are ineffective at finding errors or misconduct, but rather it is when our processes and practices become so systematized that we can mindlessly or effortlessly engage in and reproduce them without our full, critical attention that they can produce problems. While I think there are good reasons to critique the notion of peer and "expert" culture within traditional peer review processes, an additional and separate critique is the problems that arise with systematization. The article implicitly addressed this when the author commented that current post-publication environments "provide a public space that is not under the control of journal editors and conference organizers." Yet, as White indicates, there exists skepticism of the value of post-publication reviews along with a simultaneous effort to build post-publication systems that have standards that put those questioning it at ease. The National Institutes of Health establishing requirements that potential post-publication reviewers must meet demonstrated this. That is, they are trying to figure out how to systematize post-publication. For me, what this article indicates is that we ought to figure out how to keep our academic and publishing processes "fresh," so to speak. This way we don't become so comfortable with our methods and practices that they allow us to simply go through the motions without fostering innovative and critical inquiry.

"Taylor & Francis carried out a worldwide survey, with the aim of exploring journal authors' views on open access. Having previously conducted a survey on open access in 2013, we have been able to see how authors' opinions have developed, and whether the discussion and debate on open access has helped to inform and shape views. With responses to both the 2013 and 2014 survey given side-by-side, you can easily see how attitudes have changed. Alongside this, the 2014 survey explores many new areas and gives a fascinating insight into authors' current perceptions of open access."

"For most societies, the potential financial consequences of a move to Gold OA are the key concern. Income from subscriptions often provides a basis for financing other activities; as such, a loss in income can have far-reaching consequences. Naturally those who are charged with protecting a society´s interests are fearful of making changes that could have a negative impact on their organisation´s ability to fulfil its aims."

Just a few short years ago, the world of digital scholarly texts was in its primordial stages, and it is still the case that most online editions are simply basic HTML or scanned images from more or less arbitrarily chosen print editions.

" it is important to note that one of the drivers of OA is the notion that the more content and ideas that are shared, the more likely breakthroughs will materialize; OA is associated with innovation."

Module 9