Transparent evaluation of scholarly communications
Keywords:transparency, evaluation, scholarly communication
The processes behind the evaluation of scholarly communications are mostly conducted behind closed doors, with only the final published output accessible to readers. The criteria used to decide which manuscripts are sent out for peer-review and ultimately accepted for publication are often vague and hard to interpret. Without access to peer-review reports and editorial comments, it is also unclear how published manuscripts have been assessed. In this conversation, we will discuss the benefits of transparent scholarly communication and the challenges of implementing fully-transparent processes. We will also cover the how social media and podcasts can be used to demystify the publication process by providing an open forum for discussing the myriad publication processes that are typically unwritten, such as rebutting reviewer comments.
The recording of the live podcast episode is at https://youtu.be/1Xp3IXaq970.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).