An international peer‐review system for a Chinese scientific journal

The characteristics and requirements of a world‐class journal were considered in establishing a rigid peer‐review system for scientific papers submitted for publication in the English‐language Journal of Zhejiang University SCIENCE [JZU(S)] from 2002 onward. Four hundred and thirty‐five contributions were received between January and December 2002, and these were sent for pre‐publication review to appropriate leading scientists in the USA, the UK, Ireland, France, Canada, Australia, Austria, Germany, New Zealand, the Netherlands, Finland, Poland, Portugal, Italy, Israel, Spain, Greece, Belgium, Sweden, Switzerland, Japan, Singapore, Slovakia, India, Greece, the Czech Republic, Mexico, Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan. Our experience showed that such an international peer‐review system plays an important part in ensuring the high quality of a journal's contents and in helping it achieve an international reputation.     

稿件采编系统的操作分析

《电子科技大学学报》编辑部安装了网络版的稿件采编系统。这种新的工作模式提高了工作效率。针对采编系统的操作流程,对稿件处理的有关环节进行分析。     

新媒体时代高校医学期刊实施健康科普的意义及举措

新媒体时代,科技期刊的传播面不断扩大,高校医学期刊在推动医学科技发展的同时,在办好期刊的前提下,应当承担一定的社会责任,通过新媒体传播健康科普知识,推动全民健康素养提升,引导正确的医学科技舆论导向。文章分析高校医学期刊开展健康科普的意义,并结合高校医学期刊和新媒体优势,提出培养和发挥作者的健康科普意识、利用高校医学期刊的资源组稿和征稿、组建学生工作团队、建立完善的稿件处理流程、与大众媒体合作扩大传播范围、开展互动交流、获取相关政策支持等策略,为高校医学期刊开展健康科普提供思路。     

The peer‐review process in English‐language advertising journals: a survey of US academics

This study examined the views of advertising academics regarding the peer‐review process in English‐language advertising journals. Three issues were examined. First, how do advertising academics assess the peer‐review process in advertising journals on the following dimensions: fairness, anonymity (truly double‐blind), timeliness, and effectiveness in improving the quality of research? Second, how do they perceive the ethicality of review process behaviors? Third, what steps do they suggest for improving the quality or integrity of the peer‐review process? Data was collected through a survey of US‐based advertising academics. The findings reveal that advertising academics believe that, for the most part, advertising journals are succeeding at fairness, protecting anonymity, improving the research of submitters, and avoiding ethical infractions in the review process. However, advertising academics would like to see improvements in timeliness as well as in incentives and guidelines provided to participants in the peer‐review process.     

稿件采编系统在期刊联合编辑部的应用实践与探索

将稿件采编系统的部分功能有机整合,运用于期刊联合编辑部的协同平台,有助于实现协同化办公、资源共享。从应用实践出发,阐述多期刊同一平台联合使用采编系统的特点、优势和不足之处,并提出了改进意见。     

权威因子:一个新的期刊评价指标

2009年版的中国科技期刊引证报告(核心版)新提出了一个权威因子指标,权威因子的计算采用的是PrestigeRank算法,PrestigeRank算法是在著名搜索引擎算法PageRank算法的基础上修改优化而成的,PrestigeRank算法专门针对期刊引用网络缺失严重提出了合理的解决方案,在权威因子的计算中,期刊之间的引用不再是同等对待,重要期刊的一次引用比次要期刊的一次引用要被赋予更高的权重.利用PrestigeRank算法计算2008年的中国科技论文与引文数据库(CSTPCD)的所有期刊的权威因子,并对权威因子与总被引频次进行了比较研究,发现总被引频次在一定程度上是流行性测度,而权威因子在更大程度上是权威性测度.我们也发现权威因子能部分消除因为学科规模和性质不同造成的被引机会的不同的影响.     

基于期刊管理及作者调查的一稿多投解决策略探索——以审稿周期和出版周期为切入点

以药学期刊为例,将审稿周期和出版周期作为切入点,采用官网、数据库等公开途径查询与作者问卷调查相结合的方式了解目前期刊对审稿周期和出版周期的管理现状以及作者的真实投稿意愿。结果发现,造成“一稿多投”始终“禁而不止”的原因可能在于多数期刊没有按照《著作权法》规定完成审稿或明确约定审稿周期,有些期刊即使约定了审稿周期也没有认真执行,且期刊的实际审稿周期和出版周期超过了作者的心理耐受阈值。在此基础上,本文提出期刊应正确领会《著作权法》精神,尊重作者的投稿利益,明确、细化稿约中对审稿周期、出版周期的约定,提高期刊的出版伦理规范意识等建议,旨在为合理解决一稿多投问题提供参考。     

学术期刊编辑初审论文创新性的方法

学术期刊编辑初审论文的创新性是稿件初审中的一项重要工作,也是稿件初审时难度较大的一项工作。本文提出了根据论文的前置部分、主体部分和参考文献等内容提供的信息初审论文创新性的方法。实践表明,该方法是一种行之有效的论文创新性初审方法。     

The deconstructed journal — a new model for academic publishing

The limitations of existing proposed and operational publishing models intended to replace the academic journal are briefly reviewed. Three ‘insights’ are described, the first is into the ‘means/end’ confusion of much current net-based publishing activity, the second is that it is the purpose, not the form, that is the important aspect of the traditional academic journal model, and the third is that satisfactory net-based publishing models need not contain a central publisher. From this new viewpoint is developed the Deconstructed Journal (DJ) model which it is suggested is a better model for network based academic publishing. It also solves some of the problems of the current model. Although the main focus of the DJ model is the replacement of the STM journal it has implications for all areas of academic journal publishing.     

Uploading garbage files to the DOI system of a journal: a new type of misconduct

We report an unusual case in which garbage files were uploaded to the DOI system of a Korean scholarly journal (Journal of Educational Evaluation of Health Professions). This was a deliberate attack to disrupt the journal so that the DOI pages were directed to an invalid page. It was a mysterious type of attack that had never previously occurred in the DOI system. This behaviour can therefore be considered as a new type of misconduct. From the legal viewpoint, this action may be considered a criminal offence, under Korean law, to disrupt a national institute which publishes a journal on the basis of its constituting interference with a government office in the execution of its duties. We report this strange case so that publishers and editors can be alert to this new type of cyber‐crime and to help them prevent any reoccurrence.     

On the skewness of journal self‐citations and publisher self‐citations: Cues for discussion from a case study

This paper takes the cue from the case of a retracted paper, cited both by the retraction notice and by an article published later in the same journal. This led to analysis and discussion on the skewness of citations in the journal Sustainability and within Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI) journals, particularly investigating self‐citations at journal and publisher levels. I analysed articles published by Sustainability in 2015 and found that self‐citations are higher than expected under a uniform probability distribution. Self‐citations in this journal make a 36% difference to the journal's impact factor. This research raises the question of what citation patterns can be expected as normal, and where the boundary between normal and anomaly lies. I suggest the issue deserves further investigation because self‐citations have several implications, ranging from impact factors to visibility and influence of scientific journals.     

科技期刊审稿委员会的构建与管理办法探讨

审稿人是稿件科学性和创新性的评价者,在控制期刊学术质量方面发挥着举足轻重的作用。我国的期刊审稿人主要扮演“外”审专家的角色,不是期刊的“编内”人员。为了解决这一问题,许多国外期刊成立了审稿委员会,使得期刊审稿人成为期刊编委会的一部分。本文首先提出审稿委员会的概念并介绍了一些期刊的具体做法,接着分析了科技期刊成立审稿委员会的必要性和可行性,并对审稿委员会的运作提出了一些设想和建议。     

《物理学报》网站和采编系统升级分析

《物理学报》实现了从旧的网站和采编系统到新的网站和采编系统的升级和数据转换工作。升级后的期刊网站、采编系统、网刊系统提高了编辑部的工作效率,对其他编辑部选择和改进网站和采编系统有一定的参考意义。     

Economies of small: How a single‐journal publisher remains independent and grows

Key points

• Delivering focused and relevant content that researchers find valuable creates and sustains a dedicated and loyal audience.
• Partnerships expand the Journal of Orthopaedic & Sports Physical Therapy (JOSPT)’s audience and reach and enable growth.
• Introducing innovations at the right time is key – neither too soon nor too late.
• Investing in specific initiatives developed through strategic planning moves JOSPT forward.

     

Creating a more inclusive journal: the Journal of the Medical Library Association's evolving process for selecting editorial board members

The Journal of the Medical Library Association (JMLA) selects new editorial board members every year. In the spring of 2021, JMLA used a new process for reviewing and selecting applicants for the limited number of open editorial board positions. This reevaluation of the selection process was spurred by a desire to create a more diverse and representative board. Changes to the procedures for selecting new editorial board members included having an open call for editorial board members, creating an application form, creating a selection committee to screen applicants, creating a form for the selection committee to extract data from applications, and creating a two-step process for screening and then selecting board members. As part of construction of this new process, areas for continued improvement were also identified, such as refining the application form to allow more specific answers to areas of interest to the selection committee. The newly created selection process for editorial board members constitutes a significant change in JMLA processes; however, more can be done to build on this work by further refining the selection process and ensuring that new members are selected in a transparent and streamlined manner.     

The economics of scholarly journals: a case study on a society‐published journal

This article re‐examines the economics of publishing scholarly journals and illustrates the dilemma of publisher identity and publication format with a case study of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication's Media Management and Economics division. The study investigates the perceived interest and demand for a society‐published journal for the field of media management and economics and the preferred format for that journal – print or online. Results showed a divided opinion on the support of a society‐published journal and no consideration of the benefits or harms of journal publishing to the society. The print journal, though a desirable format for authors, is deemed uneconomical. The online journal is viewed as a feasible publication outlet, but its status as a prestigious journal is doubtful. Applications of scholarly journal publishing and economic models to the case are discussed.