Communicating with Peer Review Journals

Das, Anup-Kumar . Communicating with Peer Review Journals., 2015 In: UNESCO Curriculum for Researchers, Module 1: Scholarly Communications. UNESCO, Paris, pp. 17-30. [Book chapter]

[thumbnail of R1.3E-Journals.pdf] Text
R1.3E-Journals.pdf - Published version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
Download (249kB)

English abstract

This Unit, Communicating with Peer Review Journals, covers two important academic publishing channels, namely peer reviewed journals, conferences and their proceedings. This Unit also highlights different methods and procedures of peer reviewing for publishing primary literature emanated from research studies. The peer reviewing is essential for validating quality of research findings conveyed by researchers, which are subject to fulfilment of ethical standards and appropriate research design, sampling and other methodological issues. This Unit discusses in details aspects such as Academic Journals, Their Functions, Working and Procedures; The Peer Review Process; World of Journal Publishing; The Importance of Scientific and Professional Societies in Journal Publishing; and Publishing in Conferences. Published in the UNESCO Curriculum for Researchers > Module 1: Scholarly Communications > Unit 2: Communicating with Peer Review Journals.

Item type: Book chapter
Keywords: Academic Journals, Peer Reviewing, Journal Publishing, Scientific Societies, Conference Proceedings
Subjects: E. Publishing and legal issues. > EB. Printing, electronic publishing, broadcasting.
H. Information sources, supports, channels. > HN. e-journals.
H. Information sources, supports, channels. > HO. e-books.
Depositing user: Dr Anup Kumar Das
Date deposited: 20 Mar 2015 17:47
Last modified: 20 Mar 2015 17:47
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/10760/24813

References

Bohannon, J. (2013). Who's Afraid of Peer Review? Science, 342(6154), 60-65. DOI:10.1126/science.342.6154.60. Retrieved from www.umass.edu/preferen/You%20Must%20Read%20This/BohannonScience2013.pdf

Cargill, M., & O'Connor, P. (2013). Writing Scientific Research Articles: Strategy and Steps. Wiley-Blackwell.

Das, A.K. & Chakraborty, S. (2014). Collaboration in International and Comparative Librarianship. Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-4666-4365-9.

Das, A.K. (2008). Open Access to Knowledge and Information: Scholarly Literature and Digital Library Initiatives – the South Asian Scenario. New Delhi: UNESCO. ISBN: 9788189218218.

Das, A.K., & Mishra, S (2014). Genesis of Altmetrics or Article-level Metrics for Measuring Efficacy of Scholarly Communications: Current Perspectives. Journal of Scientometric Research, 3(2): 82-92.

Das, A.K., Arora, P & Bhattacharya, S (2012). Webliography of STI Indicator Databases and Related Publications. Journal of Scientometric Research, 1(1), 86-93.

De Groote, S. L., & Dorsch, J. L. (2001). Online Journals: Impact on Print Journal Usage. Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, 89(4), 372-378. Retrieved from www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC57966/

De Groote, S. L., & Dorsch, J. L. (2003). Measuring Use Patterns of Online Journals and Databases. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 91(2), 231-240. Retrieved from www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC153164/

Elsevier (2012). Understanding the Publishing Process in Scientific Journals. Retrieved from http://biblioteca.uam.es/sc/documentos/understanding_the_publishling_process.pdf

Harnad, S. (1996). Implementing Peer Review on the Net: Scientific Quality Control in Scholarly Electronic Journals. In: Peek, R. & Newby, G. (Eds.) Scholarly Publication: The Electronic Frontier. Cambridge MA: MIT Press. Pp. 103-108. Retrieved from http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/252900/1/harnad96.peer.review.html

Harter, S. P. (1998). Scholarly Communication and Electronic Journals: An Impact Study. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 49(6), 507-516.

Hovav, A. and Gray, P. Academic Electronic Journals: Past, Present, and Future. Advances in Computers, 67, 131-175. Retrieved from http://biz.korea.ac.kr/~anat/Advances.pdf

Kleinert S & Wager E (2011). Responsible Research Publication: International Standards for Editors. A position statement developed at the 2nd World Conference on Research Integrity, Singapore, July 22-24, 2010. Retrieved from http://publicationethics.org/files/International%20standard_editors_for%20website_11_Nov_2011.pdf

Mahoney, M. J. (1977). Publication prejudices: An experimental study of confirmatory bias in the peer review system. Cognitive therapy and research, 1(2), 161-175. Retrieved from http://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/1097087/908376224/name/mahoney.pdf

Monbiot, George (2011). Academic Publishers Make Murdoch Look Like a Socialist: Academic Publishers Charge Vast Fees to Access Research Paid for by Us. The Guardian, 29 August 2011. Retrieved from www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/aug/29/academic-publishersmurdoch-socialist.

Nikam, K., & Kumar, D. (2013). Evaluating the Effective Use of Electronic Journals by the Academia: A Study. DESIDOC Journal of Library & Information Technology, 33(2).

Odlyzko, A. (1997). The Economics of Electronic Journals. First Monday, 2(8). Retrieved from http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/542/

Panitch, J. M., & Michalak, S. (2005). The Serials Crisis: A White Paper for the UNC-Chapel Hill Scholarly Communications Convocation. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina. Retrieved from www.unc.edu/scholcomdig/whitepapers/panitch-michalak.html

Redhead, Claire (2013). Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing. Retrieved from http://oaspa.org/principles-oftransparency-and-best-practice-in-scholarly-publishing/

Sanville, T. J. (2001). A Method Out of the Madness: OhioLINK's Collaborative Response to the Serials Crisis. Serials: The Journal for the Serials Community, 14(2), 163-177.

Schekman, R., Watt, F. M., & Weigel, D. (2013). Scientific Publishing: The eLife Approach to Peer Review. eLife, 2, e00799. Retrieved from http://elife.elifesciences.org/content/2/e00799.

Sen, B.K. (2002). Growth of Scientific Periodicals in India (1788-1900). Indian Journal of History of Science, 37(1), S1-46.

Sense about Science (2006). Peer Review and the Acceptance of New Scientific Ideas. Retrieved from www.senseaboutscience.org/data/files/resources/17/peerReview.pdf

Wager E & Kleinert S (2011). Responsible Research Publication: International Standards for Authors. A position statement developed at the 2nd World Conference on Research Integrity, Singapore, July 22-24, 2010. Retrieved from http://publicationethics.org/files/International%20standards_authors_for%20website_11_Nov_2011.pdf

Webster, P. J. (2008). Managing Electronic Resources: New and Changing Roles for Libraries. Oxford: Chandos Publishing.

Wenneras, C., & Wold, A. (1997). Nepotism and Sexism in Peer-Review. Nature, 387, 341-343.


Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item
Contact us
Send email Sponsors
Sponsor: AIMS Sponsor: D&P Sponsor: UniNa CAB Get connected
Facebook Facebook Twitter Twitter Linkedin LinkedIn RSS RSS