DOCSLIB.ORG

The Role of Editorial Boards of Scholarly Jour Als O The

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Role of Editorial Boards of Scholarly Jour Als O The THE ROLE OF EDITORIAL BOARDS OF SCHOLARLY JOURALS O THE GREE AD THE GOLD ROAD TO OPE ACCESS by SAAD ALZAHRANI A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY in THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Library, Archival and Information Studies) THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Vancouver) April 2010 © Saad Alzahrani, 2010 Abstract The traditional subscription-based publishing system of scholarly journals is in crisis, and open access has been suggested as an alternative model. However, participants in the traditional publishing system are engaged in a debate on its feasibility as a replacement for subscription- based journals. As the gatekeepers who determine what is published in scholarly journals, editorial boards play an important role in scholarly communication. However, although there are some studies of their role in scholarly publishing no major study has focused on their role in influencing journal access polices, and in particular, their role in influencing journal policies to make some or all articles free or to allow self-archiving by authors. Through a survey of editors and editorial board members of major scholarly journals, this study explores their role in the open access movement. It examines the positions of the major publishers of scholarly journals (categorized as commercial, scholarly society and university publishers) to open access. In addition, it examines the awareness of journals’ editorial boards of their publisher’s access polices and whether their own attitudes to open access were consistent with those of their publishers. Editorial boards’ behaviour as a force for change in setting open access policies is explored. The study also considers how their level of responsibility at the journal and their own open access publishing behaviour are related to their perception and promotion of open access. The findings of this study show no clear-cut difference between categories of journal publisher in term of offering some or all of their articles free to users, and in allowing authors to self-archive. The respondents in this study demonstrated some awareness about journal access policies, with higher awareness of policies regarding offering free articles than of those on self- archiving. The majority of the respondents are satisfied with subscription-based journals although their opinion on offering free articles and on self-archiving is generally positive. They were not willing to take strong measures to influence journal access policies such as resigning from the editorial board. The level of responsibility at the journal, gender, and publishing behaviour influenced the respondent’s answers to the questionnaire. ii Table of Contents Abstract ........................................................................................................................................................ ii Table of Contents ........................................................................................................................................ iii List of Tables ................................................................................................................................................ vi List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................... x Acknowledgments ........................................................................................................................................ xi Dedication .................................................................................................................................................. xii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Background of the Study ..................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Problem Statement .............................................................................................................................. 8 1.3 Research Questions ........................................................................................................................... 12 1.4 Significance ....................................................................................................................................... 12 1.5 Limitations ........................................................................................................................................ 13 1.6 Definition of Key Terms ................................................................................................................... 14 1.7 Structure of this Dissertation ............................................................................................................. 16 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................................................... 17 2.1 Open Access Definition and Background ......................................................................................... 17 2.2 Open Access Models ......................................................................................................................... 19 2.3 Issues in Open Access ....................................................................................................................... 21 2.3.1 Pricing Models ............................................................................................................................ 21 2.3.2 Peer Reviewing ........................................................................................................................... 22 2.3.3 Indexing ...................................................................................................................................... 24 2.3.4 Impact Factor .............................................................................................................................. 25 2.3.5 Archiving .................................................................................................................................... 27 2.3.6 Stability ....................................................................................................................................... 29 2.4 Major Participants in the Scholarly Publishing Process .................................................................... 30 2.4.1 Commercial Publishers' Background and Role .......................................................................... 32 2.4.1.1 Reaction to Open Access ................................................................................................. 32 2.4.2 Scholarly Societies' Background and Role ................................................................................. 34 2.4.2.1 Reaction to Open Access ................................................................................................. 34 iii 2.4.3 University Press Background and Role ...................................................................................... 38 2.4.3.1 Reaction to Open Access ................................................................................................. 39 2.4.4 Publishers’ Position on Open Access ......................................................................................... 40 2.5 Editors' and Editorial Board Role ...................................................................................................... 42 2.5.1 Composition of the Editorial Board ............................................................................................ 45 2.6 Editors and the Theory of Gatekeeping ............................................................................................. 47 2.7 Authors' Role ..................................................................................................................................... 50 2.8 The RoMEO Project .......................................................................................................................... 52 2.9 Chapter Summary .............................................................................................................................. 53 CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY............................................................................................................... 55 3.1 Problem Statement ............................................................................................................................ 55 3.2 Overview of Methodology ................................................................................................................ 55 3.3 Use of a Questionnaire for Data Collection ...................................................................................... 56 3.3.1 Design of the Questionnaire ....................................................................................................... 57 3.4 Sample Selection ............................................................................................................................... 59 3.4.1 Scholarly Journals ....................................................................................................................... 59 3.4.2 Study Population ......................................................................................................................... 62 3.5 Pilot Study ........................................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Research in Mathematics at Norwegian Universities
    Research in Mathematics at Norwegian Universities Bibliometric analysis Evaluation Division for Science Research in Mathematics at Norwegian Universities Bibliometric analysis © The Research Council of Norway 2012 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.rcn.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 Printing: 07 Gruppen/The Research Council of Norway Number of copies: 200 Oslo, March 2012 ISBN 978-82-12-03060-2 (print) ISBN 978-82-12-03061-9 (pdf) Evaluation of Mathematics – Publication and Citation Analysis National Indicators and International Comparisons Institutional Analyses Dag W. Aksnes 15.01 2012 Preface This report presents a bibliometric analysis of research in mathematics 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) at the Nordic Institute for Studies in Innovation, Research and Education (NIFU). 2 Contents Preface ..................................................................................................................................................... 2 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... 4 2 Data and methods ...............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Gowers's Weblog
    Gowers's Weblog Mathematics related discussions Elsevier — my part in its downfall The Dutch publisher Elsevier publishes many of the world’s best known mathematics journals, including Advances in Mathematics, Comptes Rendus, Discrete Mathematics, The European Journal of Combinatorics, Historia Mathematica, Journal of Algebra, Journal of Approximation Theory, Journal of Combinatorics Series A, Journal of Functional Analysis, Journal of Geometry and Physics, Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, Journal of Number Theory, Topology, and Topology and its Applications. For many years, it has also been heavily criticized for its business practices. Let me briefly summarize these criticisms. 1. It charges very high prices — so far above the average that it seems quite extraordinary that they can get away with it. 2. One method that they have for getting away with it is a practice known as “bundling”, where instead of giving libraries the choice of which journals they want to subscribe to, they offer them the choice between a large collection of journals (chosen by them) or nothing at all. So if some Elsevier journals in the “bundle” are indispensable to a library, that library is forced to subscribe at very high subscription rates to a large number of journals, across all the sciences, many of which they do not want. (The journal Chaos, Solitons and Fractals is a notorious example of a journal that is regarded as a joke by many mathematicians, but which libraries all round the world must nevertheless subscribe to.) Given that libraries have limited budgets, this often means that they cannot subscribe to journals that they would much rather subscribe to, so it is not just libraries that are harmed, but other publishers, which is of course part of the motivation for the scheme.
    [Show full text]
  • April 2013 Table of Contents
    ISSN 0002-9920 (print) ISSN 1088-9477 (online) of the American Mathematical Society April 2013 Volume 60, Number 4 Remembering Raoul Bott (1923—2005) page 398 Errors and Corrections in Mathematics Literature page 418 Mathematical Methods in the Study of Historical Chronology page 441 Newton’s Laws and Coin Tossing page 450 Visualizing the impact of humans on the planet (see page 425) Open Access Journals Abstract and in Mathematics Applied Analysis Your research wants to be free! Hindawi Publishing Corporation http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 Advances in Decision Sciences Advances in Mathematical Physics Hindawi Publishing Corporation http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 Hindawi Publishing Corporation Volume 2013 http://www.hindawi.com 7 6 Advances in 9 15 Operations Algebra 768 Research 7 Advances in Submit your manuscripts at Numerical Analysis Hindawi Publishing Corporation3 Volume 2013 Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation http://www.hindawi.com http://www.hindawi.com 2 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society Computational and Mathematical Methods International Journal of in Medicine Game Theory Geometry Analysis Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2013 International
    [Show full text]
  • The Cost of Knowledge
    THE COST OF KNOWLEDGE This is an attempt to describe some of the background to the current boycott of Elsevier by many mathematicians (and other academics) at http://thecostofknowledge.com, and to present some of the issues that confront the boycott movement. Although the movement is anything but monolithic, we believe that the points we make here will resonate with many of the signatories to the boycott. The role of journals (1): dissemination of research. The role of journals in professional mathematics has been under discussion for some time now (see, for example, [10], [4], [11], [12], [1], [9], [13], [2]). Traditionally, while journals served several purposes, their primary purpose was the dissemination of research papers. The journal publishers were charging for the cost of typesetting (not a trivial matter in general before the advent of electronic typesetting, and particularly non-trivial for mathematics), the cost of physically publishing copies of the journals, and the cost of distributing the journals to subscribers (primarily academic libraries). The editorial board of a journal is a group of professional mathematicians. Their editorial work is undertaken as part of their scholarly duties, and so is paid for by their employer, typically a university. Thus, from the publisher's viewpoint the editors are volunteers.1 When a paper is submitted to the journal, by an author who is again typically a university-employed mathematician, the editors select the referee or referees for the paper, evaluate the referees' reports, decide whether or not to accept the submission, and organize the submitted papers into volumes. These are passed on to the publisher, who then undertakes the job of actually publishing them.
    [Show full text]