We have a range of articles featured in our look-back at June’s most read articles from European Science Editing, with papers on critical aspects of peer review, the role of social media in the research cycle and Andrew Woods’ article on terminology, usage and style
Alongside these is Stephen Merten’s editorial from our most recent issue, calling for wider editorial policies to incorporate climate change, and approaches to use of multilingualism in Russian journals.
European Science Editing (ESE) is the official, quarterly, peer reviewed journal of the European Association of Science Editors (EASE). Issues are made freely available 6 months after print publication. ESE publishes articles covering all aspects of scientific editing and publishing. It includes research articles, meeting reports, essays and viewpoints, book and website reviews, as well as highlighting events, resources and publications of interest to members.
Addressing climate change – science journals could lead via themed issues
45(2) May 2019. Editorial
Based on current trends in global CO2 emissions, the world is heading towards a 3°C temperature increase above pre-industrial levels by the end of the century.1 The overwhelming majority of scientists agree that such an increase will have devastating effects on Earth, affecting our biosphere and our societies in serious and unpredictable ways. Yet although most people are aware of climate change to at least some extent, governments, companies, and individual consumers seem extraordinarily reluctant to take concrete steps to mitigate the consequences. It is important that science journals take a lead in challenging passivity and helplessness and encouraging change.
Criticism of peer review and ways to improve it
Hasan Shareef Ahmed & Armen Yuri Gasparyan
39(1) February 2013. Essays
This paper reviews some critical aspects of peer review in developed and developing countries. Though the peer review process is criticised for some of its drawbacks, it is still widely accepted as a tool for preserving the integrity and quality of scholarly communication. Peer review varies widely across journals and countries. Many developing and some developed countries suffer from substandard and biased peer review mainly due to the lack of training in peer review. The peer review process is still slow, expensive, poor in detecting scientific misconduct, and open to abuse. It needs reforming to make it more effective worldwide.
3D or 3-D: a study of terminology, usage and style
39(3) August 2013. Original article
Andrew J. Woods
The terms “3D” and “3-D” are two alternative acronyms for the term “three-dimensional”. In the published literature both variants are commonly used but what is the derivation of the two forms and what are the drivers of usage? This paper surveys the published stereoscopic literature and examines publication-style policies to understand forces and trends
Multilingualism in Russian journals: a controversy of approaches
Lilia Raitskaya & Elena Tikhonova
45(2) May 2019. Viewpoint
This paper considers how “linguistic imperialism” is emerging as a framework for national science policies and how some countries are establishing new approaches to promote national interests to advance research profiles, in the context of Russia’s policies of multilingualism in its scientific journals.
The role of social media in the research cycle
Issue: 41(4) November 2015. Essays
Different types of social media are being adopted by an increasing number of members within the scientific community, with researchers, publishers, and readers playing important roles in the scientific communication process. Recently, the ability to harness the online presence of articles has given rise to alternative web-based metrics as an indicator of social impact and a measure of community presence to supplement conventional bibliometric methods. This paper summarises the current uses of social media in science, and includes specially conducted interviews with Jon Tennant, a power user of social media and Euan Adie, founder of Altmetric.