Search results

Peer review has been with humans for a long time. Its effective inception dates back to World War II resulting information overload, which imposed a quantitative and qualitative screening of publications. Peer review was beset by a number of accusations and critics largely from the biases and subjective aspects of the process including the secrecy in which the processes became standard. Advent of the Internet in the early 1990s provided a manner to open peer review up to make it more transparent, less iniquitous, and more objective. This chapter investigates whether this openness led to a more objective manner of judging scientific publications. Three sites are examined: Electronic Transactions on Artificial Intelligence (ETAI), Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP), and Faculty of 1000 (F1000). These sites practice open peer review wherein reviewers and authors and their reviews and rebuttals are available for all to see. The chapter examines the different steps taken to allow reviewers and authors to interact and how this allows for the entire community to participate. This new prepublication reviewing of papers has to some extent, alleviated the biases that were previously preponderant and, furthermore, seems to give positive results and feedback. Although recent, experiences seem to have elicited scientists’ acceptance because openness allows for a more objective and fair judgment of research and scholarship. Yet, it will undoubtedly lead to new questions which are examined in this chapter.

Sociological studies of entrepreneurship focus on social and technical innovations in business. Using an illustration from molecular plant biology and the historical evolution of the term “entrepreneur,” I make a case for the theoretical and methodological importance of studying entrepreneurs and their ventures outside the scope of traditional business. Then, considering the scientific lab as a self-consciously entrepreneurial venture, I use the population of molecular biology labs studying the plant Arabidopsis thaliana to demonstrate a relationship less directly measurable among start-ups in business: diverse sources of funding accompany original activities and ideas within a venture. This is not, however, what predicts lab success. Lab size drives success, but hinders originality. Moreover, I show that established institutions in science are usually the ones that become innovations in business.

The purpose of this paper is to provide an overview and evaluation of F1000, a publishing outlet and peer review system for research in the biomedical and life sciences.

The review chronicles the rise of F1000 and describes the site’s functionalities and use capabilities.

The findings detail both the strengths and limitations of F1000 and point toward avenues for continued research and development.

This is the first review to provide a substantive evaluation of F1000 for academics to consider when adopting, using and researching the platform.

The purpose of this case study is to investigate the usefulness of altmetrics for measuring the broader impact of research.

This case study is based on a sample of 1,082 the Public Library of Science (PLOS) journal articles recommended in F1000. The data set includes altmetrics which were provided by PLOS. The F1000 data set contains tags on papers which were assigned by experts to characterise them.

The most relevant tag for altmetric research is “good for teaching”, as it is assigned to papers which could be of interest to a wider circle of readers than the peers in a specialised area. One could expect papers with this tag to be mentioned more often on Facebook and Twitter than those without this tag. The results from regression models were able to confirm these expectations: papers with this tag show significantly higher Facebook and Twitter counts than papers without this tag. This clear association could not be seen with Mendeley or Figshare counts (that is with counts from platforms which are chiefly of interest in a scientific context).

The results of the current study indicate that Facebook and Twitter, but not Figshare or Mendeley, might provide an indication of which papers are of interest to a broader circle of readers (and not only for the peers in a specialist area), and could therefore be useful for the measurement of the societal impact of research.

Competition for space in peer-reviewed academic journals, together with a plethora of changes in the academic publishing processes, including, for example, open access publishing, the internationalisation of the publishing community, predatory publishing and the increasing role of journal ranking systems presents challenges for early career researchers (ECRs). The purpose of this paper is to offer practical advice on getting published in business and management.

The stages in the publishing journey are identified. The journey commences with the articulation of a contribution and building relationships with supervisors and other researchers. It then moves on to the evaluation and selection of appropriate journals (including consideration of open access publishing options), publishing policies and ethics, writing and revising the article and submitting and subsequently revising your article in response to reviewers’ comments.

This paper concludes with an acknowledgement of the shifting nature of journal publication processes and contexts and the need for doctoral and ECRs to continue to monitor changes in journal publication practices.

Whilst other articles and publisher web pages offer advice on getting published in specific journals and disciplines, few provide a rounded perspective of the experience of publishing and how this can be navigated successfully.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a review of the literature concerning interlending and document supply and related matters.

The paper is based on the reading of over 150 journals, as well as monographs, reports and websites.

This study finds that the prices of the big deals are under greater attack than ever. Alternatives are being actively explored. A more assertive approach is being adopted to expand the role of open access and both national and international newspapers as well as magazines such as The Economist have given it much favourable coverage in the last quarter. Resistance is growing, particularly in the UK, to the publishers' ability to override copyright law in their contracts with libraries.

This is the only regular literature review that focuses on document supply and related issues.