Thursday, January 17, 2008

B - The Importance of External Validity

Steckler A, McLeroy K R. The Importance of External Validity. American Journal of Public Health 2008; 98(1):9-10
DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2007.126847

The article discusses the new emphasis of the Journal on external validity for appropriate manuscripts. Enhancing the quality of reporting on external validity in journal articles, warrants higher priority than it has received in public health research publications to date. Several characteristics of external validity should be reported, and even if not every article would be expected to excel on all of the criteria, many of the articles published will benefit by including information on external validity.

http://www.ajph.org/cgi/content/full/98/1/9

B - Externally cited impact factor for Non-ISI journals

Leydesdorff L. Caveats for the use of citation indicators in research and journal evaluations. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 2008;59(2):278-87.

Non-ISI journals (i.e. journals that are not included in the ISI dataset) can be evaluated with an "externally cited impact factor", by using ISI databases anyway. Actually, in order to construct this indicator it useful to follow a procedure, here proposed and explained, that includes search on the Web of Science and on the Journal Citation Reports.

http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/116839393/HTMLSTART

B - Publishing perils include single-blind review

Williams L. Publishing perils include single-blind review. Physics Today 2007; 60(11)12.

The Letters section contained a discussion about the exacting and often confusing electronic paper submission process as an obstacle to getting published. Here Williams states that a much more important and corrosive impediment to publication is single-blind peer review, as this system has a fundamental flaw: it allows reviewers to assess the author(s)of a paper along with the scientific content and thereby allows nonscientific considerations to creep in. Single-blind peer review can in this way discourage scientists from publishing in new fields and add irrelevant considerations to the review of scientific content. For this reason peer review should be double-blind.

posted for John Glen

B - Journal to support astronomy outreach

Jeandron M. Journal to support astronomy outreach. Physics World 2007; 20(12)9.

The International Astronomical Union (IAU)launched a new open-access, peer-reviewed journal designed to support the burgeoning field of astronomy communication. Communicating Astronomy with the Public (CAP) contains research papers written by experienced astronomy communicators as well as news, reviews and opinion articles. The current issue, for example, includes articles about how to discuss astronomy using podcasts and the YouTube website. The journal has several objectives, including ensuring that outreach effort is not duplicated and establishing priorities for the field, and the IAU hopes that it will be used by a wide variety of people.

posted for John Glen

Monday, January 14, 2008

B - Open Access Publishing in High Energy Physics

Towards Open Access Publishing in High Energy Physics. Report of the SCOAP3 Working Party. CERN, Geneva 2007

High Energy Physics (HEP) pioneered OA through “repositories” containing
collections of “pre-prints” freely accessible on the Internet, but there still is a strong consensus in the scientific community about the need for high-quality journals that provide: quality control through the peer review process; a platform for the evaluation of scientists; a measure of the quality and productivity of research groups and institutes. Yet OA journals are expensive. In the present proposal, the publishers’ subscription income from multiple institutions is replaced by income from a single financial partner, the “Sponsoring Consortium for Open Access Publishing in Particle Physics” (SCOAP3). It is a global network of funding agencies, research laboratories, and libraries. Each SCOAP3 partner will recover its contribution from the cancellation of its current journal subscriptions. This model avoids the obvious disadvantage of OA models in which authors are directly charged for the OA publication of their articles.


http://www.scoap3.org/files/Scoap3WPReport.pdf

Sunday, January 06, 2008

B - The E-only Tipping Point for Journals

Johnson RK,Luther J. The E-only Tipping Point for Journals: What's Ahead in the Print-to-Electronic Transition Zone. Washington. Association of Research Library, 2007

This report issued by the US Association of Research Libraries (ARL), in December 2007, examines the issues associated with the migration from dual-format publishing to electronic-only publication of journals.
It provides a synthetic analysis of librarian and publisher perspectives on the current state of format migration, considering the drivers toward electronic-only publishing and barriers that are slowing change. The authors provide an assessment of likely change in the near term and recommend strategic areas of focus for further work to enable change.


http://www.arl.org/bm~doc/Electronic_Transition.pdf