Remedios Melero and Josep Manuel Rodríguez-Gairín
HowOpenIsit is a web application based on a guide created in collaboration by SPARC, PLoS and OASPA. Its aim is to help authors make informed decisions on where to publish, on the basis of journal editorial policies and on how open they are.
The variables that define the spectrum of a journal from restrictive to open are:
Reader Rights. On a scale from "Subscription, membership, pay-per-view, or other fees required to read all articles ” to "Free readership rights to all articles immediately upon publication”.
Reuse rights. On a scale from “No reuse rights beyond fair use/limitations and exceptions to copyright (all rights reserved copyright) to read” to “Generous reuse and remixing rights (e.g. CC BY licence)”.
Copyright. On a scale from “Publisher holds copyright, with no author reuse of published version beyond fair use” to “Author holds copyright with no restrictions”.
Author Posting Rights. On a scale from “Author may not deposit any versions to repositories or websites” to “Author may post any version to any repository or website”.
Automatic posting. On a scale from “No automatic posting in third-party repositories” to “Journals make copies of articles automatically available in trusted third-party repositories (e.g. PubMed Central) immediately upon publication”.
Machine Readability. On a scale from “Article full text and metadata not available in machine-readable format” to “Article full text, metadata, citations and data, including supplementary data, provided in community machine-readable standard formats through a community standard API or protocol”.
These new aspects extend the concept of "open" and take into account the interoperability of the journal. This web service is a simple application that, through questions and answers, determines how open a journal is, expressed as a percentage calculated from the scores assigned to the selected options from 0-4 (minimum –maximum). This helps authors move beyond the seemingly simple question, “Is this journal open access?” towards a more productive alternative, HowOpenIsIt?. The service is in beta phase development, accessible from http://www.accesoabierto.net/howopenisit/?idioma=en
Roohi Ghosh and Clarinda Cerejo, Editage, India
Education on topics such as manuscript preparation, the publication process, good publication practices, and new developments in the publishing industry can play a critical role in helping English-as-a-second-language (ESL) authors stay ahead in the race to publish in reputed international journals. Drawing on our long-standing experience with author education in Japan, South Korea, and China, we will share insights on a successful author education strategy that traverses cultural boundaries. We will discuss different training platforms that can be used for educating ESL authors, such as webinars, workshops, lectures, and written resources. The poster will use success and failure stories to talk about the acceptability and reach of such platforms, learner and faculty profiles, participant interaction, topic preferences, feedback collection methods, and language of training delivery. We will also share insights on similarities and differences in the teaching approach to be adopted for authors in Japan, South Korea, and China. We hope that other professionals involved in author education can use these insights and practical tips to develop a successful training plan.
Tamara Jurina and Želimir Kurtanjek, University of Zagreb, Faculty of Food Technology and Biotechnology, Croatia
This work presents the experiences of a young editor on the journal Chemical and Biochemical Engineering Quarterly (CABEQ) during the last five years. The peer review process in the biotechnical field is special with regard to its exponential growth and its multidisciplinary character. The challenges are to find peer-reviewers with broad scientific interests and the necessary experience in such broad and diverse research area. The editorial and reviewing process is conducted in several stages. The first stage is editor evaluation to check the aim and scope of the submitted manuscript. In the second stage, the manuscript is evaluated by a voting process by 14 members of the international editorial board (Austria, Croatia, Italy, Slovenia). The decision is made by a majority of positive votes. In the third stage, the manuscript is submitted to peer review by at least two international experts in the field. Experts are selected using the Web of Science database with the keywords from the submitted manuscript. The last stage comprises metrological (IUPAC nomenclature and SI system units), English language and technical revisions of the accepted manuscript. On average, each year the journal receives about 300 manuscripts, of which 85 % are rejected. Based on this experience, guidelines for editorial work are given in order to meet the future needs for biotechnical sciences.
Magda Luz Atrián Salazar and colleagues
The aims of the international collaboration in scientific publishing and editorial management experience between AMERBAC and the EASE are:
Lucija Vejmelka and Ksenija Švenda Radeljak, Faculty of Law and Department of Social work, University of Zagreb, Croatia
In 2014, the Annual of Social Work/ Ljetopis socijalnog rada celebrates its 20th anniversary. On this occasion, the poster presents the foundation and achievements of the only scientific journal with a core interest in social work in Croatia. The Journal occasionally publishes contents from related disciplines of importance to social work practice and translations of selected documents especially useful for the understanding of modern social work. The Journal regularly publishes reviews of conferences, books and journals.
Since 1994, the Journal has been through four phases of development, and the main characteristics of each will be pointed out in the presentation. We will display the editorial process of the Journal from submission of the article to the publication of an issue. Publication process and policy will be analysed by criteria for publication, peer review process, data on the editorial board, ethical requirements and information about thematic issues and guest editors. Accessibility and international presence, openaccess of the contents, relevance and visibility plus the future aspirations and perspectives will be mentioned also.
The Annual of Social Work informs us about current trends in social work theory, methods and education. It encourages communication and professional dialogue and transforms the professional community and practice by promoting social change, social development, social cohesion, and the empowerment and liberation of people promoting principles of social justice, human rights, collective responsibility and respect for diversities as outlined in a new international definition of social work profession (www.iassw.org2014).
Krunoslav Matešić, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Zagreb
Psychological tests are divided into research instruments and psychodiagnostic instruments. The first are used to identify the phenomenon which is the subject of measurement but do not provide for individual diagnostic use, while the latter, tests in the narrow sense of the word, are used to provide differential diagnoses.
Research scales and research tests are usually developed on the basis of accessibility of the measurement subject and are published usually in journals, rarely in research reports or books. On the other hand, psychodiagnostic instruments are independent publications, published by test publishers as a core activity. Tests published in this way are well documented in their development. Despite the fact that many research instruments are in the so-called public domain, there are still versions published in journals which require full copyright acknowledgement.
Following the Psychological Practice Act (NN 88/2003), the Croatian Psychological Chamber has accepted the A-B-C categorization model for the classification of existing psychological instruments. The laws of the Republic of Croatia forbid the unauthorized copying of psychological instruments. However, awareness of the need to respect publication and authorship rights has been slow to develop. Namely, numerous journals are publishing papers presenting results of non-legally acquired instruments. This is, naturally, a reflection of the psychological practice where non-legal psychodiagnostic instruments are used, which is also visible in the research domain. Whether the instruments are protected by copyright or are in the free use domain is easy to establish in the digital age.
A series of professional associations have established numerous standards, guidelines, recommendations and statements regarding psychological testing practices and protection of the actual tests. This is done with the aim of improving the quality of psychological practice, protection of test subject rights as well as the protection of moral and material rights of the author and test publisher. One of the latest actions has been by the International Test Commission, in the form of a public discussion regarding research instruments, begun in December 2013. It is available at http://www.intestcom.org/upload/statement_on_tests_for_research_20131203.pdf.
The proper use of research instruments and psychodiagnostic tests can be achieved through education and active interaction in the academic community in order to explain all aspects of copyrights.
Eva Baranyiová, Czech University of Life Sciences, Prague
The global science scene has been changing dramatically in many ways, both positively and negatively. We all do value the positive ones. However, phenomena such as misconduct, fraud, predatory publishing, predatory journals, manipulation of data, plagiarism, forging, retraction, have become frighteningly frequent. Moreover, the science scene has been suffering under a load of low quality manuscripts that result from poorly designed studies and lack of novelty, often a product of multiple institutional pressures.
There is general agreement that to remedy the negative developments in science is an extremely difficult task. It seems that the position of scientific journal editors is unique in that besides editing the manuscripts, it offers another chance, i.e. to alert and educate our authors, reviewers, and editorial board members. EASE has been instrumental in these endeavours not only in providing excellent materials but also in organizing own workshops and lectures for authors and editors all over the world. This has often been done in cooperation with publishing houses and universities.
However, the EASE resources, including immediate information from EASE conferences and articles published in European Science Editing, can also be used in other educating models. I will present my own experience in teaching scientific writing at undergraduate and postgraduate levels in the Czech Republic, acquired during the last decade at four universities, in courses for Ph.D. students organized by the Czech Academy of Sciences, and other institutions. A special lecture is always devoted to academic misconduct and its consequences. The written evaluations submitted by the course attendees and discussions report a positive learning experience, often indicating their first encounter with unacceptable
practices in science. Thus also this educating model for students and young scientists may contribute to prevention of unacceptable practices in science.
1 Division of Nursing, Hallym University, Chuncheon, Korea;
2 Department of Parasitology and Institute of Medical Education, College of Medicine, Hallym University, Chuncheon, Korea
Background and objective: The Korean Federation of Science and Technology Societies (KOFST) has supported science journals published in Korea since 1971. From 2012, KOFST began to evaluate candidate journals with 35 evaluation items. We have asessed the usability of each item, using item analyses based on item response theory. This may provide information to KOFST about how best to support journal publication.
Methods: Item analyses were applied to 35 items for 540 candidate journals. Analyzed contents were difficulty parameter based on Rasch model and difficulty parameter based on two-parameter item response theory.
Results: Journal history, full text XML, permanence of paper, author's check list, and editor training showed higher difficulty parameter based on Rasch model. Editor training, journal history, full text XML, and page charge showed higher difficulty parameter based on two-parametric item response theory.
Conclusion: Since description of journal history, editor training and full text XML are selected as difficult items using both the Rasch model and the two-parametric item response model, editor training should be provided more frequently and full text XML production should be encouraged for better visibility of journals.
Sung-Tae Hong, Journal of Korean Medical Science, Korean Academy of Medical Sciences, Seoul, Korea
Writing a good quality scientific article takes experience and skill but the process can be helped by following basic principles. I propose ‘TEN Tips’ that editors can encourage authors to use to improve their manuscripts. These have a culinary flavour. It is strongly recommended to write the first draft rapidly, and then allow it to cook slowly, tasting repeatedly. During the drafting and slow cooking, prepare and trim the manuscript following the Ten Tips:
The Ten Tips have been developed to facilitate reader-friendly scientific communication and citation. They may help peer review or editing as well as writing.
Louise Mallet1,2,3,B.Sc.Pharm., Pharm.D., CGP, FESCP
Julie Méthot4,5,6, B.Pharm., Ph.D.
1 Faculté de pharmacie, Université de Montréal
2 Centre universitaire de santé McGill
3 Associate editor, Pharmactuel
4 Institut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
5 Faculté de pharmacie, Université Laval
6 Editor in chief, Pharmactuel.
Introduction: In 2011, a 1-credit course on writing a scientific publication and on the peer-review process for scientific articles was launched. This course is given to the residents enrolled in the master’s degree program in hospital pharmacy in the Université de Montréal’s Faculty of Pharmacy. To pass the course, the residents have to submit an article to a peer-reviewed journal.
Objective: To describe the experience of publishing an article in a structured communication course given to the residents in the Université de Montréal’s Faculty of Pharmacy. Methods: Data pertaining to the communication course were compiled in 2011-2012 and 2012-2013. These data concerned the number of teams, the selected journals, and the type and number of articles published.
Results: Two cohorts of residents (n = 63) successfully completed the communication course. Twenty-four manuscripts were written by groups of two or three students. The results concerning the articles accepted and published are available for the 2011-2012 cohort. Eight articles were published in five different journals. The manuscripts were published in the following journals: Pharmactuel (n=4), Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy Journal (n=1), Canadian Pharmaceutical Journal (n=1), Pharmacotherapy (n=1) and British Journal of Anesthesia (n=1). Three manuscripts are currently in press. The publication rate for the first cohort is presently 61.5%.
Conclusion: The pharmacy scientific communication course has enabled all the residents to experience writing a scientific article, to receive peer-review comments for improving their article, and to submit it to a peer-reviewed journal. We hope that this experience will inspire this new generation of pharmacists to publish in scientific journals.
Sylwia Ufnalska and Arjan Polderman
As editors we tend to be extremely busy, so we may sometimes be lost in details and forget about essential things. Thus it seems useful to make a brief list of what is crucial in our work. The list could then be displayed in a visible place, to remind us about the essentials frequently. We have compiled a draft of “golden rules for science editors” below.
Please let us know your opinion about these suggested rules and, if necessary, recommend any other concise reminders about key issues for science editors.