Research assessment and open science

Dr Paula Rodríguez Abruñeiras Dr Jesús Romero Barranco

[email protected] [email protected]
 Notice of copyright

Materials in this course – unless otherwise indicated – are

protected by the Spanish Intellectual Property Act [LPI Art. 14, 17-
23]. Materials are presented in an educational context for the
personal use and study of the students officially registered in the
course, and it is thus strictly prohibited to share, distribute or sell
them in print – or digitally – outside the course without the author's
explicit permission.
Failure to comply with the terms of this notice may expose you to
legal action for copyright infringement by the authors and/or
disciplinary action by the University.
Course structure and requirements

 Dates: April 21-May 8/2020

 The course is divided into 4 units. For each unit you will
find a PowerPoint with some explanations and some
activities to complete in Aula Virtual
 In order to pass the course, you need to complete all the
tasks in Aula Virtual, and get a score of at least 5 out of
10 points in each of them
 You can repeat the activities as many times as you want
(only the highest grade is taken into account)
 At the end of the course, you will get a PASS/NON-PASS
(APTO/NO APTO) grade
Aims of the course
 Selecting tools for the evaluation of scientific
publications which are appropriate to your research area
 Using these tools to retrieve the quality indicators of
your publications
 Gaining access to information from scientific open
publications
 Taking advantage of the possibilities offered by open
science
 Knowing and managing your rights when you publish in
open access
 Using the open access tools offered by the Universitat
de València
Course outline

1. The academic publication: The

editorial process
2. Quality indicators for scientific
journals
3. The Open Access movement, free
access to knowledge and Copyright
4. How to increase the visibility of
your publications
Course outline

1. The academic publication: The

editorial process
2. Quality indicators for scientific
journals
3. The Open Access movement, free
access to knowledge and Copyright
4. How to increase the visibility of
your publications
1. Academic publication: The editorial process

1.1. The editorial process: a summary

1.2. The journal
1.3. The editor’s role
1.4. The reviewers’ role
1.5. How long does peer review take?
1. Academic publication: The editorial process

1.1. The editorial process: a summary

1.2. The journal
1.3. The editor’s role
1.4. The reviewers’ role
1.5. How long does peer review take?
The editorial process: a summary

Author
submits
manuscript

Author is Editor
informed filters out
about final the
decision manuscripts

Editor Manuscript
makes final is sent to
decision reviewers
CompanyRepor
t
1. Academic publication: The editorial process

1.1. The editorial process: a summary

1.2. The journal
1.3. The editor’s role
1.4. The reviewers’ role
1.5. How long does peer review take?
Choosing the right journal
 Put together six months to one year long wait times of journals with crazy high
rejection rates and you will know why it is so crucial for you to think through
your decision of choosing the right journal
 As early-career researchers, where you choose to publish your work will impact
your career advancement, funding opportunities and professional reputation for
years to come. Getting this wrong can be a huge setback for your career. It is
thus important that you analyze each aspect of journal submission instead of
relying on one resource as your holy grail, be it word-of-mouth, journal finder
tools, or other resources available
 Publishing in a good peer-reviewed journal is the ultimate goal for most
research projects. Over 34,000 scholarly journals fall into this category and
choosing the best journal for your work is like finding the needle in a haystack
already
CompanyRepor
t
(Taken from: https://blog.typeset.io/choose-right-journal-early-stage-researchers-guide-ea2cf236dde4)
Choosing the right journal
 But nowadays even a bigger problem looms over our head: “what if the
journal you are submitting to is not legit?” It’s a genuine concern,
considering the amount of predatory publishers that have come up as an
aftermath of the Open Access movement
 Predatory publishers often game Google Scholar and Academia.edu
systems to get access to recently published papers and their authors. Many
also set up seeming-legit websites and then send general ‘call for papers’
emails. Or sometimes they also send flattering and highly personalized
emails to authors specifically mentioning about one of their published
works and how that’s exactly the kind of thing their journal or conference
is looking for
 When in doubt, check Jeffrey Beall’s lists to spot scammers:
https://beallslist.net/ & https://beallslist.net/hijacked-journals/
CompanyRepor
t
(Taken from: https://blog.typeset.io/choose-right-journal-early-stage-researchers-guide-ea2cf236dde4)
Choosing the right journal: Factors to consider
 Aims and scope: Even remarkable, high-impact work can face rejection
when the research topic doesn’t align with the scope of the journal. This
can lead to unnecessary loss of time and motivation that could very well be
avoided in the first place if authors take some time to study the aims &
scope of the journal. This information is often easily available on journal’s
website. Reading through “About the journal,” “Aims & scope” or similar
sections can help you understand if the journal is a good match to submit
your manuscript
 Authors guidelines: This section will give you specific instructions on
things like the journal’s preferred layout, word limit (including and
excluding bibliographic information), referencing style and more.
Submitting to journal that doesn’t accept your article type is a guaranteed
way of getting your paper rejected
CompanyRepor
t
(Taken from: https://blog.typeset.io/choose-right-journal-early-stage-researchers-guide-ea2cf236dde4)
Choosing the right journal: Factors to consider
 Time to publish: Good journals take a minimum of 4 months to come
back to you with a response if your paper has been sent for a peer review.
If your paper has been rejected, you should hear about it within 4–6 weeks
after submission.
 Reputed journals work hard to publish papers within 9–12 months of
submission. But high profile journals do have longer wait times, mostly
because of the volume of submissions they receive, and their rejection
rates are also higher.
 Having said that, you must look into how many issues are published by a
journal annually. The more they publish, the lesser would be the time taken
by them to publish your paper. Keep an eye out if they have a ‘call for
papers’ for any special edition, where your paper might be a good fit.
Special editions get lesser submissions relatively and makes it easier for
yourCompanyRepor
t
paper to be considered and published, if it fits the criteria
(Taken from: https://blog.typeset.io/choose-right-journal-early-stage-researchers-guide-ea2cf236dde4)
Choosing the right journal: Factors to consider
 Well-indexed: Databases that index journals take into account several
factors like the regularity of publication, review process, quality of papers
published, journal’s reputation, and more. Well-indexed journals are thus
thought to be more prestigious, as we mentioned in the previous chapter
as well
 Acceptance rate: As it might seem obvious, journals with lower
acceptance rates are considered to be more prestigious and meritorious
 Journal Impact Factor (JIF) (this will be discussed in further detail in
Part 2)

CompanyRepor
t
(Taken from: https://blog.typeset.io/choose-right-journal-early-stage-researchers-guide-ea2cf236dde4)
1. Academic publication: The editorial process

1.1. The editorial process: a summary

1.2. The journal
1.3. The editor’s role
1.4. The reviewers’ role
1.5. How long does peer review take?
The editor’s role
 After an article is submitted to a journal, a journal editor screens the
manuscript and decides whether or not to send it for full peer review. Only
after clearing the initial screening is the article sent to one or more peer
reviewers. Editors will consider the following aspects:
 Is the manuscript good enough quality to be sent for peer review?
 Does it conform to the aims and scope of the journal and has it followed
the style guidelines and instructions for authors?
 Does it make a significant contribution to the existing literature?
 Unsuitable articles may be rejected without peer review at the editor’s
discretion. If the article passes these initial checks, it will be sent for peer
review

CompanyRepor
t
(Taken from: https://editorresources.taylorandfrancis.com/managing-peer-review-process/)
The editor’s role
 Benefits of carrying out this initial screening include:
 A quick decision for authors – if the manuscript clearly lies outside the
scope of the journal, then a rapid rejection allows the author to submit
their article to another journal more quickly
 Peer reviewers’ time is not wasted – reviewers don’t have to spend time
evaluating and giving feedback for a manuscript of clearly inferior quality

CompanyRepor
t
(Taken from: https://editorresources.taylorandfrancis.com/managing-peer-review-process/)
The editor’s role
 After receiving reviewers' comments, editors will have to make a decision
on an article. The following are the most common decisions made:
 Accept without any changes (acceptance): the journal will publish the
article in its original form
 Accept with minor revisions (acceptance): the journal will publish the
article once the author has made some small corrections
 Accept after major revisions (conditional acceptance): the journal will
publish the article if the authors make changes suggested by the
reviewers and/or editors
 Revise and resubmit (conditional rejection): the journal will reconsider
the article in another round of decision making once the authors have
made major changes
 Reject the paper (outright rejection): the journal will not publish the
CompanyRepor
article
t or reconsider it
(Taken from: https://editorresources.taylorandfrancis.com/managing-peer-review-process/)
1. Academic publication: The editorial process

1.1. The editorial process: a summary

1.2. The journal
1.3. The editor’s role
1.4. The reviewers’ role
1.5. How long does peer review take?
The reviewers’ role
 Reviewers evaluate article submissions to journals based on the
requirements of that journal, predefined criteria, and the quality,
completeness and accuracy of the research presented. They provide
feedback on the paper, suggest improvements and make a
recommendation to the editor about whether to accept, reject or request
changes to the article. The ultimate decision always rests with the editor
but reviewers play a significant role in determining the outcome
 Some of their functions include:
 ensuring the rigorous standards of the scientific process by taking part in
the peer-review system
 upholding the integrity of the journal by identifying invalid research, and
helping to maintain the quality of the journal
 helping prevent ethical breaches by identifying plagiarism, research fraud
CompanyRepor
and
t other problems by dint of their familiarity with the subject area
(Taken from: https://blog.typeset.io/choose-right-journal-early-stage-researchers-guide-ea2cf236dde4 & https://www.elsevier.com/reviewers/role)
The reviewers’ role
 Peer review, also known as refereeing, is a collaborative process that allows
independent experts in the same field of research to evaluate and
comment on manuscript submissions. The outcome of a peer review gives
authors feedback to improve their work and, critically, allows the editor to
assess the paper’s suitability for publication. The peer review process may
adopt one of the following forms:
 Single-blind review. The reviewer’s name isn’t disclosed to the author
 Double-blind review. The identity of the reviewers and the authors
aren’t disclosed
 Open review. Both the author and reviewer names are disclosed
 Post-publication open review. Readers and reviewers can post
comments, mediated by the editor, after publication
CompanyRepor
t
(Taken from: https://editorresources.taylorandfrancis.com/reviewer-guidelines/)
1. Academic publication: The editorial process

1.1. The editorial process: a summary

1.2. The journal
1.3. The editor’s role
1.4. The reviewers’ role
1.5. How long does peer review take?
 How long does peer review take?
 Reviewers are often overloaded with academic work (and are generally not
paid for their review work!), which might lead to a delay in meeting
deadlines
 Durations vary substantially between scientific fields and even within the
same broader discipline Average (in weeks)
All 13
Accepted 12
Rejected 16
General 11
Natural sciences 11
Engineering 13
Mathematics and 17
Computer sciences
Medicine 8
Public health 9
Average duration of the peer review process by discipline
Psychology 14
(Taken from Huisman, Janine and Jeroen Smits. 2017. Duration and quality of the Economics and Business 18
CompanyRepor
peert review process: the author’s perspective. Scientometrics 113: 633–650) Social sciences 17
Humanities 16
(Taken from: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11192-017-2310-5/tables/1)
 Before we finish…
Choose the right journal or publisher for your research:
https://thinkchecksubmit.org/
Aula virtual >Tasks Part 1