ARTICLE | doi:10.20944/preprints202012.0612.v2
Subject: Keywords: Academic journals; Growth of knowledge; Non-peer review; Paradigm change; Peer review; Scholarly communication; Science communication; Simplicity
Online: 30 August 2021 (12:02:53 CEST)
This article challenges the assumption that journals and peer review are essential for developing, evaluating and disseminating scientific and other academic knowledge. It suggests a more flexible ecosystem, and examines some of the possibilities this might facilitate. The market for academic outputs should be opened up by encouraging the separation of the dissemination service from the evaluation service. Publishing research in subject-specific journals encourages compartmentalising research into rigid categories. The dissemination of knowledge would be better served by an open access, web-based repository system encompassing all disciplines. There would then be a role for organisations to assess the items in this repository to help users find relevant, high-quality work. There could be a variety of such organisations which could enable reviews from peers to be supplemented with evaluation by non-peers from a variety of different perspectives: user reviews, statistical reviews, reviews from the perspective of different disciplines, and so on. This should reduce the inevitably conservative influence of relying on two or three peers, and make the evaluation system more critical, multi-dimensional and responsive to the requirements of different audience groups, changing circumstances, and new ideas. Non-peer review might make it easier to challenge dominant paradigms, and expanding the potential audience beyond a narrow group of peers might encourage the criterion of simplicity to be taken more seriously - which is essential if human knowledge is to continue to progress.
Subject: Social Sciences, Library & Information Science Keywords: scientific publishing; scientific journals; scholarly publishing; scientific papers; open science; scientific articles
Online: 20 August 2020 (09:48:21 CEST)
In the digital era in which over 4 billion people regularly access the internet, the conventional process of publishing scientific articles in academic journals following peer review is undergoing profound changes. Following physics and mathematics scholars who started to publish their work on the freely accessible arXiv server in the early 1990s, researchers of all disciplines increasingly publish scientific articles in the form of freely accessible and fully citeable preprints before or in parallel to conventional submission to academic journals for peer review. The full transition to open science, I argue in this study, requires to expand the education of students and young researchers to include scholarly communication in the digital era.
ARTICLE | doi:10.20944/preprints202104.0448.v1
Subject: Social Sciences, Accounting Keywords: preprint; citations; scholarly communication; open science; peer review; impact factor
Online: 16 April 2021 (16:45:49 CEST)
Preprints are regularly cited in peer reviewed journal articles, books and conference paper. Are preprint citations somehow less important than citations to peer reviewed research papers? This study investigates citation patterns between 2017 and 2020 for preprints published in three preprint servers, one specializing in biology (bioRxiv), one in chemistry (ChemRxiv), and another hosting preprints in all disciplines (Research Square). As evaluation of scholarship continues to largely rely on citation-based metrics, this analysis and its outcomes will be useful to inform new research-based education in today’s scholarly communication.
ARTICLE | doi:10.20944/preprints201607.0035.v1
Subject: Social Sciences, Education Studies Keywords: graduate student publishing; scholarly publication; research writing; productive academic writing; academic publishing, autoethnography
Online: 15 July 2016 (04:57:30 CEST)
For doctoral students, publishing in peer reviewed journals is a task many face with anxiety and trepidation. The world of publishing, from choosing a journal, negotiating editors and navigating reviewers’ responses is a bewildering place. Looking in from the outside, it seems that successful and productive academic writers have knowledge that is inaccessible to novice scholars. While there is a growing literature on writing for scholarly publication, many of these publications promote writing and publishing as a straight-forward activity that anyone can achieve if they follow the rules. We argue that the specific and situated contexts in which academic writers negotiate publishing practices is more complicated and messy. In this paper, we attempt to make explicit our publishing processes to highlight the complex nature of publishing. We use autoethnographic narratives to provide discussion points and insights into the challenges of publishing peer reviewed articles. One narrative is by a doctoral student at the beginning of her publishing career, who expresses her desires, concerns and anxieties about writing for publication. The other narrative focuses on the publishing practices of a more experienced academic writer. Both are international scholars working in the Canadian context. The purpose of this paper is to explore academic publishing through the juxtaposition of these two narratives to make explicit some of the more implicit processes. Four key themes emerge from these narratives. To publish successfully, academic writers need: 1) to be discourse analysts; 2) to have a critical competence; and 3) to have writing fluency and 4) to be emotionally intelligent.
ARTICLE | doi:10.20944/preprints202003.0016.v1
Subject: Arts & Humanities, Other Keywords: open research practices; digital humanities; scholarly communication; publication formats; infrastructure; research methodology; research tools
Online: 1 March 2020 (15:50:52 CET)
The digital transformation has initiated a paradigm shift in research and scholarly communication practices towards a more open scholarly culture. Although this transformation is slowly happening in the Digital Humanities field, open is not yet default. The article introduces the OpenMethods metablog, a community platform that highlights open research methods, tools, and practices within the context of the Digital Humanities by republishing open access content around methods and tools in various formats and languages. It also describes the platform’s technical infrastructure based on its requirements and main functionalities, and especially the collaborative content sourcing and editorial workflows. The article concludes with a discussion of the potentials of the OpenMethods metablog to overcome barriers towards open practices by focusing on inclusive, community sourced information based around opening up research processes and the challenges that need to be overcome to achieve its goals.