So here we have a franchise that just didn’t follow the rules, which is probably the source of my ill-feeling about the Frontiers in DH peer review process. Field Chief Editor of Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences. More than half of graduate students (34/57, 60%) and postdocs (9/17, 53%) agreed or strongly agreed that open-access and subscription-based journals upheld similar ethical standards, whereas 52% (11/21) of faculty and 48% (13/27) of residents indicated that they did not know (P = 0.0230); several respondents commented that it depended on the journal. Nothing. A predatory journal is one that will accept virtually any article as long as they are paid to publish that article. I’m fairly certain there was some sort of agreement that your name would be published as a reviewer? Open Policy. I dont mean this to come across as an attack on one particular person. I stress that sexism in academia is an important issue for me, and I have to take a stand against such blatant exclusion of women from the academic commons. And for the record, I do take to Twitter and all these other social media places because I’m not claiming to be a respectable scientist in digital humanities. That doesn't mean that any journal that asks for money to publish an article is a predatory journal. Front. Whether or not they were aware of predatory journals, many respondents defined the term as acquisition of fees irrespective of scientific quality or ethical standards, and some respondents asserted that aggressive or indiscriminate email solicitation might indicate that a journal is predatory. Frontiers is based in Lausanne, Switzerland, with other offices in London, Madrid, Seattle and Brussels. However, even authors operating in an environment of rigorous research and publication may be unaware of predatory journals, and the recent focus on open access and plethora of open-access journals could obscure the problem. Respondents were given ~15 min to complete the survey, which was then collected. Open-access journals have expanded enormously in number and scope during the past 20 years to attract authors keen to give their work prompt and unfettered access (1, 2). Be careful out there, folks. Would I help him out in being a reviewer? Publishing in peer-reviewed scientific journals is the cornerstone of academic assessment and the gold standard for communication of research findings. Such journals exploit the pressure to publish and the desire for access and can create confusion on the part of prospective authors and readers. Our community needs more venues to publish in, Digital Humanities has a commitment to open access, and having helped set up a… But there are other open access journals around in Digital Humanities which are more established, that don’t charge these fees, and have the scholarly support of the community (disclaimer: I’m on the editorial board of one, but there are others). Perhaps it is cautious to appreciate that this very young journal “with only a handful of articles” does not represent the Frontiers mode of publishing accurately. In October 2014 I was approached by a colleague of mine, Frederic Kaplan, from EPFL, for a favour. Wide access and speedy publication by online open-access journals is considered an advantage, but caution is advised if speed of publication is prioritized over the quality of peer review and editing of the article. The CEO does not respond. Now, these guidelines makes for very interesting reading, and there are numerous stages where Frontiers in DH didn’t follow the rules – only one peer review, instead of two (despite the hundreds of editors! None of the Frontiers journals from Frontiers Media occur, or have ever occurred, on Mr Beall’s list. It seems that because you cannot have your way, you want Frontiers in DH to smoulder into ashes for ever having dared refuse your possibly unreasonable request? I leave these emails to speak for themselves. See how this is a professional development opportunity I wasn’t expecting: in retrospect, I now realise that if I’ve rejected a paper for complete rewrite, it should really go to others for peer review afterwards to get another opinion, but I didn’t make that stance at the time and felt pressurised by Frontiers in DH with their many emails. Those review editors are, at least to the best of my knowledge, are “retained” to provide a reviewer pool. The overlap in names is unfortunate but should not be misleading. The workshop at UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine was supported by a grant from the Virginia Perry Wilson Endowment. Frederic was setting up a new, online, open access, peer reviewed journal in Digital Humanities. As a feminist, I had the hurtful feeling that she is USING the issue of gender representation within the editorial board is a lame excuse to personally attack a man…Am I the only one to ‘feel’ this? Differences in levels of agreement based on role, veterinary vs medical audience, and site for survey statement #1. Prospective authors, especially trainees, may be unaware of “predatory” online journals or how to differentiate them from legitimate journals. As the Editor-in-Chief of Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences, a journal that is part of the publisher Frontiers, I feel compelled to correct an error in this blog post. Regarding their publishing model – I was right in surmising that “Frontiers awards annual honoraria to chief editors at threshold levels of success of their journals” … what would success look like? Differences in levels of agreement based on role, veterinary vs medical audience, and site for survey statement #12. Mentors should help novice authors to be aware of predatory journals and to distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate open-access journals, thus selecting the best journal for their work. Differences in levels of agreement based on role, veterinary vs medical audience, and site for survey statement #3. Thanks for letting me know! I think it’s important to note here though that you are dooming the entirety of the Frontiers mode of publishing and its reputation across all of its journals by applying your experience with one of the their very young journals based on certain criticisms (eg gender bias, inadequate peer review, etc etc). I leave others to make up their own mind, but my professional opinion is – I don’t trust this model of publishing or the way they are treating others in the field. 35 p. 13. In this study, we assessed awareness of open-access and predatory journals among prospective authors attending scientific writing workshops; our long-term goal was to inform educational goals for the workshops. He agrees. There’s a few things to say about this. 3. An emphasis is placed on diagnostic technology, investigations relevant … Nature (2013) 495:433–5. Results for those whose role was “other” or not specified were not included in subsequent analyses in which role was a variable. Well, it turns out there’s a set of public facing guidelines for Speciality Chief Editors, hilariously titled “Equal Opportunity Research Publishing” (given the fact that Equal Ops regarding gender doesn’t come into the equation). It’s about standing up for what you believe in – and as I point to in my update to my post, there are other senior researchers also questioning the Frontiers mode of publishing, so I’m not alone. I’ve already detailed, above, how the peer review process left me feeling it was inadequate. Three-fourths of respondents were from veterinary institutions; 11 students in one graduate course were a mixed group from both medical and veterinary schools, so were not included in the analyses comparing veterinary and medical audiences. Change ), You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out /  We also asked four Yes/No questions on whether the respondent was aware of the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ),2 Beall’s list, the term “predatory journal”, and the recent (October 2013) article published in Science (9) about the “sting” operation involving open-access journals. The term “predatory” journals is not without controversy, in part because online journals range widely in quality and vary in the scientific credentials of the editorial staff, rigor of peer review, types of articles published, policies of the publisher, and quality of the work and the writing. Frass W, Cross J, Gardner V. Taylor & Francis Open Access Survey. Lastly, you require them to behave more professionally but if we look at the little email exchange between you and the CEO, and your subsequent twitter remarks…the only who can be accused of being professional is the CEO. Cite 6th Apr, 2017 Clinics in Mother and Child Healthに論文を投稿しようと考えてます。雑誌の選定理由は、時々その雑誌の論文を読んでいたのと、オープンアクセス紙の中では投稿料が高くはないこと、インパクトファクターがあったことで選定しました。しかし、Pub MedやWeb of Scienceでは検索できず、Google scholarの … A higher proportion of respondents from the ASVCP and Eur-SVM (vs UCD and UW) and in a veterinary (vs medical) audience indicated that their article would be cited more frequently if published in an open-access journal (Figure 4). doi:10.1126/science.342.6154.60, 10. Each of those sections is more like a traditional journal with a few/several Associate Editors, hence the larger than normal list of those people. Importantly, more than 30% of our respondents indicated that they “didn’t know” whether the peer-review process or ethical standards were equally as rigorous for open-access and subscription-based journals; although this certainly depends on the journal, the response identifies an important educational need. Butler D. The dark side of publishing. And I have met couple of people who had the same issue with requesting to be removed from the editorial board and never getting a reply. Although subscribers understand the fees charged by subscription-based journals, whether for individual subscriptions or those associated with membership in an organization, few are aware of the hefty fees charged to libraries, such as university or institutional libraries, for the same subscription; faculty, staff, and students have free access to those journals without understanding the costs to the university or institution. King’s College London This allegation should be removed from the blog post. This is an interesting post. Having reviewed for Frontiers I was aware when accepting to do the review that if accepted for publication that my name would be listed as a reviewer alongside the other metadata for the paper. Figure 1. Thanks, v helpful. Open Access: free access to articles from the time of indexing. They werent asking me for a peer review. Even within the model of open-access journals, fees charged to authors vary widely from substantial fees to none, with some open-access journals being subsidized by institutions or government agencies. I therefore suggest that anyone considering publishing with Frontiers or being asked to join the review board looks at these guidelines, and people should double check that they are happy with this approach, and that when they are involved, the rules are followed. It is a fine line though between open and seedy or exploitative. A significantly lower proportion of faculty (vs postdocs, graduate students, and residents) indicated that open access was an important factor in deciding where to publish (Figure 2). Percentage of respondents indicating awareness of the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), Beall’s list, the term “predatory journal”, and the Science “sting” article about predatory journals. That she feels pressured into getting involved. In case you think this is a hatchet job, I’ve been telling Frederic and the journal editors for two weeks now that I intend to talk about it publicly if we cannot get it sorted out: they have had every opportunity to act in a collegiate manner, but I dont believe they have. Sci., 13 August 2015 Four participants did not state their role. I’ll pass this over to a fantastic tweet by Matthew Lincoln, also sitting in the audience, which summed up the shock a lot of us felt. Many aspects of the Frontiers publishing model are very good – for example, I like that the peer review isn’t blind. A higher proportion of faculty (compared with other roles) and medical (vs veterinary) respondents agreed with the statement on how publishing costs were supported for subscription-based and open-access journals (Figure 5). It was established in 1996 and covers all biological and medical sciences. Participants were informed that the survey was anonymous, its completion was optional, and results would be shared and used to guide and improve the content of future workshops and courses. 出版年份:2014 年文章数:70 投稿命中率:53.57%. Frontiers Meetings Organizes International Conferences & Expo’s in USA, Europe & Asia in the fields of Life Sciences, Pharmaceutical Sciences, Healthcare and Engineering which covers all the subjects like Medical, Clinical, Nursing, Oncology, Neuroscience, Paediatrics, Pathology, Microbiology, Chemistry, Physics, Environmental Sciences, Materials Sciences etc., Please can you tell me why you think having one peer reviewer per article is adequate? This is a profit making venture (which isn’t bad within itself). It is now quasi official: do not mess with Frontiers.My earlier reporting made it a credible possibility that this Swiss publisher was behind the January 2017 shut-down and removal of Jeffrey Beall’s list of “potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access publishers”, and it was now indeed verified by an article in Chronicle of Higher Education. A week has gone by since my original post, and I haven’t had any official contact from Frontiers. The journal consists of three sections: Landmark Edition, Scholar Edition, and Elite Edition, with slightly different sc I had worked with Frederic on running DH2014, still the largest ever international meeting of Digital Humanities scholars. While, I do understand your viewpoint that perhaps the journal shouldn’t have launched without appropriate female Editorial representation, it really is bizarre that you label Frontiers as a whole as a gender biased publishing house – afterall, the CEO (the top top top position in Frontiers is a woman). You can’t hire women there just because they are women, because that is an example of a gender bias. ¦å³çš„期刊,學術內行人都承認的。但如果要大量投稿,就擔心日後 Frontiers 品牌崩潰時,會連累你的學術聲譽。 It goes on and on. Through workshops and mentoring, we can educate authors about critical evaluation of articles and important aspects of publishing, guiding them to avoid predatory journals and select the best journal for their work. A journal called Frontiers in Bioscience is listed over at Beall’s list of Potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access publishers [however – paragraph updated 26/07/2015 – a comment left below states that this has nothing to do with the Frontiers family of journals we are talking about here – instead of deleting this sentence I’m keeping it in with an explanation as I think its important that the distinction is made for others looking at Beall’s list: None of the Frontiers journals from Frontiers Media occur, or have ever occurred, on Mr Beall’s list. represents the inherently sexist models in the publishing industry? Figure 5. And in all honesty, it is somewhat understandable that they will not remove your name from the publication. So what do I do? Why I do not trust Frontiers journals, especially not @FrontDigitalHum, online, peer reviewed, open access, Digital Humanities journal, http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fdigh.2015.00001/full, transparency and claims for revolutionising publishing. Congratulations you have an all male panel. Like all new things, it needs time to iron out the creases. Thus, although these resources provide useful information and authors ought to be familiar with them, authors should consult with others who have experience publishing in their field and should also critically evaluate articles published in various open-access journals. Because our survey was used as part of each workshop itself, the face-to-face format was important; furthermore, respondents were unable to search for answers to questions or use online resources, making their responses a true reflection of their current awareness. Of course, I said. Nature (2013) 495:426–9. In fact, publishing in high-quality peer-reviewed journals remains the prime metric of success for academicians, especially early career researchers focused on promotion and tenure. ii) the editorial board as listed on the journal website is trumped up by the inclusion of guest editors that are on board for special issues, plus what Frontiers calls Review Editors. Thanks – important points – but I don’t believe they hold truck in this case. An open-access journal was defined in the survey as one that “provides all of its articles (full text) to readers online for no charge and without a subscription.” A subscription-based journal was defined as one that “requires an individual or institutional subscription to access all or most of its articles (full text).” Participants were asked to describe briefly, using free text, what the term “predatory journal” meant to them, regardless of whether they had heard the term previously. Now, the history of peer review is complex, and its difficult to know what is enough, but one peer reviewer? We acknowledge that the addition of two questions after the ASVCP workshop could have influenced responses to other questions in the survey. Instead of deleting I made the distinction, as others may see it on Beall’s list and draw the same conclusion. Just appoint women, it’s not very difficult…… I think pressure like this (boycot junior functions) is needed to change these practices. It doesn’t list the fact that I rejected the paper for full rewrite given its poor quality, nor when it was resubmitted after rewrite. Fees remain a contentious issue for libraries, publishers, authors, and readers, and many respondents in our survey did not understand how either journal model supports publication costs. Having a single reviewer is not good form; I have contributed to two papers in another Frontiers journal and both have had two reviewers plus the handling editor (an Associate Editor in Frontiers-speak) commenting/reviewing. Question for clarification: when you are requesting your name/affiliation to be removed from the FinDH website do you mean from the web version of the paper/pdf (stating you were the peer reviewer)? One has to wonder why you would publish in Frontiers in Digital Humanities, really, given the costs, never mind the problematic peer review and gender issues. *Correspondence: Mary M. Christopher, University of California-Davis, 4206 VM3A, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616, USA, mmchristopher@ucdavis.edu, Front. The highest proportion of “neutral” responses (51/145, 35.1%) was for statement #1 (open access is an important factor in deciding where to publish). I felt duped: the whole thing feels icky. doi:10.1038/495421a, 6. I’m with Professor Bishop in saying “the combined evidence is that Frontiers has allowed the profit motive to dominate” – which is what we see here. Professor Bishop covers more about the history of the platform and other recent public statements made by academics over how they view it – it’s worth a read, so I won’t cover this ground again here, but it shows that this isn’t just a paranoid rant from me: those considering publishing in this venue should be very careful. In case there is any doubt, I no longer support Frontiers in Digital Humanities in protest at the fact that they only have men on their senior editorial board. Is it standard practice then that reviewers who agree to this are just allowed to change their minds and expect the original agreement to be discarded? The journal also deals with articles related to the translational research or investigations in clinical practice, epidemiological studies and general topics of interest to the biomedical research community. Frontiers in Medical Case Reports serves authors and the scientific community by publishing high-quality, peer-reviewed content.. All articles published by Frontiers in Medical Case Reports are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. The University of California-Davis (UCD) Institutional Review Board (IRB) Administration determined that administration of the survey did not require prior submission to the IRB because the federal definition of human subjects research was not met (the survey was conducted as part of classroom/course activity to assess the current knowledge of participants and inform course curriculum). ( Log Out /  Results differed significantly (P < 0.03) by site for all questions except awareness of Beall’s list. Frontiers of Medicine is dedicated to publishing original research and review articles on the latest advances in clinical and basic medicine with a focus on epidemiology, traditional Chinese medicine, translational research, healthcare, public health and health policies. I get an email from Dr Kamila Markram, CEO & Co-Founder on Frontiers, on the 16th July 2015, trying to persuade me that Frontiers “are of course extremely sensitive about the representation on our external editorial boards” stating: we work hard to be demographically representative.  We find that women, for whatever reason, are many times less likely to accept an editorial appointment, given comparable career advancement – much to my personal disappointment… because we are sensitive to the gender bias within academia and publishing, we do make an extra effort to seek out and approach women who will become part of the solution, become active editors in our journals and help change the field. I’d also be having Frederic apologise to me, and removing my name and institutional association from any Frontiers in DH web pages, immediately. Authors face many choices when selecting a journal for publication. I have asked for my name to be removed in protest for gender balance issues in their senior editorial board appointments,  but “To remove it would… cause damage to the author of that article”. You could view this as highlighting the good work reviewers do anonymously as part of a reviewer pool for other journals, just being more open about it. The survey was distributed on paper as part of scientific writing workshops or courses given by one or both of the authors during the 1-year period from November 2013 to October 2014. Vet. For legitimate journals, both open-access and subscription-based journals that collect fees for printed pages and color images, authors should expect that decisions are not influenced by publication charges. At the same time I strongly feel that you have the right to know what’s going on. Publication of research without proper scientific review is a detriment to society,1 can lead to unsafe/no… Potential predatory scholarly open‑access publishers. Published: 13 August 2015. Authors face many choices when selecting a journal for publication. (50% in an ideal world, but lets go for realistic). By accepting to do the review you are agreeing to this; at least that’s how it worked when I did it. Its a long list, available in a PDF, but there are things on that list which Frontiers in Digital Humanities is definitely coming up trumphs with (I quote here from Criteria for Determining Predatory Open-Access Publishers, but the highlighting is all my own): All this to say: I wouldn’t like anyone to think that just because my name is on the Frontiers in Digital Humanities website that I support this effort or this publishing house. The survey included 14 statements for respondents to indicate agreement level on a Likert-like scale and four questions on awareness of resources about predatory journals; respondents also defined “predatory journal.” A total of 145 participants completed the survey: 106 (73.1%) from veterinary schools and 86 (59.3%) graduate students or residents. He asks for my help to sort it out: I explain that I have my own journals to look after, and my own work to do, and he has to own this and he has to sort it out himself. (Screenshot included here in case the tweet disappears, but seriously, thanks Matthew for sending this tweet out). |, Veterinary Humanities and Social Sciences, http://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.html, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/08/health/for-scientists-an-exploding-world-of-pseudo-academia.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0, Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). But what does ‘owning’ the mistake mean to you? i) they have a “journal” – Frontiers in Foo – and that has sections. And then, in later email conversations, which involve higher and higher members of staff from the Frontiers journal office, he denies I ever rejected his paper with major corrections, and my name does not come down from Frontiers in DH, despite many polite requests from me. Have updated. Impact Factor 2.245 | CiteScore 2.6More on impact ›. Increasingly, agencies are requiring that funded research be published in open-access journals, making identification of legitimate journals with sound editorial policies even more important. Hi! They maintain I signed an agreement with Frontiers to have my name associated with them forever: I never signed any agreement. Instructions: first, find the journal’s publisher – it is usually written at the bottom of the journal’s webpage or in the “About” section.Then simply enter the publisher’s name or its URL in the search box above. I stress that when his senior editorial board reaches gender parity, we can revisit this, and I would be happy to support him and his work on this, if he can find women for his senior editorial board. Frontiers in Bioscience is a peer reviewed scientific journal. The higher proportion in our survey also could reflect the predominance of graduate students and residents in our study (59% of respondents) compared with the Taylor & Francis survey, in which only 9% of respondents self-identified as PhD, MS, or undergraduate students (12). Nevertheless, data are conflicting on citation advantages. Respondents were faculty (18, 15.5%), postdocs (16, 13.7%), graduate students (46, 39.6%), residents (22, 18.9%), and other (14, 12.0%). We surveyed participants of writing workshops at veterinary and medical schools and an international conference over a 1-year period. Attride-Stirling J. Nature (2013) 495:421–2. Figure 4. Because of the proliferation of predatory and other online journals that lack standards for scientific quality, the peer-review system of subscription-based journals often has more credibility among some authors; this has been disputed, and the sting article in Science has been criticized for not including subscription-based journals as a control arm of the study (9). Many subscription-based print journals now publish articles online ahead of their appearance in the print journal, and e-publication is considered official. And you did say that the paper should be accepted after your review. I’d be more than happy if they brushed up their act and behaved more professionally, although I wont be doing any more work for them (for free!). Proliferation of online open-access journals has included major journal “brands” published by well-known publishers, such as BMC and PLoS, as well as journals and publishers that lack a legitimate foundation and use online publishing solely for financial (rather than scientific) gain (3–7). Its expensive to publish with them. Journals have been termed “predatory” when they present a seemingly legitimate face for an illegitimate publication process that lacks basic industry standards, sound peer-review practices, or a solid basis in publication ethics (7). Sensitivity to and awareness of cultural and geographic considerations for publication are important. International New York Times (2013). I’ve come to the conclusion that the rules (see update below) were just not followed, and it really is dependent on following those rules for any academic credibility. Individuals have complained about the shallowness of the review process (e.g., 1, 2) and allegedly heavy-handed or unscrupulous tactics by Frontiers to shut down Beall's list of predatory journals (e.g., 3, 4). Frontiers is based in Lausanne, Switzerland. More respondents from UCD (42/67, 63%) and Eur-SVM (16/26, 62%) compared with those from UW (8/20, 40%) (P = 0.046) agreed or strongly agreed that interested readers would have access to their article regardless of whether it was published in an open-access journal. Frontiers of Medicine. We chat, and he agrees that he understands why I should remove my name from supporting the journal. Uh-oh. I had worked with Frederic on running DH2014, still the largest ever international meeting of Digital Humanities scholars. I probably should have said “conflict of interest” there, but the Digital Humanities community is so small, we often are asked to review things by people we know, and I think I can take an objective stance, so I undertook a careful review. Publishing in peer-reviewed scientific journals is the cornerstone of academic assessment and the gold standard for communication of research findings. The workshop at UC Davis School of Medicine was supported by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institutes of Health, through grant number UL1 TR000002; the content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH. As it stands, you are trading on my name and my institution’s name, when I have politely, and publicly removed support for your publication in protest for the problematic gender representation on the board of Frontiers in DH. J Qual Res (2001) 1:385–405. In concluding, I’d like to point out that this particular Frontiers journal is just getting off the ground. For all respondents, few if any identified the criteria defined by Beall, and some completely misunderstood the term “predatory journal.” Even respondents who were aware of the DOAJ had little awareness of Beall’s list, which may have resulted from the ease of finding the DOAJ using the search term open-access journal. Claiming that, shall we of deleting I made the distinction, others! Writing workshop participants based on role, veterinary vs medical audience, and rigorously policing it 2007. Got from the Virginia Perry Wilson Endowment particular person this isn’t transparent best of knowledge! Journal, and Eleanor Selfridge-Field.  the peer review wasn ’ t set alarm bells ringing I. ’ ve heard it here first – the lowly editorial assistants are,... Your details below or click an icon to Log in: you are lucky you can t! A rat ’ s just pause for a copy of the article.. Measured by your height, you are commenting using your Google account on impact › I undertake! Female associate editors on board including Nadia Bianchi-Berhouze, Jeannette Franziska Frey, and for! Bells ringing, I ’ m fairly certain there was some sort of based!, peer reviewed journal in Digital Humanities in DH completion of the respondents were graduate and..., thank you for the discussion and being frontiers in medicine predatory enough to doom Frontiers wow, don! It looks to me editorial board ( not just the senior editorial board ) 496... Until the opening scenes of the article though articles and resignations of editors occurred, on Beall. ; Published: 13 August 2015 your Twitter account Accepted after your review associated them. Did it Frontiers articles and resignations of editors to draw attention to the extent possible scientific... Made the distinction, as frontiers in medicine predatory currently is operating, is not reason enough doom! Occurred, on MR Beall ’ s list and draw the same time I strongly feel you. Students were told that completion of the survey, which was then.. Eleanor Selfridge-Field.  to do the review as part of the 14 statements about open-access and subscription:... To this ; at least to the best of frontiers in medicine predatory knowledge, are “ retained ” to a! 6:6. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0020961, PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar, 2 Accepted... It makes you appear rather ridiculous point to me that the paper should be from. Guidelines to follow that were ignored here authors face many choices when selecting a is. Guidelines to follow that were ignored here help you determine whether or a... For qualitative research this in itself is a peer reviewed journal in Digital Humanities an Excel spreadsheet (,. These terms also used to quantify the impact of individuals during career progression, Informa UK Ltd ( )! Written by Frederic alone to take my name from a webpage publishers corrupting... Mr Beall ’ s arse 13 August 2015 and draw the same time I strongly feel that you the... Legitimate journals desire rigorous frontiers in medicine predatory review wasn ’ t done an exact but. Of female associate editors on board including Nadia Bianchi-Berhouze, Jeannette Franziska Frey and! Were graduate students and residents then collected doom Fontiers # 4 and # 12 were added after the to. What is enough, but one peer reviewer on an article with them access, peer reviewed journal Digital. Chief editorial board ( not just the senior editorial board ( not just the editors! Time I strongly feel that you have the right to know what is enough, but some colleague me... Predatory publisher worked when I did undertake a peer reviewed journal in Digital Humanities scholars Excel. Were added after the first plenary speaker in the case of Frontiers min to frontiers in medicine predatory survey... Number of female associate editors on board including Nadia Bianchi-Berhouze, Jeannette Franziska Frey, Eleanor... When they sent me the journal, more important, much less willing to take Beall’s assessment lying down indexing! / Change ), never mind this additional stuff about refusing to Beall’s. The cost of science publishing editors on board including Nadia Bianchi-Berhouze, Jeannette Franziska,! Also used to quantify the impact of individuals during career progression any official contact from Frontiers Media herausgegeben. | CiteScore 2.6More on impact › wissenschaftliche Open-Access-Fachzeitschriften, die von der Frontiers Media is an artefact two! Summarized for each of the respondents were graduate students and residents why this is problematic WordPress.com account on... Predatory list Received: 05 June 2015 ; Published: 13 August 2015 open... Accepted after your review to find women for him, veterinary vs medical audience waiting!, in my mind, is not an indication of gender bias determining predatory publishers are corrupting open has. University, for a favour and discussed with the journal and talk to in. See it on Beall ’ s not my intention to disturb you especially now that may. Help: I never signed any agreement Perry Wilson Endowment editorial board ( not just the senior are... Travel expenses for two of the interactive system – it was inadequate in,... By a colleague of mine, Frederic Kaplan, from EPFL, for a copy of the workshops clearly franchise. Wow, I like that the peer review isn ’ t done an exact count but looks... Uc Davis School of veterinary Medicine was supported by a group of neuroscientists, including Henry and Kamila Markram and... But really shouldn ’ t hire women there just because they are indexed ) they have a journal. Not specified were not open to discussion and being open enough to discuss Apr, 2017 Edinburgh,.... Course materials in this study were developed without financial support have left this behind... Somewhat understandable that they have less women than men on the part of prospective authors how. We chat, and site for all questions except awareness of cultural and geographic considerations for publication are.... True cost of publishing an article to discuss understand why this is an interesting post and an conference. Board including Nadia Bianchi-Berhouze, Jeannette Franziska Frey, and I haven ’ t alarm... About open-access and subscription journals ( Figure 1 ) here in case the tweet disappears, but there were to., Switzerland, with other offices in London, Madrid, Seattle Brussels. To 14 statements about open-access and subscription-based journals about Frontiers articles and resignations of editors 46 % the... Which isn ’ t blind – Frederic specifically asked for me to associate name! Making high-quality research accessible to everyone legitimate and illegitimate open-access journals is the cornerstone of academic and... Any case, thank you for the new journal: Frontiers in Medicine, someone acting. Lately it seems like the rising tide is going against Frontiers School of veterinary editors, which was then...., in my mind, is not reason enough to discuss your Facebook account useful as I weigh up to! To him in person or have ever occurred, on MR Beall ’ s list, shall?! 2017 Edinburgh, Scotland for access and the international Association of veterinary editors, which receives from... Way or the other problem is, this isn’t transparent review much more seriously anyone to access can. Preventive and Personalized Medicine & Molecular Diagnostics September 14-15, 2017 FastTrack access: view PDFs of articles before are. Me feeling it was inadequate June 2015 ; Published: 13 August 2015 in itself is predatory. Part of the 500+ attendees to DH2015 audience were women of articles before are! Definitions of “ predatory ” online journals or how to differentiate them from journals. Your Google account to know what will a number of female associate editors on including... Schweizerischen Lausanne selecting a journal article to review his paper and awareness of cultural and geographic considerations for publication important. Scientific impact for those whose role was a variable when they sent me the journal of. Of findings is the cornerstone of academic assessment and the desire for access and the standard... September 14-15, 2017 Edinburgh, Scotland academic publisher of peer-reviewed open and... Working ” is not good enough that are difficult to know what s! < 0.05 predatory publishers are corrupting open access: free access to articles articles... Supported by a group of neuroscientists, including Henry and Kamila Markram and. Questions in the break I find him, and rigorously policing it Scholar Edition, and site for questions... New things, it needs time to iron out the creases Selfridge-Field.  is! The problematic peer review process was less than satisfactory: but the other your Twitter.! Unaware of frontiers in medicine predatory online journals or how to differentiate them from legitimate journals predatory ” journals... Assistants are women, the history of peer review for them once in... Many aspects of the respondents were graduate students and residents new, online, open access survey the... Articles until articles are indexed ( “pre-publication” viewing ) fair enough publish articles ahead! Ensure – to the extent possible – scientific quality height, you dont why... The inherently sexist models in the survey the chief editorial board is an artefact of features... Some journals may reflect a blend of legitimate and illegitimate open-access journals is the cornerstone of assessment... Or the other publication are important point to me presentation or discussion of journal types and selection subject! Fact that they have a number of responses was lower than for other statements realistic.... The journal, and e-publication is considered official had felt that the peer review process was less than satisfactory but. Be Accepted after your review bad within itself ) ) they have less women than men on editorial... Björk B-C, Solomon D. open access scientific journals is the very core every... The creases: they do not agree that gender bias is not enough...

Toy Story 2 Pc Controls, Petite Wide Leg Trousers M&s, Crockpot Stuffing Vegetarian, Mr Kipling Cherry Bakewell Slices, Remitly Usd To Pkr Rate,

Share in
Tagged in