Search

A total of 966 allegedly 'predatory' open access publishers were examined to determine the nature of their ethical or unethical practices and the extent to which Australian academics were included on the editorial boards of their journals. An estimated 4,000 Australian academics (ca. 7% of the academic population) are on these journal boards. Of the publishers, 240 proved to be overtly fraudulent, the ethical status of the others remaining unresolved. About 86% of the Australian academics identified appeared on the editorial boards of journals belonging to those 240 publishers. Despite two decades of advocacy from librarians, there remains widespread ignorance of the existence of such fraudulent publishers, and more severe action is required. Reform proposals include naming the publisher in all references and in academic profiles and curriculum vitae. Universities are encouraged to take responsibility for publishing journals that replace those currently causing the problem. Institutions are urged to augment their current warnings and advice with formal policies, which will probably require a blacklist of unacceptable publishers. New formal policies for dealing with predatory publishers are currently being developed in some Australian universities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The document is an acknowledgement letter from the editor of the journal Drugs in R&D. The editor expresses gratitude to the authors, peer reviewers, and members of the Honorary Editorial Board for their contributions to the journal over the past year. The editor also highlights the high quality of articles published in the journal, as reflected in the recent Impact Factor and CiteScore. The letter concludes by expressing the editor's hope that readers have found the articles interesting and informative, and looks forward to sharing more topical issues in the coming year. [Extracted from the article]

The Sociology of Sport Journal (SSJ) recently celebrated its 40th anniversary and sought to recognize and acknowledge its past while promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion. The journal's Editorial Board decided to publish a Special Anniversary Issue titled "'Futures—Past,' A Reflection of 40 Years of the Sociology of Sport Journal." The issue, guest-edited by Dr. Letisha Brown and a group of emerging scholars, focuses on liberation, futurity, intersectionality, and interdisciplinarity. The journal also published "Top 40 at 40" lists throughout the year, highlighting influential articles in the field. The aim is to create visibility, encourage conversations about citation politics, and move the journal and field forward in their commitment to equity, diversity, inclusivity, and belonging. [Extracted from the article]

Using novel and large-scale data at the individual level, we find that when a coauthor joins an editorial board of an economics journal an author publishes more articles in the "coauthor's" journal. This increase is larger, the less experienced the author is, and the more editorial power the coauthor obtains. It disappears quickly once the coauthor leaves the journal's board. A less experienced author whose coauthor joins an editorial board also publishes more in journals different from the coauthor's journal. We find that the connections-as-signals hypothesis and the identity-independent information hypothesis explain more patterns in the data than the other hypotheses we consider. Only the favoritism hypothesis can explain that, at journals with low board turnover, articles published during a coauthor's stint on the editorial board receive less citations than articles published during other years. This finding suggests that editors and publishers can address a cause of favoritism by stimulating editorial rotation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Every researcher wants their research to gain more recognition, and this desire is achieved by publishing their article in a journal with higher impact. It is very important to get researchers interested in the Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society (JKNS). Therefore, the first goal was to promote the publication of papers in our journal. To do this, a table of contents was sent out, and the citation ranking was announced every 2 months. Several efforts have been made to publish good papers. Foreign speakers, who were invited to a conference hosted by the Korean Neurosurgical Society were contacted and politely requested to write a paper addressing their recent research. Domestic and international researchers highly renowned in their fields were also contacted to submit their novel works to our journal. The journal impact factor of our journal has continued to rise for the last 3 years and reached 1.376 in 2019. It can be said that the JKNS is now competitive with other international neurosurgery journals. These achievements were not due to the efforts of the editorial boards alone. This was because our society members have submitted very good papers, and because many of our members have cited the papers published in our journal. We believe that this will continue in the future. The next step of evolution of the JKNS has begun, and this is the beginning of another great development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An introduction to the journal is presented which discusses the selection of topics for publication by "The George Washington International Law Review" Editorial Board.

The Editors and Editorial Board of Communications Chemistry are pleased to launch an Editors' Highlights Collection featuring some of our favorite Articles published in the journal in 2022. Here we highlight each Article and outline why it was selected. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Umsatzsteuer-Rundschau is the property of De Gruyter and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Minerals is a scientific journal that was launched in 2011. The journal has undergone changes in leadership, with Prof. Dr. Leonid Dubrovinsky becoming the new Editor-in-Chief. During the tenure of the previous Editor-in-Chief, the journal expanded its scope to include more diverse applications of mineral studies. This expansion led to an increase in the Impact Factor of the journal, and it is now indexed in multiple categories. The journal has published over 7500 peer-reviewed articles and has a large team of Editorial Board Members and Reviewer Board Members. Annual awards are given to deserving candidates. The outgoing Editor-in-Chief expresses gratitude to everyone who contributed to the success of the journal. [Extracted from the article]

The Executive Committee of ABLS has decided to discontinue print issues of The Bryologist and Evansia and publish the journals online only at BioOne starting in 2024. This decision was primarily made to reduce costs and align with the trend of academic societies switching to online-only publishing. The online version of The Bryologist will include a pdf version of the cover, table of contents, recent literature lists, and book reviews. Authors can request open access for their papers, and color figures will be published in online pdfs at no cost to authors. The journal will also explore options for enhancing its impact and welcomes suggestions from members. [Extracted from the article]

The social sciences, including management, are at a crossroads. Globally, scholars are increasingly pressured to publish in top journals, compelling editorial boards to recruit more individuals--including those with less experience--to meet the demand. Furthermore, the validity of the social sciences is under scrutiny in light of ethical violations, article retractions, and calls for more relevant research. At the epicenter of this conundrum lie journal editors, those who adjudicate the quality and potential of submitted research. With these issues as backdrop, we report an inductive study of how journal editors come to understand the notion of theoretical contribution. Working with a data set of editorial decision letters and interviews with editors at two top management journals, we provide critical insight into how new editors, despite not yet having the requisite experience or knowledge to make expert judgments, experience being labeled experts by their scholarly community--a phenomenon we label "novice experts." We find that the process of making sense of theoretical contribution differs for novice experts than for those with more experience. Given the rise in less experienced editors, our data suggest that now is the time to rethink the hows and whys of knowledge dissemination at the heart of our profession. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article focuses on university finance department representation on the editorial boards of professional journals that specialize in the department's major area of academic concern. Faculty publication is widely viewed as a measure of academic quality. In addition, publications are important in determining both the place of academic employment and the rate of advancement in the careers of individual faculty. The membership of the editorial boards of domestic quarterly journals that specialize in one or more areas of finance were analyzed. The university with the largest representation on editorial boards was the University of Rochester, with 36. It was following by the University of Chicago.

The Family Journal (TFJ) has experienced increases in manuscripts submitted for publication, especially from international scholars and quantitative researchers. This reverses a previous trend to publish more practice-oriented articles for our clinical readership. The journal will take efforts to balance theory, research, and practice. Some manuscripts are rejected for distribution to the editorial board (or "unsubmitted") due to problems conforming to the APA Publication Manual 7th Edition guidelines. Some submissions would benefit from reviews by colleagues and securing the services of an editor. Authors are asked to attend to guidelines concerning levels of headings and formatting of citations and references. Most importantly, authors should follow bias-free language guidelines. There are additional considerations in the desk review process such as including practice implications for Marriage and Family Counselors in the article and incorporating relevant previously published articles from TFJ in the literature review. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Socioloski Pregled is the property of Srpsko Sociolosko Drustvo and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In our first installment of a series of short articles, we focus on demystifying the publishing process. We first review terminology that is important for authors to understand yet is not clearly defined in easily accessible ways. Then, we describe the publishing process, beginning with preparing and submitting a manuscript, and ending with either publication or a recommendation to submit to another outlet. We provide a visual flowchart to illustrate the steps and multiple pathways in this process. Finally, we present the advice we collected from eight individuals involved in the publication process at MWER: the two current editors and one past editor, along with several associate editors and members of the MWER editorial board. We summarize descriptions of the indicators of submission quality they identified, which included cohesion (i.e., the fit between the various sections of the paper); a comprehensive, transparent, and welldeveloped methods section; and appropriate, recent literature in sync with the field, among others. We also categorize and describe their advice for those new to the publication process, such as ways to usefully process reviewer feedback and strategies to maximize journal fit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article investigates whether editorial board members of selected economic journals publish their research papers in their ‘own’ journal. Journals were selected from the Journal Citation Report® from the categories Business; Business, Finance; and Economics. Only research articles published between 2012 and 2015 were included in the analysis. We recorded ratios concerning the share of articles authored by editorial board members, the share of editorial board members publishing in their own journals and ratios representing their publication output. The average share of articles authored by editorial board members ranges from 0.6 to 17.5%. The average share of editorial board members publishing in their own journals ranges from 5.6 to 24.4%. Considering only editorial board members publishing in their own journals, the share of their articles in their journals ranges from 8.2 to 71.4%. While the share of board members publishing only in their own journals, to the number of board members publishing in their own journals, the ratio in a quarter of journals is equal to zero, with a maximum reach of 85.7%. All observed ratios are significantly positively correlated with the gap between impact factor and impact factor without Journal Self Cites; and negatively correlated with the Article Influence Score. A cluster of journals in which a high proportion of editorial board members publish and simultaneously these members publish in their own journal at a high rate was identified. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There has been increasing interest on the apparent underrepresentation of African-based scholars in economics scholarship on Africa. Much of this debate, however, proceeds with little by way of evidence in demonstrating whether such an underrepresentation actually exists in the first place. In this paper, I look at the patterns of authorship over the period 2005–2015 in 'leading' economics journals that publish regularly on Africa. I find that, on average, only 25 per cent of the journal articles published on Africa had at-least one African-based author over this period. Further, I find that whereas the journals I consider dedicate about 30 per cent of their content on Africa, only 3 per cent of their editorial boards are based on the continent. These patterns likely account for the dismal state of the discipline's knowledge about the continent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scientists who plan to publish in British Journal of Pharmacology (BJP) must read this article before undertaking a study. This editorial provides guidance for the design of experiments. We have published previously two guidance documents on experimental design and analysis (Curtis et al., 2015; Curtis et al., 2018). This update clarifies and simplifies the requirements on design and analysis for BJP manuscripts. This editorial also details updated requirements following an audit and discussion on best practice by the BJP editorial board. Explanations for the requirements are provided in the previous articles. Here, we address new issues that have arisen in the course of handling manuscripts and emphasise three aspects of design that continue to present the greatest challenge to authors: randomisation, blinded analysis and balance of group sizes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Journal editors are the main gatekeepers in scientific publishing. Yet there is a concern that they may receive preferential treatment when submitting manuscripts to their own journals. The prevalence of such self‐publishing is not known, nor the consequences for reliability and trustworthiness of published research. This study aimed to systematically review the literature on the prevalence of editors publishing in their own journals and to conduct a normative ethical analysis of this practice. A systematic review was performed using the following databases: Medline, PsycInfo, Scopus and Web of Science. Articles that provided primary data about editors publishing in own journals were included. We identified 15 studies meeting inclusion criteria. There was large variability of self‐publishing across fields, journals and editors, ranging from those who never published in their own journal to those publishing extensively in their own journal. Many studies suffered from serious methodological limitations. Nevertheless, our results show that there are settings where levels of self‐publication are very high. We recommend that editors‐in‐chief and associate editors who have considerable power in journals refrain from publishing research articles in their own journals. Journals should have clear processes in place about the treatment of articles submitted by editorial board members. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents a bibliometric analysis of the Journal of African Business on its twentieth anniversary. The article focuses on the journal's intellectual development by objectively examining the evolution of its 20 years of publication, including citations, co-citations, and major researched themes with visualization maps. The findings show that JAB is a young journal in the field of African business. It appears as a collection of articles, keywords, and themes that gathers knowledge. Some of these have well-defined relatedness, while others are loosely clustered together and connected by the simple fact of being published in this journal. This looseness should not be interpreted as a sign of softness but rather as an opportunity for creativity and constructive discourse and as a challenge for the next 20 years of JAB. This study is useful for contributors, readers, and editorial board members who form the journal's community of knowledge creation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents an editorial in which the author comments on presubmission inquiries to academic journals. He discusses the problems associated with these inquiries, including the extensive time taken to evaluate, and explains his preference for traditional manuscript submissions. The work of editorial and peer review boards is also detailed.

Editorial board members, who are considered the gatekeepers of scientific journals, play an important role in academia. The aim of this study is to explore the causal relationship between the number of editorial board members and the scientific output of universities. In this article, we have used time-series data and Granger causality test to explore the causal relationship between the number of editorial board members and the number of articles published by top universities in the field of chemistry. Furthermore, we interviewed some editorial board members about this causal relationship. The Granger causality test results suggest that the causal relationship is not obvious overall. Combining these findings with the results of qualitative interviews with editorial board members, we discuss the causal relationship between the two variables. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Information on the journal's editorial board, publishing, and copyright is presented.

Information on the 2018 issue of the journal is presented including its editorial board, publishing, and subscription.

The article announces the transition of Dr. Curtis C. Harris from Editor-in-Chief to Editor Emeritus of the journal Carcinogenesis: Integrative Cancer Research. The article expresses gratitude for Dr. Harris' 40-year leadership and highlights the journal's growth and impact under his guidance. The new Editor-in-Chief, Sharon R Pine, is committed to advancing cancer medicine and research. The journal maintains high standards, has a quick review process, and does not charge submission or page fees. The research published in the journal is made available to subscribing institutions and becomes free online after 12 months. The article concludes by expressing excitement for future contributions and thanking readers for their support. [Extracted from the article]

This document is the backmatter of an article published in the journal Nematology. It provides information about the editors and editorial board of the journal, as well as acknowledgements to colleagues who served as referees for articles in the volume. It also includes the dates of publication for previous issues of the journal, both in print and online. The document concludes with copyright information and details about photocopying permissions. [Extracted from the article]

Copyright of Computer und Recht is the property of De Gruyter and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The article provides information related to the periodical which includes editorial boards, periodical publishing and copyright.

An introduction is presented in which the editor discusses articles in the issue on topics including editorial boards, periodical publishing and pharmacodynamics.

The article offers information for the periodical which includes editorial boards, periodical publishing and copyrights.

Information about the September 2018 issues of the journal is presented including its editorial board, subscription, and table of contents.

No abstract is available for this article. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Information about the May 2018 issue of the journal "Ophthalmic & Physiological Optics," is presented in which details include the editorials boards, author guidelines, and table of contents.

The article discusses several topics in the journal including editorial board, copyright information and publisher.

Len Fulton was a key figure in bridging the gap between libraries and the small press/little magazine movement that developed in the 1960s. As the founder and publisher of Dustbooks, Fulton sought to document the growth of independent publishing through the Dustbooks “skein” of directories that provided information about books and periodicals traditionally overlooked by library and mainstream publishing review sources. He also served as a cofounder of the Committee of Small Magazine Editors and Publishers, which attempted to organize independent publishers to find better distribution among libraries and bookstores. This article provides an overview of Fulton's accomplishments and influence among the American small presses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This section offers information on the subscription, publishing, and editorial board of "Learning Disabilities Research & Practice" journal.

On behalf of the Editorial Board and Staff of Earth and Space Science, I thank the reviewers whose selfless dedication to science has ensured, once again, that the papers published in our journal in 2021 highlight the best Earth and space science in a manner that does justice to the authors and their work. All of us at Earth Peer reviewing is a demanding and often thankless job. It is however an essential component of the scientific process, ensuring the highest standards of integrity and rigor. Without the work of reviewers, who check data and procedures for possible bias and to ensure reproducibility, and who share their expertise to verify that the interpretations and conclusions of a paper are consistent with assumptions and existing knowledge, it would not be possible to trust in the scientific process. Our journal is particularly indebted to our reviewers: Earth and Space Science is a multidisciplinary journal that highlights methods, instruments, data and algorithms, and therefore we rely heavily on the direct expertise of our reviewers to verify and vouch for the quality of the papers we publish. We are indebted to all our reviewers, and we are delighted to acknowledge them publicly in this Editorial. Plain Language Summary: The Editors and Staff of Earth and Space Science acknowledge the importance of hundreds of peer reviewers who contributed to the scientific rigor of the papers published in the journal. The Editors wish to publicly recognize the 881 reviewers who gave selflessly of their time and expertise in 2021. Key Points: The editors thank the 2021 peer reviewers [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]