DOCSLIB.ORG

Publishing News in 2016 – an Overview

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Publishing News in 2016 – an Overview Publishing News in 2016 – An Overview Dear Reader, The landscape in the publishing industry is constantly changing and evolving. It can get quite challenging to stay updated on the latest happenings, products, and innovations around the world. We have tried to compile some of these in this free downloadable e-book and hope that you find them informative. We have also added some popular links at the end as additional resources that you can refer to. These pieces will also lead you to the original sources, which will definitely provide you detailed information. Happy Reading! Regards, Enago Academy Team Publishing News in 2016 – An Overview 1 Contents Recognizing Peer Review through Publons ................................................................................ 4 Using Publons .......................................................................................................................... 4 Growing Partnerships .............................................................................................................. 4 Sentinels of Science ................................................................................................................. 4 Yewno for Education: A New Approach to Knowledge Discovery ........................................... 5 Using Yewno ............................................................................................................................ 5 Yewno for Education ............................................................................................................... 5 A Promising Tool ...................................................................................................................... 5 Reaxys: Chemistry Search Engine by Elsevier ........................................................................... 6 Who uses Reaxys? ................................................................................................................... 6 New Updates to Reaxys ........................................................................................................... 7 ChemSearch Challenge ............................................................................................................ 7 Research Ideas and Outcomes (RIO) Journal: Making the Research Cycle Public .................... 8 Making the Research Cycle Transparent ................................................................................. 8 Collaborative Writing and Review ........................................................................................... 9 Good for Scientists, Good for Science ................................................................................... 10 How is Sci-Hub Affecting Academic Publishing? .................................................................... 10 Publishing Process and Journal Access .................................................................................. 10 Effects of Sci-Hub ................................................................................................................... 11 Moving Forward .................................................................................................................... 11 The Journal of Brief Ideas is Making Your Ideas Citable......................................................... 12 Archiving Intellectual Capital ................................................................................................. 12 Benefits for Researchers ........................................................................................................ 13 Quality Control ...................................................................................................................... 13 Sparrho: An Innovative Way to Remain Updated .................................................................... 13 Channels and Pinboards ........................................................................................................ 14 The Discovery Engine ............................................................................................................. 14 Revolutionising Science ......................................................................................................... 14 Publishing News in 2016 – An Overview 2 Important Global Events ........................................................................................................... 15 Open Access Week ................................................................................................................ 15 Peer Review Week ................................................................................................................. 15 Brexit: It’s Impact on Research in the UK .............................................................................. 15 The Nature scandal ................................................................................................................ 15 Some Important Links ............................................................................................................... 15 Latest News ........................................................................................................................... 15 Featured Interviews ............................................................................................................... 15 Manuscript Preparation Resources ....................................................................................... 15 Author Workshops Conducted by Enago .............................................................................. 15 Publishing News in 2016 – An Overview 3 Recognizing Peer Review through Publons The peer review process is a crucial part of scholarly communication, but without good referees, the system would not work. However, researchers barely get credit for this important job. To ensure that reviewers receive the appreciation they deserve, scientific publishers and peer review institutions have started an initiative to recognize peer review. You must have read our recent article on Publons, an online platform that helps researchers track, verify, and showcase their peer review activity across several journals. Publons also rewards top referees several times per year. Using Publons Publons, which was launched in 2012, already has more than 80,000 registered members. Researchers who sign up to Publons can use their verified peer reviews and editorial records for funding and promotion applications. Also, using the service does not affect reviewer anonymity. By default, the content of the reports is not publicly displayed and only the year of the review and the name of the journal appear on a reviewer’s profile. The content of the report can be made open access after a paper has been published only if both the reviewer and the journal agree. Growing Partnerships Four years after its inception, Publons already has partnerships with several leading scientific publishers, such as BMJ, SAGE, Cambridge University Press, Springer Nature, IOP Publishing, and Wiley. It also works with ORCID such that scientists can easily connect their reviewer activities to their ORCID record. Following a six-month pilot program conducted in 2015, Wiley recently announced that more than 750 of its journals will be integrated with Publons. The 2015 trial showed an improvement in reviewer acceptance rates for the pilot journals—and faster review times among the reviewers that opted in—indicating that referee recognition can be an excellent way to speed up the peer review process and let reviewers know that their work is being valued. Sentinels of Science A survey carried out in 2015 among nearly 3000 reviewers showed that researchers spend a huge amount of time evaluating other scientists’ work (they spent twenty-two million researcher hours reviewing papers for the top 12 publishers in 2013 alone). Most of the participants of the survey said that feedback from the journals they review for and acknowledgment are the best rewards for these efforts. In line with this, the first Peer Review Week was introduced last year to celebrate the fundamental role that peer review plays in ensuring scientific quality. The inaugural event was a success, and in September this year, more than 20 institutions gathered to organize the second annual Peer Review Week, which involved a number of activities, such as webinars, interviews, social media campaigns, and others. The highlight of this year’s event was the introduction of the annual Sentinels of Science Awards program, where Publons teamed up with Publishing News in 2016 – An Overview 4 top publishers and industry leaders to honor the “highest achievers in peer review across the world’s journals.” Yewno for Education: A New Approach to Knowledge Discovery Yewno is a new search engine that claims to mimic the workings of the human brain. In contrast to traditional tools, such as Google, Yahoo, or Bing, which are based on keyword search, Yewno is able to extract meaning from a great number of scholarly publications in the form of concepts. It enables searching for ideas rather than specific expressions. The platform uses a combination of full-text analysis, computational semantics, neural networks, and machine learning algorithms to visualize information, uncovering relationships between different sources. Using Yewno The platform explores connections between various pieces of information and displays them graphically. Two panels are shown: a graph or concept map on the left-hand side and a context bar on the right-hand side. Users
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Researcher ID/Publons – 2019 Instructions
    Researcher ID/Publons – 2019 Instructions ResearcherID is has now been integrated into the Publons platform: https://publons.com/account/login/. Publons is similar to researcher ID and is a platform which records, verifies, and showcases peer review contributions of researchers. Publons information integrates with Web of Science or records imported from ORCID, EndNote or manual uploads and allows you to track citations to your research outputs that are indexed in Web of Science. Please note that publications that have been manually entered into your Publons from journals outside of Web of Science will not track your citation metrics. Your Account Existing Account If you already have an account for ResearcherID, or Web of Science, you can login at https://publons.com/account/login/ using the same username and password. The publications you previously added into ResearcherID have automatically be added into your Publons account. Create a New Account If you do not already have a ResearcherID, create a Publons account here: https://publons.com/account/register/. You will receive a ResearcherID overnight from Publons that you will be able to use to attach to your publications in Web of Science. Adding Publications Once logged into your account you can load your publications by importing them from Web of Science, ORCID account, EndNote Library or manually using identifiers such as DOI numbers. (Note that citation metrics won't be tracked for records that do not appear in Web of Science). Loading Web of Science publications Select “Publications” under My Records then select “Import Publications” Publons will automatically search Web of Science when you select “Import Publications” for publications that match the email addresses and publishing names you listed in your profile.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploratory Analysis of Publons Metrics and Their Relationship with Bibliometric and Altmetric Impact
    Exploratory analysis of Publons metrics and their relationship with bibliometric and altmetric impact José Luis Ortega Institute for Advanced Social Studies (IESA-CSIC), Córdoba, Spain, [email protected] Abstract Purpose: This study aims to analyse the metrics provided by Publons about the scoring of publications and their relationship with impact measurements (bibliometric and altmetric indicators). Design/methodology/approach: In January 2018, 45,819 research articles were extracted from Publons, including all their metrics (scores, number of pre and post reviews, reviewers, etc.). Using the DOI identifier, other metrics from altmetric providers were gathered to compare the scores of those publications in Publons with their bibliometric and altmetric impact in PlumX, Altmetric.com and Crossref Event Data (CED). Findings: The results show that (1) there are important biases in the coverage of Publons according to disciplines and publishers; (2) metrics from Publons present several problems as research evaluation indicators; and (3) correlations between bibliometric and altmetric counts and the Publons metrics are very weak (r<.2) and not significant. Originality/value: This is the first study about the Publons metrics at article level and their relationship with other quantitative measures such as bibliometric and altmetric indicators. Keywords: Publons, Altmetrics, Bibliometrics, Peer-review 1. Introduction Traditionally, peer-review has been the most appropriate way to validate scientific advances. Since the first beginning of the scientific revolution, scientific theories and discoveries were discussed and agreed by the research community, as a way to confirm and accept new knowledge. This validation process has arrived until our days as a suitable tool for accepting the most relevant manuscripts to academic journals, allocating research funds or selecting and promoting scientific staff.
    [Show full text]
  • Publons for Researchers Final
    Track more of your impact. Own your research identity. Publons Researcher Profiles “In today’s highly competitive research environment, I am frequently asked to demonstrate my impact. But keeping track of all my contributions is tedious, frustrating, and time-consuming. I have grown exhausted with keeping all of the different profiles and tools up-to-date.” Researcher feedback Researcher feedback 2 Track more of your research impact and own your online researcher identity Track your publications, citation metrics, peer reviews, and journal editing work in one, easy-to- maintain profile. ● All your publications, instantly imported from Web of Science, ORCiD, or your bibliographic reference manager (e.g. EndNote Zotero, or Mendeley) ● Trusted citation metrics, automatically imported from the Web of Science Core Collection ● Manage your publication records in Web of Science ● Your verified peer review and journal editing history, powered by partnerships with thousands of scholarly journals ● Downloadable record summarising your scholarly impact as an author, editor and peer reviewer. 3 Unified Authentication A seamless user-experience. Sign in to Publons, EndNote, and Web of Science (entitlements pending) using the same email and password. 4 Modern profile Summary of key publication and peer review metrics Simple and intuitive user interface and clear information hierarchy making it easy for you to build, maintain, and navigate profiles. Navigate to detailed metrics, publication, or peer review and journal editing summaries Research fields, bio, institutional affiliations, and highly cited and peer review awards Most cited publications and citation counts Journals reviewed for and count of verified reviews performed 5 Easy to add publications to your profile 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Show More of Your Research Impact
    Show more of your research impact The world’s researchers use Publons to track their publications, citations, peer reviews, and journal affiliations in one place. The only researcher profile with: All your publications, easily imported Verified peer review and journal from Web of Science, ORCID, or your editing history, powered by partnerships bibliographic reference manager with thousands of scholarly journals (e.g. EndNote or Mendeley) Downloadable record summarizing Trusted citation metrics, your scholarly impact as an author, automatically imported from the editor and peer reviewer Web of Science Core Collection "Publons is brilliant. I like how it is becoming a one- stop portal for all metrics that matter to scientists' careers: H-index, citations, reviews, etc. I love the WS190020 / 01 WS190020 automated graphs of citations and reviews over time." Matty Demont, Senior Economist, International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) A more complete picture Managing your research of your impact identity made easy Raise your visibility with the only profile Import your publications from Web of that lets you track your publications, Science, ORCID, or your bibliographic citation metrics, peer review history, reference manager in a few clicks. and journal affiliations, in one place. • Automatically add verified records of your peer review work thanks to integrations with thousands of the world's scholarly journals. • Link with ORCiD to keep your ORCiD Take control of your visibility ID in sync with your Publons profile. in the Web of Science Claiming your publications on Publons ensures they are correctly attributed to you in the Web of Science — the research discovery platform and citation index trusted by funders and Showcase your awards researchers around the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Research Data and Open Peer Review: Perceptions of a Medical and Health Sciences Community in Greece
    publications Case Report Open Research Data and Open Peer Review: Perceptions of a Medical and Health Sciences Community in Greece Eirini Delikoura 1,‡ and Dimitrios Kouis 2,*,†,‡ 1 MLIS, General Hospital of Athens “Hippokration”, 11527 Athens, Greece; [email protected] 2 Department of Archival, Library & Information Studies, University of West Attica, 12243 Athens, Greece * Correspondence: [email protected] † Current address: Agiou Spyridonos Str., Aegaleo, 12243 Athens, Greece. ‡ These authors contributed equally to this work. Abstract: Recently significant initiatives have been launched for the dissemination of Open Access as part of the Open Science movement. Nevertheless, two other major pillars of Open Science such as Open Research Data (ORD) and Open Peer Review (OPR) are still in an early stage of development among the communities of researchers and stakeholders. The present study sought to unveil the perceptions of a medical and health sciences community about these issues. Through the investigation of researchers‘ attitudes, valuable conclusions can be drawn, especially in the field of medicine and health sciences, where an explosive growth of scientific publishing exists. A quantitative survey was conducted based on a structured questionnaire, with 179 valid responses. The participants in the survey agreed with the Open Peer Review principles. However, they ignored basic terms like FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable) and appeared incentivized to permit the exploitation of their data. Regarding Open Peer Review (OPR), participants expressed their agreement, implying their support for a trustworthy evaluation system. Conclusively, researchers Citation: Delikoura, E.; Kouis, D. need to receive proper training for both Open Research Data principles and Open Peer Review Open Research Data and Open Peer processes which combined with a reformed evaluation system will enable them to take full advantage Review: Perceptions of a Medical and of the opportunities that arise from the new scholarly publishing and communication landscape.
    [Show full text]
  • Instruction for Work in Publons
    Instruction for Work in Publons Publons is the service allowing researchers to monitor, test and demonstrate their editorial and expert activities in the capacity of editors and reviewers of scientific journals. The profile of Publons is integrated with ResearcherID (RID). It is closely integrated with ORCID and it can be of interest not only for editors and reviewers, but also authors as it contains different analytical tools as well as free reviewer courses. That is how the profile of a scientist looks like in Publons. The page of the profile contains data reflecting the scientist status in Publons. Publons, EndNote and Web of Science (WoS) use a unified system of authorization. Therefore, it is better to use the already existing account which is now single for all resources of the Company Clarivate Analytics. Most likely, you already have the Publons profile, if you have started and worked with RID profile. Simply go to the search page of Publons and enter your name or RID. If you located yourself, simply type your account data from RID on the login page. In case of necessity, you can use the service of password restoration. If you have accounts of EndNote and WoS, you can try to login using them. It is not hard to register the new account. When you login in Publons for the first time, this resource will ask you to fill some information and search your publications in WoS. All this can be done immediately or later. The scientist profile in Publons allows one to enter various kinds of information.
    [Show full text]
  • Web of Science (Wos) and Scopus: the Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today's Academic World
    publications Review Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World Raminta Pranckute˙ Scientific Information Department, Library, Vilnius Gediminas Technical University, Sauletekio˙ Ave. 14, LT-10223 Vilnius, Lithuania; [email protected] Abstract: Nowadays, the importance of bibliographic databases (DBs) has increased enormously, as they are the main providers of publication metadata and bibliometric indicators universally used both for research assessment practices and for performing daily tasks. Because the reliability of these tasks firstly depends on the data source, all users of the DBs should be able to choose the most suitable one. Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus are the two main bibliographic DBs. The comprehensive evaluation of the DBs’ coverage is practically impossible without extensive bibliometric analyses or literature reviews, but most DBs users do not have bibliometric competence and/or are not willing to invest additional time for such evaluations. Apart from that, the convenience of the DB’s interface, performance, provided impact indicators and additional tools may also influence the users’ choice. The main goal of this work is to provide all of the potential users with an all-inclusive description of the two main bibliographic DBs by gathering the findings that are presented in the most recent literature and information provided by the owners of the DBs at one place. This overview should aid all stakeholders employing publication and citation data in selecting the most suitable DB. Keywords: WoS; Scopus; bibliographic databases; comparison; content coverage; evaluation; citation impact indicators Citation: Pranckute,˙ R. Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Predatory Publishing – Firm Action Is Required List of Fake Conference in Order to Help Researchers Avoid Falling Into the Trap of Predatory Conferences
    Science of the Total Environment 734 (2020) 139329 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Science of the Total Environment journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/scitotenv Predatory publishing – Firm action is required list of fake conference in order to help researchers avoid falling into the trap of predatory conferences. Another issue is the fact that the OMICS Publishing Group claims that Keywords: some of its journals are indexed by databases such as Scopus. Again, a Publons simple check using the Scopus Preview Website (www.scopus.com/ Predatory publishers sources?zone=&origin=NO%20ORIGIN%20DEFINED), which is avail- Scopus fi Open access able free of charge on the internet, con rmed that only 15 journals have been at some point listed in this global abstract and citation data- base (Table 1). In fact, no journals from this publisher have been indexed by Scopus since 2015. The internet has revolutionized all kinds of industries, but it has also A recent study has shown the adverse effect of misleading informa- created opportunities for unscrupulous organizations to take advantage tion. In a seminal piece of work, Moher et al. (2017) determined that of them. Predatory publishing companies have done so through an 1907 articles published by more than 200 supposedly predatory open-access model, sowing confusion through misleading information, journals contained data on roughly 2 million individuals and over lack of transparency, indiscriminate solicitation and deviation from best 8000 animals. Since the quality of the peer-review process of predatory editorial and publication practices (Grudniewicz et al., 2019; Sonne journals is questionable, the validity of this huge amount of data be- et al., 2020a).
    [Show full text]
  • Track Your Research Impact
    Track your research impact Publons Researcher Profiles Bob Green Solution Specialist October 2019 Publons in October 2019 snapshot 2M+ 5.1M+ 4,700+ 250+ Researcher Profiles Verified Reviews Intergrated journals Publisher partners 2 Track more of your research impact and own your online researcher identity Track your publications, citation metrics, peer reviews, and journal editing work in one, easy-to- maintain profile. ● All your publications, instantly imported from Web of Science, ORCiD, or your bibliographic reference manager (e.g. EndNote Zotero, or Mendeley) ● Trusted citation metrics, automatically imported from the Web of Science Core Collection ● Manage your publication records in Web of Science ● Your verified peer review and journal editing history, powered by partnerships with thousands of scholarly journals ● Downloadable record summarising your scholarly impact as an author, editor and peer reviewer. 3 Unified Authentication A seamless user-experience. Sign in to Publons, EndNote, and Web of Science (entitlements pending) using the same email and password. 4 Modern profile Summary of key publication and Simple and intuitive user peer review metrics interface and clear information hierarchy Navigate to detailed metrics, making it easy for you to publication, or peer review and build, maintain, and journal editing summaries navigate profiles. Research fields, bio, institutional affiliations, and highly cited and peer review awards Most cited publications and citation counts Journals reviewed for and count of verified reviews performed 5 Easy to add publications to your profile • Import publications directly from Web of Science via your Private Dashboard. • Import publications from ORCiD, DOI/title search, or by file upload. • Validate which publications are yours and add them to your profile.
    [Show full text]
  • Publons Seeks to Attract Reviewers and Improve Peer Review Lilian Nassi-Calòa,*
    EDITORIAL http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1984-0462/;2017;35;4;00018 IN TIME: PUBLONS BUSCA ATRAIR PARECERISTAS E APERFEIÇOAR A AVALIAÇÃO POR PARES In time: Publons seeks to attract reviewers and improve peer review Lilian Nassi-Calòa,* avaliação por pares, um dos pilares da comunicação científica, vem passando por um momento de transição, em direção à maior confiabilidade, transparência e responsabilidade.1 É fato conhecido da comunidade acadêmica a saturação pela qual passa o atual modelo de revisão por pares. O aumento contínuoA do número de publicações não é acompanhado pelo incremento da quantidade de pesquisadores que atuam como pareceris- tas dos artigos submetidos. Em consequência disso, a qualidade dos pareceres diminuiu e o tempo necessário para obtê-los, por outro lado, aumentou consideravelmente, o que ocasiona atrasos indesejáveis na disseminação do conhecimento e no avanço da ciência. Sociedades científicas, instituições de pesquisa, agências de fomento e pesquisadores vêm se dedicando a estudar o tema; confe- rências e workshops são organizados em todo o mundo a fim de debater novas propostas e o futuro da avaliação por pares,2-4 inclu- sive a possibilidade de prescindir dela, ao menos em parte.5 Surgiram novas formas de avaliação além dos clássicos modelos simples e duplo-cego, como a avaliação em cascata e a avaliação pós-publicação. Essa modalidade em particular vem sendo adotada por um número crescente de periódicos, além dos repositórios de preprints.6 A avaliação por pares é um trabalho extremamente especializado, que demanda tempo e conhecimento, e pelo qual o parece- rista — ao menos até recentemente — não recebe créditos proporcionais ao seu empenho.
    [Show full text]
  • Grant Review in Focus — 2
    GRANT REVIEW IN FOCUS Publons is part of GLOBAL STATE OF PEER REVIEW SERIES Grant Review in Focus — 2 Foreword 3 Executive summary 4 What do we already know? 5 1 The role of grant funding in the research lifecycle 11 2 Deep dive: The grant review process 17 3 New horizons in grant peer review 30 4 Appendix 37 Grant Review in Focus — 3 FOREWORD Last year Publons released its inaugural Global Grant Review In Focus brings together the State of Peer Review report, the largest ever most extensive researcher survey on grant study of peer review. Conceived in response to peer review ever conducted – with over 4,500 the gap in empirical assessments of global peer researchers surveyed – and the full power review, we were delighted with the audience the of Web of Science and InCites datasets. The report received and the debate it generated. researchers we surveyed enumerated interactions with more than 800 unique funders across As a result, we are proud to announce the 95 countries. We subsequently interviewed second report in the Global State of Peer a range of these funders to build a detailed Review Series: Grant Review in Focus. As an understanding of their perspectives. independent platform of 1.9-million researchers and 5-million peer reviews, Publons is uniquely While we will cover the details of our findings capable of calling upon diverse data and in the report that follows, I would like to call out insights on peer review worldwide. In openly a theme that has appeared in both this and the sharing these insights with the research Global State of Peer Review report: a need to community we hope to inspire evidence- ‘close the loop’ between the work of reviewers based debate and inform decision making.
    [Show full text]
  • College of Education Associate Dean for Research Orcid, Publons, and Transparent Review Information for College of Education F
    College of Education Associate Dean for Research ORCiD, Publons, and Transparent Review Information for College of Education Faculty What is ORCiD? ORCiD (Open Researcher and Contributor ID) provides a free digital ID that you control, distinguishing you from other researchers. The ID is free. You can connect your ID with professional information, such as affiliations, grants, publications, peer review, and so forth. This allows you to easily track and share your professional contributions. The ID is important, for example, to avoid confusion with others that may share your name, if you have changed your name, or if you have been affiliated with several organizations over your career. It is recommended that you obtain a ORCiD now. Why should I use ORCiD? • Gain recognition for your work • Share professional info easily with other systems • Increase accuracy of references to your work • Save time when filling out forms, editorial work, and so on • Connect your record to institutions, funders, and publishers • Connect selected items to Activity Insight records (see below) Connecting ORCiD items to Activity Insight Another benefit of having an ORCiD number is that it can be used in Activity Insight (AI) to import your publications each year, as you would if you were using the other options such as Web of Science. You will still need to check for accuracy. To try this in AI, look under the Publications section, click on the Import button at the top of the page, then under the Import from a Third Party section, select ORCiD from the drop down menu and follow the instructions.
    [Show full text]