scholarly journals Several Factors of Library Publishing Services Facilitate Scholarly Communication Functions

2012 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 108
Author(s):  
Leslie Bussert
Keyword(s):  
Knowledge Sharing ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Scholarly Communication ◽  
Digital Publishing ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Scholarly Publishing ◽  
Communication Process ◽  
Research Libraries ◽  
Facilitating Factors ◽  
Publishing Services

Objective – To identify and examine the factors of library publishing services that facilitate scholarly communication. Design – Analysis of library publishing service programs. Setting – North American research libraries. Subjects – Eight research libraries selected from the signatories for the Compact for Open-Access Publishing Equity (COPE) Cornell University Library’s Center for Innovative Publishing; Dartmouth College Library’s Digital Publishing Program and Scholars Portal Project; MIT Libraries’ Office of Scholarly Publishing and Licensing; Columbia University Libraries’ Center for Digital Research and Scholarship; University of Michigan Library’s Scholarly Publishing Office; Duke University Library’s Office of Scholarly Communications; University of Calgary Libraries and Cultural Resources’ Centre for Scholarly Communication; and Simon Fraser University Library’s Scholarly Publishing. Methods – The authors used Roosendaal and Geurt’s (1997) four functions of scholarly communication to analyze and categorize library publishing services provided by libraries included in the study. The four functions of scholarly communication include registration, certification, awareness, and archiving. Main Results – Analysis of the registration functions provided by library publishing services in this study revealed three types of facilitating factors: intellectual property, licensing, and publishing. These include services such as repositories for digital scholarly work and research, ISBN/ISSN registration, and digital publishing. Analysis of archiving functions demonstrated that most programs in the study focus on repository-related services in support of digital content preservation of papers, datasets, technical reports, etc. Analysis of certification functions provided by these services exposed a focus on expert review and research support. These include services like professional assessment of information sources, consultation on appropriate literature and information-seeking tools, and writing or copyright advisory services. Analysis of awareness function showed search aids and knowledge-sharing platforms to be the main facilitating factors. These include services like metadata application, schema, and standards or scholarly portals enabling knowledge-sharing among scholars. Conclusion – This study identified several services offered by these library publishing programs which can be categorized as facilitators under Roosendaal and Geurt’s (1997) four functions of scholarly communication. The majority of the libraries in the study treated library publishing services as part of broader scholarly communication units or initiatives. Digital publishing (registration function) was offered by all programs analyzed in the study, while traditional peer-review services (certification function) were not. Widely adopted among programs in the study were the use of social networking tools (awareness function) and self-publishing (archiving function). The authors recommend developing services that facilitate peer review and assert the need to provide a knowledge-sharing mechanism within the academic community that facilitates the scholarly communication process.

scholarly journals New directions in scholarly publishing: journal articles beyond the present

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jadranka Stojanovski
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Journal Article ◽  
Scholarly Communication ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Research Data ◽  
Scholarly Publishing ◽  
Communication Process ◽  
Journal Articles ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
And Storage

>> See video of presentation (28 min.) The primary goal of scholarly communication is improving human knowledge and sharing is the key to achieve this goal: sharing ideas, sharing methodologies, sharing of results, sharing data, information and knowledge. Although the concept of sharing applies to all phases of scholarly communication, most often the only visible part is the final publication, with the journal article as a most common type. The traditional characteristics of the present journals allow only limited possibilities for sharing the knowledge. Basic functions, registration, dissemination, certification, and storage, are still present but they are no more effective in the network environment. Registration is too slow, there are various barriers to dissemination, certification system has many shortcomings, and used formats are not suitable for the long term preservation and storage. Although the journals today are digital and various powerful technologies are available, they are still focused on their unaltered printed versions. This presentation will discuss possible evolution of journal article to become more compliant with users' needs and to enable “the four R’s of openness” – reuse, redistribute, revise and remix (Hilton, Wiley, Stein, & Johnson, 2010).Several aspects of openness will be presented and discussed: open access, open data, open peer review, open authorship, and open formats. With digital technology which has become indispensable in the creation, collection, processing and storage of data in all scientific disciplines the way of conducting scientific research has changed and the concept of "data-driven science" has been introduced (Ware & Mabe, 2009). Sharing research data enhances the capabilities of reproducing the results, reuse maximizes the value of research, accelerating the advancement of science, ensuring transparency of scientific research, reducing the possibility of bias in the interpretation of results and increasing the credibility of published scientific knowledge. The open peer review can ensure full transparency of the entire process of assessment and help to solve many problems in the present scholarly publishing. Through the process of the open peer review each manuscript can be immediately accessible, reviewers can publicly demonstrate their expertise and could be rewarded, and readers can be encouraged to make comments and views and to become active part of the scholarly communication process. The trend to to describe the author's contribution is also present, which will certainly lead to a reduced number of “ghost”, "guest" and "honorary" authors, and will help to establish better standards for author’s identification.Various web technologies can be used also for the semantic enhancement of the article. One of the most important aspects of semantic publication is the inclusion of the research data, to make them available to the user as an active data that can be manipulated. It is possible to integrate data from external sources, or to merge the data from different resources (data fusion) (Shotton, 2012), so the reader can gain further understanding of the presented data. Additional options provide merging data from different articles, with the addition of the component of time. Other semantic enhancement can include enriched bibliography, interactive graphical presentations, hyperlinks to external resources, tagged text, etc.Instead of mostly static content, journals can offer readers dynamic content that includes multimedia, "living mathematics", “executable articles”, etc. Videos highlighting critical points in the research process, 3D representations of chemical compounds or art works, audio clips with the author's reflections and interviews, and animated simulations or models of ocean currents, tides, temperature and salinity structure, can became soon common part of every research article. The diversity of content and media, operating systems (GNU / Linux, Apple Mac OSX, Microsoft Windows), and software tools that are available to researchers, suggests the usage of the appropriate open formats. Different formats have their advantages and disadvantages and it would be necessary to make multiple formats available, some of which are suitable for "human" reading (including printing on paper), and some for machine reading that can be used by computers without human intervention. Characteristics and possibilities of several formats will be discussed, including XML as the most recommended format, which can enable granulate document structure as well as deliver semantics to the human reader or to the computer.Literature:Hilton, J. I., Wiley, D., Stein, J., & Johnson, A. (2010). The Four R’s of Openness and ALMS Analysis: Frameworks for Open Educational Resources. Open Learning: The Journal of Open, Distance and E-Learning, 25(1), 37–44. doi:10.1080/02680510903482132Shotton, D. (2012). The Five Stars of Online Journal Articles - a Framework for Article Evaluation. D-Lib Magazine, 18(1/2), 1–16. doi:10.1045/january2012-shottonWare, M., & Mabe, M. (2009). The stm report (p. 68).

scholarly journals Open-access mega-journals

2017 ◽  
Vol 73 (2) ◽  
pp. 263-283 ◽  
Author(s):  
Valerie Spezi ◽  
Simon Wakeling ◽  
Stephen Pinfield ◽  
Claire Creaser ◽  
Jenny Fry ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Scholarly Communication ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Scholarly Publishing ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Academic Literature ◽  
Article Processing Charges ◽  
The Impact

Purpose Open-access mega-journals (OAMJs) represent an increasingly important part of the scholarly communication landscape. OAMJs, such as PLOS ONE, are large scale, broad scope journals that operate an open access business model (normally based on article-processing charges), and which employ a novel form of peer review, focussing on scientific “soundness” and eschewing judgement of novelty or importance. The purpose of this paper is to examine the discourses relating to OAMJs, and their place within scholarly publishing, and considers attitudes towards mega-journals within the academic community. Design/methodology/approach This paper presents a review of the literature of OAMJs structured around four defining characteristics: scale, disciplinary scope, peer review policy, and economic model. The existing scholarly literature was augmented by searches of more informal outputs, such as blogs and e-mail discussion lists, to capture the debate in its entirety. Findings While the academic literature relating specifically to OAMJs is relatively sparse, discussion in other fora is detailed and animated, with debates ranging from the sustainability and ethics of the mega-journal model, to the impact of soundness-only peer review on article quality and discoverability, and the potential for OAMJs to represent a paradigm-shifting development in scholarly publishing. Originality/value This paper represents the first comprehensive review of the mega-journal phenomenon, drawing not only on the published academic literature, but also grey, professional and informal sources. The paper advances a number of ways in which the role of OAMJs in the scholarly communication environment can be conceptualised.

scholarly journals Informing library-based digital publishing: Selected findings from a survey of scholars' needs in a contemporary publishing environment

2018 ◽  
Vol 34 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. i172-i178
Author(s):  
Megan Senseney ◽  
Maria Bonn ◽  
Christoper Maden ◽  
Janet Swatscheno ◽  
LaTesha Velez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Support Services ◽  
Scholarly Communication ◽  
Digital Publishing ◽  
Scholarly Publishing ◽  
Print Medium ◽  
Digital Scholarship ◽  
Survey Responses ◽  
Key Aspects ◽  
Technological Affordances ◽  
Shed Light

Abstract Library-based publishing initiatives are on the rise in a rapidly diversifying scholarly publishing ecosystem. This article presents selected results from a US-based survey on the needs of humanities scholars in a contemporary publishing environment, emphasizing survey responses that shed light on key aspects of access for scholars seeking to publish: access to support services, access to content, and access to audience. Survey responses suggest a profile of the authors for whom libraries are poised to offer attractive publishing solutions: (1) those whose scholarship is not sufficiently represented in the print medium and (2) those who place a high value on the technological affordances provided by open-access digital scholarship to reach their intended audiences. Compared to other publishing models, situating support for scholarly communication in the research library creates opportunities for addressing challenges related to access and sustainability in the digital scholarly publishing.

scholarly journals Leading dental journals availability through academic network of Serbia

2010 ◽  
Vol 57 (3) ◽  
pp. 154-162
Author(s):  
Jelena Jacimovic ◽  
Slavoljub Zivkovic
Keyword(s):  
Information Needs ◽  
Information Technologies ◽  
Oral Surgery ◽  
Technological Development ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Communication Process ◽  
Comprehensive Overview ◽  
Research Libraries ◽  
Number Of Publications

In the last century a great progress was noted in all scientific disciplines. With the increasing number of scientific research, researchers and investment, the number of publications has grown exponentially. Besides, the development of information technologies and the emergence of the Internet, communication between scientists as well as the traditional roles assigned to the institutions responsible for information processing and provision has been changed. Due to the rapidly increasing subscription rates, libraries, although the primary participants in the scholarly communication process, lose their ability to meet user information needs. In order to overcome commercialization of scholarly publishing, libraries intensify use of different electronic resources, coordinate acquisition policy and form consortia. In November 2001, leading research libraries in Serbia launched an initiative to form the Consortium for Coordinated Acquisition of Serbian Libraries (KoBSON). Subscribed services, funded by the Ministry of Science and Technological Development of Serbia, currently include over 35,000 scientific journals, about 40,000 books and several citation databases. In the field of Dentistry, Oral Surgery and Medicine, 73.4% of total number of the most relevant dental journals is available in electronic form to Serbian academic community. This article presents a comprehensive overview of basic information about available journals: impact factor, productivity, publication continuity and frequency, language, services that they are available through, size of archives and existing formats. At present Serbian academic institutions have access to more than two thirds of the world?s most relevant dental journals, which justifies the Consortium founders? initial idea of wide accessibility of scientific information and requires greater involvement of librarians in introducing available services to researchers in order to ensure their full utilization.

ViewpointRuminations on peer review in the time of social change

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Keren Dali
Keyword(s):  
Social Change ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Personal Experience ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Scholarly Communication ◽  
Journal Editor ◽  
Communication Process ◽  
Cumulative Impact ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Published Research

PurposeThis viewpoint article looks at several approaches to peer review that become detrimental to the scholarly process and disadvantage diverse voices in the scholarly conversation.Design/methodology/approachAs a viewpoint article, the piece relies on published research and the author's personal experience as an author and a journal editor.FindingsThe article focuses on the manuscript structure; manuscript length expectations; and several immediately obvious effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the scholarly communication process.Originality/valueThe article addresses the aforementioned aspects of peer review with a goal of contemplating their cumulative impact on the state of diversity in scholarly communication and suggests possible ways of rethinking the situation.

scholarly journals Research libraries as digital publishers: The foreign experience

2021 ◽  
pp. 149-166
Author(s):  
T. E. Savitskaya
Keyword(s):  
Digital Publishing ◽  
Scientific Data ◽  
Science Data ◽  
Digital Collections ◽  
Research Libraries ◽  
Scientific Data Management ◽  
Content Selection ◽  
Foreign Countries ◽  
Library Studies ◽  
Publishing Services

The author discusses the current experience of building the service of digital science publishing obtained by the libraries in the Western countries. She emphasizes that this process is incorporated into further informatization of libraries and their increasing role in managing science data. The digital publications integrate a number of interrelated programs comprising the whole cycle of scientific data management accomplished within the wider context of innovations. Digital publishing is a new type of library activities; it requires integrating competences of modern librarians (i.e. content selection, data supervising, metadata management, building digital collections, their preservation and archiving) and publishers (monitoring new trends in science and technology, selecting materials for publication, abstracting, scientific editing, developing marketing strategies).For the first time in the domestic library studies, the dynamics of this service in foreign countries is examined based on Library Publishing Directory for 2013– 2018. The author compares digital publishing services in four university libraries in different world regions and offers the findings of preliminary analysis of online publication services in foreign research libraries.

scholarly journals The four pillars of scholarly publishing: The future and a foundation

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jarrett E.K. Byrnes ◽  
Edward Baskerville ◽  
Bruce Caron ◽  
Cameron Neylon ◽  
Carol Tenopir ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
Electronic Publishing ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
Scholarly Communication ◽  
Scholarly Publishing ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Paradigm Shifts ◽  
The Future

With the rise of electronic publishing and the inherent paradigm shifts for so many other scientific endeavours, it is time to consider a change in the practices of scholarly publication in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. To facilitate the speed and quality of science, the future of scholarly communication will rest on four pillars - an ecosystem of scholarly products, immediate and open access, open peer review, and full recognition for participating in the process. These four pillars enable us to build better tools to facilitate the discovery of new relevant work for individual scientists, one of the greatest challenges of our time as we cope with the current deluge of scientific information. By incorporating these principles into future publication platforms, we argue that science and society will be better served than by remaining locked into a publication formula that arose in the 1600s. It has served its purpose admirably and well, but it is time to move forward. With the rise of the Internet, scholarly publishing has embraced electronic distribution. But the tools afforded by the Internet and other advancing technologies have profound implications for scholarly communication beyond just distribution. We argue that, to best serve science, the process of scholarly communication must embrace these advances and evolve. Here we consider the current state of the process in ecology and evolutionary biology and propose directions for change. We identify four pillars for the future of scientific communication: (1) an ecosystem of scholarly products; (2) immediate and open access; (3) open peer review; and (4) full recognition for participating in the process. These four pillars will guide the development of better tools and practices for discovering and sharing scientific knowledge in a modern networked world. Things were far different when the existing system arose in the 1600s, and though it has served its purpose admirably and well, it is time to move forward.

scholarly journals The four pillars of scholarly publishing: The future and a foundation

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jarrett E.K. Byrnes ◽  
Edward Baskerville ◽  
Bruce Caron ◽  
Cameron Neylon ◽  
Carol Tenopir ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Open Access ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Evolutionary Biology ◽  
Electronic Publishing ◽  
Scientific Information ◽  
Scholarly Communication ◽  
Scholarly Publishing ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Paradigm Shifts ◽  
The Future

With the rise of electronic publishing and the inherent paradigm shifts for so many other scientific endeavours, it is time to consider a change in the practices of scholarly publication in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology. To facilitate the speed and quality of science, the future of scholarly communication will rest on four pillars - an ecosystem of scholarly products, immediate and open access, open peer review, and full recognition for participating in the process. These four pillars enable us to build better tools to facilitate the discovery of new relevant work for individual scientists, one of the greatest challenges of our time as we cope with the current deluge of scientific information. By incorporating these principles into future publication platforms, we argue that science and society will be better served than by remaining locked into a publication formula that arose in the 1600s. It has served its purpose admirably and well, but it is time to move forward. With the rise of the Internet, scholarly publishing has embraced electronic distribution. But the tools afforded by the Internet and other advancing technologies have profound implications for scholarly communication beyond just distribution. We argue that, to best serve science, the process of scholarly communication must embrace these advances and evolve. Here we consider the current state of the process in ecology and evolutionary biology and propose directions for change. We identify four pillars for the future of scientific communication: (1) an ecosystem of scholarly products; (2) immediate and open access; (3) open peer review; and (4) full recognition for participating in the process. These four pillars will guide the development of better tools and practices for discovering and sharing scientific knowledge in a modern networked world. Things were far different when the existing system arose in the 1600s, and though it has served its purpose admirably and well, it is time to move forward.

scholarly journals Scholarly communication trends in the digital age

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (6) ◽  
pp. 1150-1162 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ahmed Shehata ◽  
David Ellis ◽  
Allen Foster
Keyword(s):  
Grounded Theory ◽  
Scholarly Communication ◽  
Small Sample ◽  
Scholarly Publishing ◽  
Communication Process ◽  
Theory Approach ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Grounded Theory Approach ◽  
Publishing Practices

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate scholars’ attitudes toward informal publishing and dissemination to provide a view of the challenges and advantages of using such channels. Although considerable research has been carried out in relation to peer-reviewed scholarly publishing, relatively few studies have investigated the adoption of informal scholarly communication platforms in the scholarly publishing process. Design/methodology/approach – The paper deployed a grounded theory approach using semi-structured interviews as a qualitative research tool. A theoretical sample of 40 researchers in 4 universities were interviewed to gather data regarding informal publishing, platforms, factors that affect the researchers’ decision and the use of informal channels in dissemination. Findings – Results of the interviews suggest that there is an increasing trend among researchers toward informal publishing and dissemination throughout the scholarly communication cycle. The paper shows that there are three types of scholars who are involved in the scholarly communication process: conventional, modern and liberal scholars. Each of these scholars carries different beliefs regarding the scholarly communication process. Research limitations/implications – This paper was conducted on a relatively small sample of academic researchers, and therefore, the results cannot be easily generalized into a wider community of scholars. Originality/value – The paper provides insight into informal scholarly publishing practices using a grounded theory approach. This approach helped to capture the changes in both scholarly publishing practices and the adoption of informal techniques among the scholarly community.

scholarly journals For what it’s worth – the open peer review landscape

2015 ◽  
Vol 39 (5) ◽  
pp. 649-663 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andy Tattersall
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Scholarly Communication ◽  
Academic Community ◽  
Content Type ◽  
New Era ◽  
Scholarly Communications ◽  
Facilitators And Barriers ◽  
Published Research ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is twofold, first, to discuss the current and future issues around post-publication open peer review. Second, to highlight some of the main protagonists and platforms that encourages open peer review, pre-and post-publication. Design/methodology/approach – The first part of the paper aims to discuss the facilitators and barriers that will enable and prevent academics engaging with the new and established platforms of scholarly communication and review. These issues are covered with the intention of proposing further dialogue within the academic community that ultimately address researchers’ concerns, whilst continuing to nurture a progressive approach to scholarly communication and review. The paper will continue to look at the prominent open post-publication platforms and tools and discuss whether in the future it will become a standard model. Findings – The paper identifies several problems, not exclusive to open peer review that could inhibit academics from being open with their reviews and comments of other’s research. Whilst identifies opportunities to be had by embracing a new era of academic openness. Practical implications – The paper summarises key platforms and arguments for open peer review and will be of interest to researchers in different disciplines as well as the wider academic community wanting to know more about scholarly communications and measurement. Originality/value – This paper looks at many of the new platforms that have been previously ignored and discusses issues relating to open peer review that have only been touched on in brief by other published research.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document