Choosing a publishing partner: advice for societies and associations

For societies and associations seeking a publishing partner, the healthy competition between publishers means that the deals on offer have never been better. The problem for the society is distinguishing a good short‐term deal (say, an attractive financial offer) from the partnership that will actually be in the better long‐term interests of the journal. This article, based on the author's experience as a publisher‐turned‐consultant advising societies, offers a framework for selecting a partner based on a careful analysis of what the society needs from its publisher in the long term. Underlying the performance of the best publisher partners are a good understanding of the needs of societies and their journals; a strong service orientation; and an ability to plan strategically for each journal on the basis of facts and data.     

Experiences with bilingual publishing: surveys of authors and editors

Bilingual publishing has become a strategy employed by journals from the non‐Anglophone world to gain wider recognition. Beyond anecdotal evidence, however, there are no published accounts of the experiences of editors and authors of bilingual journals with the process of bilingual publication. It is also unclear how authors writing in bilingual journals judge the quality of the translations and whether they consider this sort of publishing as beneficial for their aims. Consequently, we carried out two surveys: one among editors of bilingual journals and one anonymous survey among authors and translators of articles published in Deutsches Ärzteblatt International, the bilingual journal of the German Medical Association. Eight of nine journals as well as 233 of 353 authors and 4 of 6 translators took part. Most journals reported that bilingual publication helped in becoming indexed in important databases (e.g. Medline), receiving or improving an Impact Factor, and in attracting authors. All journals plan to continue publishing bilingually. Authors were ‘satisfied’ (40.8%) or ‘very satisfied’ (57.8%) with translations. Almost all (96.7%) were in favour of bilingual publication of their work. They did not view an English translation as an obstacle to another related English language paper. Translators highlighted challenges relating to specialized terminology and to terms specific to the regional healthcare system.     

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.

     

Identifying legitimate open access journals: some suggestions from a publisher

• New publishing models lead to new players – not all of them good.
• No commonly accepted criteria aid scholars to select ‘good’ journals.
• Journals (and publishers) need to assert their good practice.
• How do publishers serve their different customers – readers, authors, reviewers, and the public?

     

近10年科技期刊办刊队伍建设研究综述

从期刊主编、编委、学科编辑、审稿专家和经营管理团队等5个方面,对科技期刊办刊队伍建设进行了文献梳理和综述研究,归纳了各类办刊队伍的定位、作用、素质、责任意识和相关要求,并对各类办刊队伍建设的发展做了展望。     

How scholars implement trust in their reading,citing and publishing activities: Geographical differences

In an increasingly digital environment, many factors influence how academic researchers decide what to read, what to cite, where to publish their work, and how they assign trust when making these decisions. This study focuses on how this differs according to the geographical location of the researcher, specifically in terms of the country's level of development. Data were collected by a questionnaire survey of 3650 authors who had published articles in international journals. The human development index (HDI) was used to compare authors' scholarly behavior. The findings show that researchers from less developed countries such as India and China (medium HDI) compared to those in developed countries, such as the USA and UK (very high HDI) are more reliant on external factors and those criteria that are related to authority, brand and reputation, such as authors' names, affiliation, country and journal name. Even when deciding where to publish, the publisher of the journal is more important for developing countries than it is for researchers from the US and UK. Scholars from high HDI countries also differ in these aspects: a) they are less discriminatory than authors from developing countries in their citation practices; b) for them the fact that a source is peer reviewed is the most important factor when deciding where to publish; c) they are more negative towards the use of repositories and social media for publishing and more skeptical about their potential for increasing usage or reaching a wider audience.     

Authors and electronic publishing: what authors want from the new technology

Responses from almost 1,250 academic authors around the world were analysed to obtain their views on electronic publishing of learned journals. Currently, having a print version of journals is still more important to them than an electronic version. The issue of greatest importance to authors and readers is the continuing availability of back volumes, and there are strong concerns about pricing of electronic journals. The potential gains in publication speed through publishing electronically appear not to be a priority. Electronic preprint and reprint archives are used very little at present, with the exception of the physics and mathematics communities. Of all publisher‐mediated tasks, the peer‐review process is the most valued, followed by provision of citation‐linking. Respondents' views of future developments in electronic publishing are also explored.     

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.     

创品牌增效益--《学会》杂志办刊经验谈

随着社会主义市场经济的建立和发展,期刊业的竞争更加激烈.为了迅速地占领期刊市场,在竞争中求得生存与发展,期刊编辑应当转变观念,由传统的质量意识向精品意识、品牌意识转变.这是期刊发展和壮大的重要保证,也是市场经济、国际文化市场发展的要求和必然趋势.     

Tell me and I'll forget; show me and I may remember; involve me and I'll understand: a review of the Teaching and Learning in Action feature

Appointed at the turn of the year Donna Iriving is the incoming Teaching and Learning in Action Regular Feature Editor, in this quarters issue Donna presents and overview of Regular Features over the past five years to share examples of your best practice.     

Politics and publishing in a democratic society: Technical breakthroughs and research agendas

Publishing flourishes best in a democratic society. Technological changes alter the relationship of forces so that opportunities for publishing expand. A broader range of information channels, for example, increases choice and makes authoritarian rule more difficult. Publishing also enhances democracy when decisions are made on the basis of merit rather than top-down legislation. Research should reflect awareness of the interaction of publishing and politics. Such areas as the relationship between public and private sectors, the impact of internationalization, non-U.S. ownership of information, mergers and acquisitions, and conflict between the First Amendment and copyright law, are examples of areas in which democratic outcomes are critical. Decision making in publishing would benefit from heightened awareness of the political consequences of publishers’ activities. Irving Louis Horowithz is the author ofCommunicating Ideas: The Politics of Publishing Mary E. Curtis has written widely on subjects of concern to professional publishing.     

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.     

互联网+科技期刊出版——构建科技期刊编校平台的设想

"互联网+"新业态给传统行业发展带来了新的机遇.提出了构建利用互联网挖掘、整合全社会的编校资源,满足期刊社外包需求的方案:科技期刊编校平台由期刊协会(或出版管理机构)与期刊社共同搭建,实行会员制管理.平台除了匹配供需信息外,还具备培训编辑和评价编校质量的功能,用以储备编辑资源、提升编辑业务水平和保证编校质量.     

Restructuring the publishing industry: New technology,new jobs,and a new curriculum

Major changes in the publishing industry demand a reassessment of the way publishing is taught. This article discusses changes in technology, internationalization, organization, and context, along with implications for the purpose of publishing education, its objectives, and scope. Ralph Hancox, chairman, president, and chief executive officer of the Reader’s Digest Association (Canada) Ltd., has been with the corporation since 1967. A graduate of the Program for Management Development at Harvard Business School and a Nieman Fellow at Harvard, Mr. Hancox is chairman of the National Association of Major Mail Users, a governor of the Conseil du Patronat du Québec, a director of the Quebec Chamber of Commerce, and chairman of the Canadian Centre for Studies in Publishing Society. Mr. Hancox acknowledges the assistance of Jeanmarie Gélinas, Charles W. Magill, and James Hayes.     

英文学术期刊论文出版与推广体系构建 ——以《Microsystems & Nanoengineering》为例

基于期刊《Microsystems & Nanoengineering》的文章推广实践,提出英文学术期刊的论文出版与推广体系。该体系强调论文出版与宣传的统一性,编辑部在策划与实施过程中要发挥的中枢作用,以及对出版商平台、作者及其单位、相关媒体资源的充分利用。本文以作者所在期刊的文章出版与推广实践为例,具体说明该体系的实现步骤及效果。文章的Altmetrics表现印证了该出版与推广体系对促进文章传播,提升文章关注度的重要作用。本文提出的论文出版与推广体系是长期实践的经验总结,流程清晰,内容全面,可操作性强,期望能给国内英文期刊的文章推广提供借鉴。     

Toward a scalable and sustainable approach to open access publishing and archiving for humanities and social sciences societies: a proposal

The proposal we offer here (and in the more extensive ‘white paper’ proposal on which this article is based) tackles head‐on the open access (OA) business models that have proven particularly problematic for implementation of OA in the humanities and social sciences (HSS). Our proposal suggests all tertiary institutions contribute to systemic support of the research process itself, including its entire scholarly output. A bold rethinking of the economics of OA by way of partnerships among scholarly societies and academic libraries funded by an institutional fee structure based on a student‐and‐faculty per‐capita sliding scale, our plan is nevertheless intentionally incremental. Our proposal focuses first on HSS and primarily in the United States, but just as research and scholarship are increasingly global and collaborative, our plan is not bound by discipline or national borders, but can be adopted by all those looking for a more equitable and sustainable OA model.