Abstract:Open access has seen a great many developments since its inception some twenty five years ago. From an individual initiative it evolved into an institutional then a governmental action that gave it more weight. These initiatives that took place in the last decade of the twentieth century, and are still going on, have coincided with a revolution that has impacted our daily lives and more precisely our lives as researchers: the Internet which changed our ways of doing scientific research and whose influence could be seen live under our own eyes. While open access in the developed world has thrived, in the developing world to which Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia belong it seems to lag behind.
This presentation will present the Journal Publishing Practices and Standards and its implementaion by The International Network for the Availability of Scientific Publication (INASP) on the Journal On Line project. It will try to see what different countries have achieved in responding in the system the INASP has put forward. Open access has undoubtedly allowed a bigger share and spread of scientific and technical information at both green and gold road. The statistics in every key open access site show an increase in the number of freely available data and peer reviewed material. Nevertheless, there is a clear “divide” between countries when it comes to the prestige and recognition for publishing in a Global North or a Global South journal. The reasons are multiple but prejudice about the quality and transparency is the most prominent. The International Network for the Availability of Scientific Publication (INASP) and its flagship program Journals On Line ( JOL) that encompasses a number of national and regional platforms have established a framework: Journal Publishing Practices and Standards (JPPS), whose goal is to bring these journals up to par and afford them a respectable place among the more established journals. The JPPS framework is made up of 6 levels of quality that determine the standing of the journal: inactive title; new title; no stars; one star; two stars; and three stars. The levels are used to rank and classify the journals. The other goal of JPPS is to give the editors of journals feedback on what to improve and how. We will in this presentation present the framework and show statistics for the different platforms using the star system. We will also present a conclusion on whether the framework has achieved its goals and what journals and countries have achieved a leap forward using the system.
Watch the VIDEO here.Peer review has been a cornerstone of science since the first scientific journals started in the middle of 17th century. It has since evolved from a case by case and non standardized process to a more regulated and organized undertaking. The period at which peer review entered its new phase is the Second World War and the extraordinary boom of scientific output that resulted from the cold war. All this output had to have a receptacle (scientific journals) but also had to be selected due to the big amount of data produced. That is when peer review became unanimously and, to some extent, uniformly implemented. It also became the unavoidable door leading to a number of advantages all researchers are looking for (promotions, funding, prize, etc.).That’s when the human component intervened and made the process a rather biased process subject to all kinds of critics. One of the main (if not the main) problem is the secrecy in which the process is undertaken and that has led to all kind of iniquitous, unjust and sometimes bizarre decisions. The process tried to inject some kind of openness (going from blind to double blind peer reviewing for example) with little results. The 90’s of the last century saw the Internet slowly becoming more and more used in everyday life and, more importantly, in the scientific and academic research. With all the problems besetting peer review ,Internet’s openness seemed as the best cure to all the grievance peer review elicited. Among the most revolutionary experiences, Faculty of 1000 (F 1000), Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (A.C.P.), Journal of Medical Internet Research (J.M.I.R.), British Medical Journal? Electronic Transactions on Artificial Intelligence ( ETAI) and Biology Direct have introduced new ways to undertake peer review that have somehow alleviated the numerous critics. With Research Ideas Outcomes (RIO), the process enters a new era of openness as its two stages are completely open: the pre submission peer review (part 1) in which the submitter is reviewed before submission by a colleague and could even ask colleagues to help write his proposal and then open post-publication peer-review (part 2) in which the process is even more open as authors could decide what reviews are published, when and also decide to ask for an in house classic type of review done exclusively by peer reviewers from RIO or let the whole community implement a Post Publication Peer Review that could putatively last as long as the article is on the system. All the process is open in all its steps and allows novelty, among others, to recognize namely reviewers’ work, a task they have so far anonymously and without any reward of any kind. This proposal will explain in details the process and try to understand the (r)evolution this kind of process introduces to the making of science through transparency in a stage of science that has been known to be utterly secretive.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.