Corpus ID: 18297406

Peer review and journal models

@article{DallAglio2006PeerRA,
  title={Peer review and journal models},
  author={P. Dall'Aglio},
  journal={arXiv: Physics and Society},
  year={2006}
}
  • P. Dall'Aglio
  • Published 2006
  • Physics, Computer Science
  • arXiv: Physics and Society
Tentative analysis of alternative peer review and journal models. Open Access and Impact factor issues are not covered. The bibliography, in alphabetical order, lists articles and web sites (with brief description). 
Current and Evolving Models of Peer Review
New models of scientific publishing and new ways of practicing peer review have injected a recent dynamism into the scholarly communication system. In this article, we delineate the context of theExpand
Current and evolving models of peer-review ANA FRESCO-SANTALLA and TONY HERNÁNDEZ-PÉREZ
New models of scientific publishing and new ways of practicing peer review have injected a recent dynamism into the scholarly communication system. In this article, we delineate the context of theExpand
Choosing and communicating with journals
Publishing your research requires knowing about the business practices of journals, what journal editors and peer reviewers want, and how the publication process works. For example, journals thatExpand
New journal models and publishing perspectives in the evolving digital environment
TLDR
The authors consider that publishers should concentrate much more on value-added services for authors, readers and libraries, such as navigational services, discovery services, archiving and evaluation services. Expand
Liquid Journals: Knowledge Dissemination in the Web Era
In this paper we redefine the notion of "scientific journal" to update it to the age of the Web. We explore the historical reasons behind the current journal model, and we show that this model isExpand
Internet and Innovative Knowledge Evaluation Processes: New Directions for Scientific Creativity?
TLDR
It is shown that the evaluation processes might be categorized in both incremental and radical innovations, and how these innovative opportunities might have a huge impact on the creativity of the scientific publishing sector. Expand
Determining the informativeness of comments: a natural language study of F1000Research open peer review reports
TLDR
This research is the first to reveal the merits of open review reports on scientific papers, in terms of their relatedness to their mother articles, in specific, and to the knowledge tree, in general. Expand
Expanding Perspectives on Open Science: Communities, Cultures and Diversity in Concepts and Practices: Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Electronic Publishing, Limassol, Cyprus, June 6-8, 2017
TLDR
This talk shall discuss the motivations, methods and assessment of open online publishing, and the decisions I have made as an early career researcher, to share my research output on Huntington's disease in real-time through an open lab notebook. Expand
Web intelligence analyses of digital libraries: A case study of the National electronic Library for Health (NeLH)
TLDR
The use of LexiURL is explored as a Web intelligence tool for collecting and analysing links to digital libraries, focusing specifically on the National electronic Library for Health (NeLH). Expand
Arxiv-Based Commenting Resources By and For Astrophysicists and Physicists: An Initial Survey
TLDR
This paper results to be the first, though absolutely initial, overview of commenting platforms and other web 2.0 resources which were born for and within the astrophysical research community, from 2004 to 2016, as well as some aspects of ArXiv’s recent pathway towards partial inclusion of web2.0 features. Expand
...
1
2
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 68 REFERENCES
Peer Review—The Newcomers' Perspective
The World Academy of Young Scientists argue that double blind peer-review will generate a better perception of fairness and equality in global scientific funding and publishing
The invisible hand of peer review
The refereed journal literature needs to be freed from both paper and its costs, but not from peer review, whose "invisible hand" is what maintains its quality. The residual cost of online-only peerExpand
The peer‐review process
TLDR
Any scholarly publishing system will need to locate financial support to at least that extent, and a system of lump‐sum payment by the authors' funders is best placed to cover this cost while providing universal free access to scholarly material. Expand
What will happen to peer review?
The author summarizes the benefits and disadvantages of peer review and discusses a number of examples of difficulties with it that have arisen in the medical literature. In the absence of aExpand
Implementing peer review on the net: scientific quality control in scholarly electronic journals
Electronic networks have made it possible for scholarly periodical publishing to shift from a trade model, in which the author sells his words through the mediation of the expensive and inefficientExpand
Quality control in scholarly publishing: A new proposal
  • S. Mizzaro
  • Computer Science
  • J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol.
  • 2003
TLDR
A new kind of electronic scholarly journal is described, in which the standard submission-review-publication process is replaced by a more sophisticated approach, based on judgments expressed by the readers: in this way, each reader is, potentially, a peer reviewer. Expand
The convergence of digital libraries and the peer-review process
TLDR
The contributions set forth by this paper emphasize a deconstructed publication model in which the peer-review process is mediated by an Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting (OAI-PMH) peer- Review service, and suggest a set of peer- review specific metadata tags that can accompany a pre-print's existing metadata record. Expand
The deconstructed journal — a new model for academic publishing
TLDR
From this new viewpoint is developed the Deconstructed Journal (DJ) model which it is suggested is a better model for network based academic publishing and solves some of the problems of the current model. Expand
A lifecycle model of the scientific communication process
TLDR
A formal model of the scientific communication process is presented using the IDEF0 notation, which includes the whole communication value chain, from initial research to the assimilation of research results to everyday practice. Expand
Effects of editorial peer review: a systematic review.
CONTEXT Editorial peer review is widely used to select submissions to journals for publication and is presumed to improve their usefulness. Sufficient research on peer review has been published toExpand
...
1
2
3
4
5
...