Three recommended inclusive language guidelines for scholarly publishing: Words matter

• Inclusive language will make scholarly publishing more accurate and more respectful, and it has the potential to help authors reach a wider audience.
• JAMA and the JAMA Network journals, the American Chemical Society and the Coalition for Diversity and Inclusion in Scholarly Communications have free guides on inclusive language, formatting and images.
• The guides provide principles and rationale, as well as examples of preferred language, in order to equip people with knowledge to choose the most inclusive words even as terminology preferences change.

     

Normative drift and self‐correction in scholarly book publishing: The case of Makerere University

University academics face multiple pressures to publish. These pressures emanate from contexts with different, often competing, social norms, which result in academics publishing for reasons that may run counter to accepted scientific practice. This paper asks what decisions are being taken by academics when it comes to their choice of scholarly book publisher. An analysis of books selected from more than 2,500 self‐reported scholarly publications produced by academics at Makerere University in Uganda from 2011 to 2017 shows that 31 scholarly books were published. Of these books, more than half (54%) were published by publishers that do not follow accepted scholarly publishing practice. Findings also show that there was a sharp decline in books published with suspect publishers in the second half of the 7‐year period. The article discusses possible reasons for the selection of suspect publishers and considers four factors that may account for the observable decline: (1) a cyclical downturn, (2) improved research management and reporting, (3) explication of the norms of science, and (4) self‐correction.     

Open access and predatory publishing: a survey of the publishing practices of academic pharmacists and nurses in the United States

Objective:Academics are under great pressure to publish their research, the rewards for which are well known (tenure, promotion, grant funding, professional prestige). As open access publishing gains acceptance as a publishing option, researchers may choose a “predatory publisher.” The purpose of this study is to investigate the motivations and rationale of pharmacy and nursing academics in the United States to publish in open access journals that may be considered “predatory.”Methods:A 26-item questionnaire was programmed in Qualtrics and distributed electronically to approximately 4,500 academic pharmacists and nurses, 347 of whom completed questionnaires (~8%). Pairwise correlations were performed followed by a logistic regression to evaluate statistical associations between participant characteristics and whether participants had ever paid an article processing fee (APF).Results:Participants who had published more articles, were more familiar with predatory publishing, and who were more concerned about research metrics and tenure were more likely to have published in open access journals. Moderate to high institutional research intensity has an impact on the likelihood of publishing open access. The majority of participants who acknowledged they had published in a predatory journal took no action after realizing the journal was predatory and reported no negative impact on their career for having done so.ConclusionThe results of this study provide data and insight into publication decisions made by pharmacy and nursing academics. Gaining a better understanding of who publishes in predatory journals and why can help address the problems associated with predatory publishing at the root.     

数字出版环境中学术期刊的机遇与挑战

数字出版已成为全球出版行业的一种发展趋势,对学术论文的生产加工、出版发行以及网络传播等环节产生了深远的影响;但目前国内数字出版产业链还不够成熟,仍有许多环节需要不断完善,数字出版前景光明却任重道远.     

From working group to standing committee: A history of diversity,equity, inclusion and accessibility work at the Society for Scholarly Publishing

• The Society for Scholarly Publishing's (SSP) Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility (DEIA) Committee began as a grassroots initiative in 2016.
• Over a a period of 4 years, the committee evolved from a six-member task force to a large standing team consisting of more than 25 individuals.
• The task force developed a strategic plan consisting of three major objectives that formed the basis of the group's strategic initiatives. The committee implemented several DEIA nitiatives that provided education and resources to SSP members about DEIA within their workplaces and promoted DEIA practices in the work that SSP committees were doing on behalf of the organization.

     

国际学术出版开放式访问(OA):Ⅰ.实践与前沿问题研究进展

综述当前国际学术出版界开放式访问(Open Access,OA)运动实践和理论研究的部分热点问题.主要讨论OA期刊和OA知识库的概念、实施方式,提高OA文献的可见性和可获取性的若干措施,OA带来的学术文献引用影响力的提高和一些发展趋势.     

Web3.0时代学术期刊开放同行评议的实质和审稿模型构建

为了解决同行评议中不公平、不透明、时效性差的问题,提出改变审稿方式,采用开放同行评议的办法.在分析开放同行评议透明、交互、高效、共享、完整实质的基础上,尝试构建开放同行评议的审稿模型,并指出制订规范的编辑出版政策,构建专业化投稿和审稿平台,调动参与者的积极性,是实施开放同行评议的关键环节.     

走联合办刊之路促进期刊社发展--中国地震局工程力学研究所科技杂志社改革的体会

随着我国防震减灾事业的发展和科技体制改革的深入,研究所办科技期刊如何生存与发展,面临着严峻的挑战.几年来,工程力学研究所科学技术杂志社以读者为中心,制定杂志社的发展战略,联合办刊,加强编辑工作的管理,取得了初步成效.     

《Cell》的编辑出版特色

通过对《Cell》的审稿原则及标准、栏目设置、编审体制等方面的探讨来认识《Cell》的编辑出版特色。     

医学期刊媒体融合出版发展的创新性实施路径——以《中华胃肠外科杂志》为例

出版融合发展是适应时代发展的新需求和新业态,医学科技期刊需顺势而动,抓住机遇,建立具有自身特色的融媒体出版平台。《中华胃肠外科杂志》是胃肠外科专业学术期刊,学科范围较为局限,使得读者群比较单一,在媒体融合出版时代,通过大胆创新,利用自身特色,走出了适合自己的融合出版发展路径。本文首先剖析目前医学科技期刊出版融合发展的研究现状和困境,然后就《中华胃肠外科杂志》的相关经验进行阐述,总结了用心经营自建平台、借船搭建多渠道发布平台、拓展内容呈现形式、强大平台功能、获取新技术支撑以及加强编辑队伍建设6个方面的经验举措,以期能够为医学科技期刊的出版融合之路提供借鉴。     

众包出版对高校学术期刊出版模式的启示

以互联网为前提的众包模式,已应用于文化创意产业、图书馆、翻译以及地理信息采集等领域.本文基于众包模式的优势以及学术期刊众包评审案例,分析网络环境中出版流程碎片化、出版平台便捷化众包出版模式的可行性.认为高校学术期刊的众包出版需要有相应的机制与流程确保其工作效率和质量.在多媒体融合背景下,高校学术期刊众包出版模式可以为高校学术期刊提高社会效益和社会影响力,提供一个新的发展路径和出版模式.     

高校期刊出版常见的组织形式与模式创新

简要分析高校目前实际采用并占主导地位的4类常见的期刊出版组织形式的特色、优势和可能存在的缺陷,提出一种全新的期刊出版组织形式与改革设想.     

数字化出版模式下知识确定性的缺失及编辑应对策略

从"薛定谔的猫"的思想实验和"小白鼠对环境条件变化的认识适应"试验出发,论述知识确定的重要性和相对性。认为人类对知识确定性的追求是连续和传承的过程,编辑(或者出版)的社会价值就是对知识确定性的追求。探讨数字化出版模式下知识发表的现状和导致知识确定性缺失的潜在原因,以及编辑对知识确定性保证的责任。提出编辑的应对策略:树立对现有编辑出版体系的坚定信念,在数字化出版中更好地履行保障知识确定性的义务;利用数字化数据库建立科学、动态的评审专家平台;借助互联网的开放性建立读者评论体系;慎重对待论文所引用的电子文献,尤其是来自博客等自媒体的文献;集成各种数字化的专业工具,并将其运用于编辑加工和校对工作,提高知识确定性鉴别的准确性与时效性;在知识发表领域建立由编辑主导的有效的纠错与删除机制,确保知识体系的确定性。     

我国高校编辑出版教育刍议

我国高校编辑出版专业的学历教育是编辑出版教育多种形式中最重要的一种。根据我国出版文化产业的发展实际，对高校编辑出版专业教育的规模、师资队伍结构、教材建设、课程设置及教育实习等做了初步探讨和评估，并提出了调整与改进的建议。     

A global questionnaire survey of the scholarly communication attitudes and behaviours of early career researchers

This article describes an international study informed by a 3‐year‐long qualitative longitudinal project, which sought to discover the scholarly communication attitudes and behaviour of early career researchers (ECRs). Using a combination of small‐scale interviews and a larger‐scale survey, ECRs were questioned on their searching and reading behaviour, publishing practices, open data, and their use of social media. Questionnaire invitations were sent out via publisher lists, social media networks, university research networks, and specialist ECR membership organizations. One‐thousand and six‐hundred responses were received, with many coming from China, Russia, and Poland. Results showed that ECRs are adopting millennial‐facing tools/platforms, with Google, Google Scholar, social media, and smartphones becoming embedded in their scholarly activities. Open data sharing obtains widespread support but somewhat less practice. There are some differences in attitudes and behaviour according to age and subject specialism.     

中华医学会系列杂志实现全媒体出版的SWOT分析

全媒体出版的出现,标志着出版业正发生着新的变革,必定对未来产生深远的影响。中华医学会系列杂志实现全媒体出版的优势是高度的学术权威性、具有全媒体出版的基础、出色的编辑出版人才队伍,劣势是全媒体出版的基础建设存在不足、杂志质量仍需提高,机会是政策的引导、市场的契机,威胁是国外出版集团的竞争、数字化出版势必导致纸质期刊发行量下降、终端数字设备的制约、目前对科研成果评价的偏差。     

Part I: Columns and Blogs: Making Sense of Merging Worlds

Abstract

Intellectual property rights are threatened by current trends in publishing and by the changing market. In this presentation, Patricia S. Schroeder, an advocate for intellectual property rights, describes the need for understanding and cooperation and for support for legislation to protect authors' rights.     

The impact of the pandemic on early career researchers' work-life and scholarly communications: A quantitative aerial analysis

After two-years of repeat interviewing early career sciences/social sciences researchers from around the world about their work life and scholarly communications in pandemic-times, the Harbingers-2 project is in a position to release quantitative data on the pandemic's overall impact. The data comes from around 50 questions asked in the third and final round of interviews with 147 early career researchers (ECRs), which had a codifiable element to them (such as yes, no, do not know). The 19 scholarly topics covered include: pandemic-related research; research funding; changes to the workplace/working from home; pandemic-incurred stress and anxiety; teaching; employment security; career progression; mentoring; assessment (including metrics); collaboration; searching/finding information; ethics; networking; informal communication; publishing; sharing; pre-prints; outreach; and scholarly transformations. The main findings are that in six broad aspects of ECRs' work-life and scholarly behaviour, more than 50% of ECRs were impacted by the pandemic, with remote teaching having the greatest impact. By way of comparison, in another six aspects there was little change, least of all when it came to sharing activities. Among the countries studied, Malaysia stood out as being the most impacted, and of the disciplines it was the medical sciences and the soft social sciences most impacted.