DOCSLIB.ORG

Research in Earth Sciences in Norway

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Research in Earth Sciences in Norway Research in Earth Sciences in Norway Bibliometric analysis Evaluation Division for Science Research in Earth Sciences in Norway Bibliometric analysis Evaluation Division for Science © The Research Council of Norway 2011 The Research Council of Norway P.O.Box 2700 St. Hanshaugen N–0131 OSLO Telephone: +47 22 03 70 00 Telefax: +47 22 03 70 01 [email protected] www.forskningsradet.no/english The report can be ordered at: www.forskningsradet.no/publikasjoner or green number telefax: +47 800 83 001 Design cover: Design et cetera AS Photo: Tom Andersen Printing: 07 Gruppen AS Number of copies: 300 Oslo, November 2011 ISBN 978-82-12-03005-3 (printed version) ISBN 978-82-12-03006-0 (pdf) Evaluation of Earth Sciences – Publication and Citation Analysis National Indicators and International Comparisons Institutional Analyses Dag W. Aksnes & Antje Klitkou May 2011 2 Preface This report presents a bibliometric analysis of research in earth sciences and is a background report of the evaluation of the discipline. The report is written on the commission of the Research Council of Norway by senior researcher Dr. Dag W. Aksnes (project leader) and senior researcher Dr. Antje Klitkou at the Nordic Institute for Studies in Innovation, Research and Education (NIFU). 3 4 Contents Preface..................................................................................................................................................... 3 1 Introduction.......................................................................................................................................... 6 2 Data and methods ................................................................................................................................ 7 2.1 Data sources .............................................................................................................................. 7 2.2 Included departments and researchers .................................................................................... 7 2.3 Methods .................................................................................................................................... 8 3 Norwegian geosciences in an international context .......................................................................... 16 3.1 Scientific publishing................................................................................................................. 16 3.2 Citation indicators ................................................................................................................... 25 3.3 Collaboration indicators .......................................................................................................... 27 3.4 The units selected for the evaluation...................................................................................... 28 4 Institutional analyses.......................................................................................................................... 30 4.1 Norwegian University of Life Sciences .................................................................................... 30 4.2 Norwegian University of Science and Technology .................................................................. 32 4.3 Sogn og Fjordane University College....................................................................................... 35 4.4 University Centre in Svalbard .................................................................................................. 36 4.5 University of Bergen (including Uni Research)........................................................................ 39 4.6 University of Oslo .................................................................................................................... 44 4.7 University of Stavanger ........................................................................................................... 48 4.8 University of Tromsø ............................................................................................................... 49 4.9 CICERO – Center for International Climate and Environmental Research ............................. 51 4.10 Geological Survey of Norway................................................................................................. 53 4.11 Institute of Marine Research................................................................................................. 57 4.12 Nansen Environmental and Remote Sensing Center ............................................................ 59 4.13 NORSAR ................................................................................................................................. 62 4. 14 Norwegian Institute for Air Research................................................................................... 64 4. 15 Norwegian Meteorological Institute .................................................................................... 66 4. 16 Norwegian Polar Institute..................................................................................................... 68 4. 17 Norwegian Water Resources and Energy Directorate.......................................................... 71 4. 18 SINTEF Petroleum Research ................................................................................................. 73 5 Appendix: General introduction to bibliometric indicators ............................................................... 74 5.1 The ISI (Thomson Reuter)-database............................................................................................ 74 5.2 Citation indicators ....................................................................................................................... 75 5.3 What is measured through citations? ......................................................................................... 75 5.4 Some basic citation patterns....................................................................................................... 76 5.5 Limitations................................................................................................................................... 77 5.6 Bibliometric indicators versus peer reviews ............................................................................... 78 5.7 Co-authorship as an indicator of collaboration........................................................................... 80 6 Appendix – “Level 2” journals ........................................................................................................... 83 References............................................................................................................................................. 84 5 1 Introduction This report presents the results of a bibliometric study of the institutions included in the evaluation of research in earth sciences in Norway. Both the institution/department level and the research group level are analysed. In addition the report contains a macro analysis of Norwegian earth science research in an international comparison. Publication and citation data have increasingly been applied as performance indicators in the context of science policy and research evaluation. The basis for the use of bibliometric indicators is that new knowledge – the principal objective of basic and applied research – is disseminated to the research community through publications. Publications can thereby be used as indirect measures of knowledge production. Data on how much the publications have been referred to or cited in the subsequent scientific literature can in turn be regarded as an indirect measure of the scientific impact of the research. The report is structured as follows: The first chapter presents the data and the methodology applied in the study. The second chapter gives an overview of Norwegian earth sciences in an international context. Next follows separate chapters on each of the departments and institutes included in the evaluation. A final appendix chapter provides a general introduction to bibliometric indicators, particularly focusing on analyses based on Thomson Reuters (ISI) data. 6 2 Data and methods 2.1 Data sources The study is based on two main data sources. One source is Thomson Reuters (formerly known as Institute for Scientific Information (ISI)), the producer of the most important database for bibliometric purposes. Another is the publically accessible database Frida, which is a joint system for registration of scientific publications applied by several Norwegian higher education institutions, including the universities in Oslo, Bergen, Trondheim and Tromsø. 2.2 Included departments and researchers The analysis covers the following departments and units: Universities and university colleges Norwegian University of Life Sciences o Department of Mathematical Sciences and Technology o Department of Plant and Environmental Sciences Norwegian University of Science and Technology o Department of Geology and Mineral Resources Engineering o Department of Petroleum Technology and Applied Geophysics Sogn og Fjordane University College University Centre in Svalbard o Arctic Geology Department o Arctic Geophysics Department University of Bergen (including Uni Research) o Center for Integrated Petroleum Research o Department of Earth Science o Geophysical Institute o Uni Bjerknes Centre University of Oslo o Department of Geosciences o Natural History Museum University of Stavanger o Petroleum Engineering Department University of Tromsø o Department of Geology Research institutes
Load more

Recommended publications
  • And Ordovician (Sardic) Felsic Magmatic Events in South-Western Europe: Underplating of Hot Mafic Magmas Linked to the Opening of the Rheic Ocean
    Solid Earth, 11, 2377–2409, 2020 https://doi.org/10.5194/se-11-2377-2020 © Author(s) 2020. This work is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License. Comparative geochemical study on Furongian–earliest Ordovician (Toledanian) and Ordovician (Sardic) felsic magmatic events in south-western Europe: underplating of hot mafic magmas linked to the opening of the Rheic Ocean J. Javier Álvaro1, Teresa Sánchez-García2, Claudia Puddu3, Josep Maria Casas4, Alejandro Díez-Montes5, Montserrat Liesa6, and Giacomo Oggiano7 1Instituto de Geociencias (CSIC-UCM), Dr. Severo Ochoa 7, 28040 Madrid, Spain 2Instituto Geológico y Minero de España, Ríos Rosas 23, 28003 Madrid, Spain 3Dpt. Ciencias de la Tierra, Universidad de Zaragoza, 50009 Zaragoza, Spain 4Dpt. de Dinàmica de la Terra i de l’Oceà, Universitat de Barcelona, Martí Franquès s/n, 08028 Barcelona, Spain 5Instituto Geológico y Minero de España, Plaza de la Constitución 1, 37001 Salamanca, Spain 6Dpt. de Mineralogia, Petrologia i Geologia aplicada, Universitat de Barcelona, Martí Franquès s/n, 08028 Barcelona, Spain 7Dipartimento di Scienze della Natura e del Territorio, 07100 Sassari, Italy Correspondence: J. Javier Álvaro ([email protected]) Received: 1 April 2020 – Discussion started: 20 April 2020 Revised: 14 October 2020 – Accepted: 19 October 2020 – Published: 11 December 2020 Abstract. A geochemical comparison of early Palaeo- neither metamorphism nor penetrative deformation; on the zoic felsic magmatic episodes throughout the south- contrary, their unconformities are associated with foliation- western European margin of Gondwana is made and in- free open folds subsequently affected by the Variscan defor- cludes (i) Furongian–Early Ordovician (Toledanian) activ- mation.
    [Show full text]
  • Tracking Content Updates in Scopus (2011-2018): a Quantitative Analysis of Journals Per Subject Category and Subject Categories Per Journal Frédérique Bordignon
    Tracking content updates in Scopus (2011-2018): a quantitative analysis of journals per subject category and subject categories per journal Frédérique Bordignon To cite this version: Frédérique Bordignon. Tracking content updates in Scopus (2011-2018): a quantitative analysis of journals per subject category and subject categories per journal. 17th INTERNATIONAL CON- FERENCE ON SCIENTOMETRICS & INFORMETRICS, ISSI, Sep 2019, Rome, Italy. pp.1630. hal-02281351 HAL Id: hal-02281351 https://hal-enpc.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02281351 Submitted on 9 Sep 2019 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution| 4.0 International License Tracking content updates in Scopus (2011-2018): a quantitative analysis of journals per subject category and subject categories per journal Frederique Bordignon 1 1 [email protected] Ecole des Ponts ParisTech, Direction de la Documentation, Champs-sur-Marne, France Abstract The aim of this study is to track Scopus content updates since 2011 and more particularly the distribution of journals into subject areas. An unprecedented corpus of data related to sources indexed in Scopus has been created and analyzed. Data shows important fluctuations regarding the number of journals per category and the number of categories assigned to journals.
    [Show full text]
  • Print Special Issue Flyer
    IMPACT CITESCORE FACTOR 3.7 3.103 SCOPUS an Open Access Journal by MDPI Past, Present and Future Trends in Sea Level Change Guest Editors: Message from the Guest Editors Dr. William Llovel Dear Colleagues, LOPS, Plouzané, France william.llovel@ legos.obs-mip.fr Global mean sea level rise is one of the most direct consequences of global warming. High-precision satellite Dr. Anny Cazenave altimetry, available since 1993, indicates that the global Laboratoire d’Etudes en mean sea level is not only rising at a mean rate of 3.1 géophysiques et Océanographie -1 Spatiales, CNES, 18 avenue mm.yr , but has also accelerated over this 25-year period. Edouard Belin, 31401 Toulouse Satellite altimetry also reveals strong regional variability in Cedex 9, France sea level trends that significantly differ from the global anny.cazenave@ legos.obs-mip.fr mean estimates. Ocean warming and continental ice mass loss are the two processes responsible for the global mean sea level rise.At regional scales additional processes are at play such as ocean dynamics, ocean circulation, Deadline for manuscript submissions: atmospheric forcing (wind stress, heat flux and freshwater closed (30 October 2019) flux), the response of the solid Earth to past deglaciation (glacial isostatic adjustment/GIA) and present-day land ice melt, and associated gravitationl changes. [...] For further reading, please follow the link to the Special Issue Website at: https://www.mdpi.com/journal/water/special_issues/ Sea_Level_Change mdpi.com/si/18851 SpeciaIslsue IMPACT CITESCORE FACTOR 3.7 3.103 SCOPUS an Open Access Journal by MDPI Editor-in-Chief Message from the Editor-in-Chief Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • EGU)Published with It’S Partner Copernicus •Rapid Access Peer-Review → Publication As Discussion Paper Publishing
    OpenOpen AccessAccess PublishingPublishing atat thethe EuropeanEuropean GeosciencesGeosciences UnionUnion est. 2002 I.I. IntroductionIntroduction III.III. InnovativeInnovative ApproachApproach toto PublishingPublishing This poster introduces the 14 Open Access Publications of the European Public Peer-Review and Interactive Public Discussion (see Box II) Geosciences Union (EGU)published with it’s partner Copernicus •Rapid access peer-review → publication as discussion paper Publishing. It briefly describes the EGU (II), it’s innovative publishing •Interactive public discussion: published referee comment, author approach (III), the 14 journals of the union (IV), along with comments & comments of the scientific community dissemination and archives of the journals (V) and ends with a •Paper revision & final acceptance → publication as final revised paper summary (VI). Box I provides an overview. Publication Strategy •Rigorous Peer-Review: ≥2 BoxBox I:I: QuickQuick FactsFacts II.II. TheThe EuropeanEuropean GeosciencesGeosciences UnionUnion independent referees •14 peer-reviewed open access •Immediate Open Access to all articles journals (IV) published by EGU The European Geosciences Union (EGU) is Europe’s premier geo- •Page charge waiver for first 3 years of •Authors & editors from >69 sciences union, dedicated to the pursuit of excellence in the geosciences a journal countries and the planetary and space sciences for the benefit of •Moderate page charges for authors •95,000 Pages published in 2010 humanity,worldwide. afterwards •Free access to all articles The EGU has over 11,000 members, a General Assembly with over •No extra charges for illustrations in •Interactive public peer-review 10,000 scientists each year, a diverse portfolio of 14 scientific journals colour etc. & discussion (Box II) that use an innovative “open access” format (III&IV), a number of •Author copyright under the Creative •Signatory of the Berlin thematic meetings, and education and outreach activities.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Online & Open Access Publishing: Doubts and Advantages
    Online & Open Access Publishing: Doubts and Advantages Arne K. Richter Copernicus Gesellschaft e.V. and Max-Planck-Institut für Sonnensystemforschung December 2004 Copernicus Gesellschaft e.V. 1 Reasons for Publishing in "classical" Journals Aims & Scope Content of paper matches with Journal's Aims & Scope Peer-Review All papers undergo a rigorous peer-review process prior to publication Citation Index Journal is listed by ISI in the Citation Index Impact Factor The Impact Factor of the Journal is high Competent Editors Editors (and Referees) are of high scientific standing Fast Publication The review and publication process is fast (few months) High Dissemination The Journal is international and well spread amongst colleagues Accessibility The Journal is also accessible online (on the web) Free Publication No charges for authors for publication and/or colour illustrations Competent Publisher Publisher is strong in marketing & promotion Archiving Publication is on paper and archived (Copyright Libraries) Copernicus Gesellschaft e.V. 2 1 Criticism against "Classical" Publishing Publication Process The review, typesetting & editing and production processes are too long too long ("old" technologies and subscription regulations) Publication charges Normal: High subscription rates too high AGU: High page charges, high extra charges for colour illustrations and high subscription charges ("old" technologies and optimizing incomes) Decreasing Decrease in subscriptions by 2-10% per year. Total abort of Dissemination subscriptions by universities and institutions Copyright Prevents free distribution of scientific information , even for scientific purposes No Open-Access Even electronic copy of journal only free for subscribers or payment online Unfair Refereeing Only one “real” referee; poor referees’ reports; no relevance to the issues raised in the paper; personal insults; fraudulent delay of reports Copernicus Gesellschaft e.V.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Access Publishing Practice in Geochemistry: Current State And
    EarthArXiv Preprint - Manuscript not peer-reviewed submitted to Geochemical Perspectives Letters 1 Open Access publishing practice in Geochemistry: current state and 2 look to the future 3 4 Olivier Pourret1*, Andrew Hursthouse2, Dasapta Erwin Irawan3, Karen Johannesson4, Haiyan Liu5, 5 Marc Poujol6 , Romain Tartèse7, Eric D. van Hullebusch8, Oliver Wiche9 6 7 1UniLaSalle, AGHYLE, Beauvais, France 8 2School of Computing, Engineering & Physical Sciences, University of the West of Scotland, 9 Paisley PA1 2BE, UK 10 3Faculty of Earth Sciences and Technology, Institut Teknologi Bandung, Bandung, Indonesia 11 4School of the Environment, University of Massachusetts Boston, 12 Boston, USA 13 5School of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering, East China University of 14 Technology, Nanchang 330013, PR China 15 6Université de Rennes, CNRS, Géosciences Rennes - UMR 6118, Rennes, France 16 7Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of Manchester, Manchester 17 M13 9PL, UK 18 8Université de Paris, Institut de physique du globe de Paris, CNRS, Paris, France 19 9Institute for Biosciences, Biology/Ecology Unit, TU Bergakademie Freiberg, Freiberg, 20 Germany 21 22 *Corresponding author: [email protected] 23 1 EarthArXiv Preprint - Manuscript not peer-reviewed submitted to Geochemical Perspectives Letters 24 Abstract 25 Open Access (OA) describes the free, unrestricted access to and re-use of research articles. 26 Recently, a new wave of interest, debate, and practice surrounding OA publishing has emerged. In 27 this paper, we provide a simple overview of the trends in OA practice in the broad field of 28 geochemistry. Characteristics of the approach such as whether or not an article processing charge 29 (APC) exists, what embargo periods or restrictions on self-archiving’ policies are in place, and 30 whether or not the sharing of preprints is permitted are described.
    [Show full text]
  • Reply J.Mataix-Solera 01 March 2017
    Dr Jorge Mataix-Solera Department of Agrochemistry and Environment Universidad Miguel Hernández Avda de la Universidad s/n. Edificio Alcudia 03202. Elche, Alicante Spain Tel 966658334, Fax: 966658340 [email protected] www.jorgemataix.com Dear colleagues On 18 February 2017, an anonymous report by the pseudonym "Akhenaten McDonald" about scientific misconduct was distributed widely amongst the scientific community. This report was trigged by the unusually high impact factor of Land Degradation and Development and aimed to provide evidence for scientific misconduct (artificial inflation of citations and journal impact factor). It highlights the activity of an alleged "citation cartel" involving five editors and five journals, and lists a further three editors and authors as having potentially “dubious” involvement. Whilst not accused as being part of the citation cartel, my name appears under potentially “dubious” involvement and I therefore feel the need to respond to this serious and potentially damaging accusation. My name appears in the report because (i) I co-authored some papers with other researchers that also appear in the mentioned report as having inflated citations and (ii) I am Executive Editor of SOIL, which is one of the journals listed as potentially involved in the citation cartel. The report states that in my case, my participation in that malpractice was dubious (i.e. doubtful), and no meaningful evidence is given of my potential involvement. However, the anonymous author(s) did include my name and that of other colleagues in the report with seemingly little regard to what damage that may be causing to our prestige and reputation. Some damage has unfortunately been done already.
    [Show full text]
  • Kein Folientitel
    Verbessserung wissenschaftlicher Kommunikation & Qualitätssicherung durch Open Access Publishing Ulrich Pöschl Max Planck Institut für Chemie, Abteilung Biogeochemie Becherweg 27, D-55128 Mainz [email protected] Die Digitale Herausforderung - Nutzung elektronsicher Ressourcen im universitären Umfeld Universitätsbibliothek Stuttgart, 26 Oktober 2005 EGU Outline Motivation ¾ open access perspectives & challenges Interactive Open Access Publishing: Public Peer Review & Interactive Discussion ¾ principles & effects Atmospheric Chemistry & Physics (ACP) and the European Geosciences Union (EGU) ¾ organisation, aims & achievements Summary & Outlook ¾ EGU interactive open access concept ¾ alternatives & future developments ¾ conclusions, vision & propositions EGU Motivation for Open Access Scientific, economic & educational advantages of free online availability of scientific research publications Educational: ¾ information & stimulation for students & general public ¾ equal opportunities in the information society (global & social) Economic: ¾ liberation of distorted scientific information market ¾ resolution of serial & budget crisis at university & research libraries Scientific: ¾ enhancement of research impact & productivity ¾ improvement of quality assurance: bigger need, larger gain and higher importance than “mere increase of impact & productivity” ¾ promotion of scientific progress EGU Open Access & Quality Assurance 1. We expect that the transition to open access will enhance the quality assurance and evaluation of scholarly
    [Show full text]
  • Open Peer Review: the Current Landscape and Emerging Models
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange School of Information Sciences -- Faculty Publications and Other Works School of Information Sciences 2019 Open Peer Review: The Current Landscape and Emerging Models Dietmar Wolfram University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee School of Information Studies, [email protected] Peiling Wang University of Tennessee - Knoxville School of Information Sciences, [email protected] Hyoungjoo Park University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee School of Information Studies, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_infosciepubs Part of the Scholarly Communication Commons, and the Scholarly Publishing Commons Recommended Citation Dietmar Wolfram, Peiling Wang, & Hyoungjoo Park (2019) Open peer review: the current landscape and emerging models. In Proceedings of the The 17th International Conference on Scientometrics & Informetrics (September 2-5, 2019, Rome, Italy) This Conference Proceeding is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Information Sciences at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in School of Information Sciences -- Faculty Publications and Other Works by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Open Peer Review: The Current Landscape and Emerging Models Dietmar Wolfram1, Peiling Wang2 and Hyoungjoo Park3 1 [email protected]; 3 [email protected] School of Information Studies University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Milwaukee, WI 53211, USA 2 [email protected] School of Information Sciences University of Tennessee, Knoxville Knoxville, TN 37996, USA Abstract Open peer review (OPR) is an important innovation in the open science movement. OPR can play a significant role in advancing scientific communication by increasing its transparency.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Peer Review & Interactive Discussion
    Open Access, Public Peer Review and Interactive Discussion for Improved Scientific Communication & Quality Assurance Ulrich Pöschl European Geosciences Union, Atmospheric Chemistry & Physics www.atmos-chem-phys.org Max Planck Institute for Chemistry, Mainz, Germany [email protected] IFQ –DFG Workshop “Peer Review Revisited“ WZB Berlin, 16 May 2006 EGU Outline Scientific Quality Assurance & Open Access ¾ perspectives & challenges Interactive Open Access Publishing & Collaborative Peer Review ¾ concepts & effects Atmospheric Chemistry & Physics (ACP) & European Geosciences Union (EGU) ¾ aims & achievements Alternative Concepts & Future Developments ¾ combination & integration Conclusions ¾ vision & propositions EGU Motivation for Open Access Scientific, educational & economic advantages of free online availability of scientific research publications Educational: ¾ information & stimulation for students & general public ¾ equal opportunities in the information society (global & social) Economic: ¾ liberation of distorted scientific information market ¾ resolution of serial & budget crisis at university & research libraries Scientific: ¾ enhancement of research impact & productivity ¾ improvement of quality assurance: bigger need, larger gain and higher importance than “mere increase of impact & productivity” EGU Open Access & Quality Assurance 1. We expect that the transition to open access will enhance the quality assurance and evaluation of scholarly output. This will be a direct consequence of the free availability of information. 2. In disciplines where peer-review is a cornerstone of the scientific information system, open-access publishing has demonstrated the same standards as traditional publishing. We foresee that open access will allow the development of even more effective peer-review by • allowing interactive forms of review and discussion, • permitting more efficient and more inclusive selection of referees, and • giving referees more information with which to do their work.
    [Show full text]
  • Interactive Open Access Publishing and Peer Review: the Effectiveness and Perspectives of Transparency and Self-Regulation in Scientific Communication and Evaluation
    LIBER QUARTERLY 19 (3/4), February 2010 – ISSN: 1435-5205. P293–314 http://liber.library.uu.nl/ Igitur, Utrecht Publishing & Archiving Services This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported License Interactive Open Access Publishing and Peer Review: The Effectiveness and Perspectives of Transparency and Self-Regulation in Scientific Communication and Evaluation Ulrich Pöschl Max Planck Institute for Chemistry, Mainz, Germany, [email protected] Abstract The traditional forms of scientific publishing and peer review do not live up to the demands of efficient communication and quality assurance in today’s highly diverse and rapidly evolving world of science. They need to be advanced by interactive and transparent forms of review, publication and discussion that are open to the scientific community and to the public. The advantages of open access, public peer review and interactive discussion can be efficiently and flexibly combined with the strengths of traditional publishing and peer review. Since 2001 the viability of this approach is demonstrated by the highly suc- cessful interactive open access journal Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP) and a growing number of sister journals of the European Geosciences Union (EGU) and Copernicus Publications. The achievements and statistics of these journals and their publishers clearly prove both the scientific benefits and the financial sustainability of open access. Future -per spectives are outlined with regard to critical rationalism, open societies and the global information commons. Key Words: scientific quality assurance; open peer review; collaborative peer review; open peer commentary Liber Quarterly Volume 19 Issue 3/4 2010 293 Interactive Open Access Publishing and Peer Review 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Solid Earth Sciences
    SOLID EARTH SCIENCES AUTHOR INFORMATION PACK TABLE OF CONTENTS XXX . • Description p.1 • Abstracting and Indexing p.1 • Editorial Board p.1 • Guide for Authors p.3 ISSN: 2451-912X DESCRIPTION . SESCI is a peer-reviewed journal; it publishes research papers on a wide range of subjects in the Earth sciences, including Chemical geodynamics, covering the physical and chemical evolution of the Earth Petrologic processes, ranging from igneous rocks to sedimentary and metamorphic rocks Present and the past Environments Tectonic processes that affect the crust and upper mantle, ranging from structural geology, to plate tectonics Geochemical behavior of different elements and mineralization processes High pressure experiments that address chemical and/or physical properties of Earth materials New methods, new ideas, new models SESCI aims at providing an interface for Earth scientists all over the world, to share new progress and exchange new ideas. It contains some of the following: Trends, reporting recent progress in Earth Sciences Reviews, summarizing major recent progress in a special field Articles, reporting a well- developed piece of research work Letters, reporting major progress of an ongoing research project Hypotheses, reporting original, innovative, striking new ideas on phenomena of global significance Forum, discussing papers published in SES News, brief introductions to major progress in Earth sciences ABSTRACTING AND INDEXING . Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI) Scopus Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) INSPEC EDITORIAL
    [Show full text]