Scientometrics
Volume/Issue:
Volume 88: Issue 2
Understanding the role of open peer review and dynamic academic articles
Authors’ reply to “Problems with natural selection of academic papers”
Authors:
Pandelis Perakakis Department of Personality, Evaluation and Psychological Treatment, University of Granada, Campus Cartuja, 18071, Granada, Spain
Laboratory of Experimental Economics, University Jaume I, Avda. Sos Baynat s/n, 12071, Castellón, Spain

Search for other papers by Pandelis Perakakis in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
Michael Taylor Institute for Space Applications and Remote Sensing (ISARS), National Observatory of Athens (NOA), Vas. Pavlou & I. Metaxa, 15236, Penteli, Greece

Search for other papers by Michael Taylor in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
,
Marco G. Mazza Stranski-Laboratorium fur Physikalische und Theoretische Chemie, Technische Universitat Berlin, Straße des 17. Juni 135, 10623, Berlin, Germany

Search for other papers by Marco G. Mazza in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
, and
Varvara Trachana Institute of Biological Research and Biotechnology (IBRB), National Hellenic Research Foundation (NHRF), 48 Vas. Constantinou Ave., 11635, Athens, Greece

Search for other papers by Varvara Trachana in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed Close
Pages:
669–673
Online Publication Date:
06 May 2011
Publication Date:
01 Aug 2011
Article Category:
Letter
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-011-0402-1
Keywords (English):
Academic publishing; Open peer review
Restricted access

Abstract

We welcome the commentary by L. Egghe (Scientometrics, ) stimulating discussion on our recent article “Natural selection of academic papers” (NSAP) (Scientometrics, 85(2):553–559, ) that focuses on an important modern issue at the heart of the scientific enterprise—the open and continuous evaluation and evolution of research. We are also grateful to the editor of Scientometrics for giving us the opportunity to respond to some of the arguments by L. Egghe that we believe are inaccurate or require further comment.

  • 1. Egghe, L. Problems with “natural selection of academic papers”. Scientometrics. doi: .

  • 2. Perakakis, P., Taylor, M., Mazza, M., Trachana, V. 2010 Natural selection of academic papers. Scientometrics 85 2 553–559 .

  • 3. Perakakis, P., Taylor, M., Mazza, M., & Trachana, V. (2010). The roads to open access. In: World Social Science Report 2010 (pp. 307–309). UNESCO.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 4. Swan, A., Brown, S. 2004 Authors and open access publishing. Learned Publishing 17 3 219–224 .

  • 5. Harnad, S., Brody, T., Vallières, F., Carr, L., Hitchcock, S., Gingras, Y. et al. 2008 The access/impact problem and the green and gold roads to open access: An update. Serials Review 34 1 36–40 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 6. Xia, J. (2007). Disciplinary repositories in the social sciences. In: ASLIB Proceedings New Information Perspectives (Vol. 59, pp. 528-538). London: Aslib.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 7. Chan, L., Costa, S. 2005 Participation in the global knowledge commons: Challenges and opportunities for research dissemination in developing countries. New Library World 106 3/4 141–163 .

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 8. Evans, J. A., Reimer, J. 2009 Open access and global participation in science. Science 323 5917 1025 .

  • 9. Barcinski, M. A. 2003 Disruption to science in developing countries. Nature 423 6939 480–480 .

  • 10. Kirsop, B., Chan, L. 2005 Transforming access to research literature for developing countries. Serials Review 31 4 246–255 .

  • 11. Habib, A. (2010). Challenging the international academic publishing industry. In: World Social Science Report 2010. UNESCO, p. 311.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 12. Taylor, M., Perakakis, P., Trachana, V. 2008 The siege of science. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics(ESEP) 8 1 17–40 .

  • 13. Moed, H. F. 2005 Citation analysis in research evaluation Kluwer Academic Pub Dordrecht.

  • 14. Seglen, P. O. 1997 Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. British Medical Journal 314 7079 497.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

  • 15. Scully, C., Lodge, H. 2005 Impact factors and their significance; overrated or misused?. British Dental Journal 198 7 391–393 .

  • 16. Gura, T. 2002 Scientific publishing: Peer review, unmasked. Nature 416 6878 258–260 .

  • 17. Godlee, F. 2002 Making reviewers visible. The Journal of the American Medical Association 287 21 2762–00 .

  • 18. Wilson, R. 2006 ‘Referee factor’ would reward a vital contribution. Nature 441 7095 812 .

  • 19. Raymond, E. S. (1999). The Cathedral & the Bazaar. Sebastapol: O'Reilly (in press).

  • 20. Lehmann, S., Jackson, A., Lautrup, B. 2005 Life, death and preferential attachment. Europhysics Letters 69:298 .

  • 21. Mandavilli, A. 2011 Trial by twitter. Nature 469:286–287 .

  • Collapse
  • Expand
Cover Scientometrics
Scientometrics
Print ISSN:
0138-9130
Online ISSN:
1588-2861

To see the editorial board, please visit the website of Springer Nature.

Manuscript submission: http://www.editorialmanager.com/scim/

For subscription options, please visit the website of Springer Nature.

Scientometrics
Language English
Size B5
Year of
Foundation		 1978
Volumes
per Year		 1
Issues
per Year		 12
Founder Akadémiai Kiadó
Founder's
Address		 H-1117 Budapest, Hungary 1516 Budapest, PO Box 245.
Publisher Akadémiai Kiadó
Springer Nature Switzerland AG
Publisher's
Address		 H-1117 Budapest, Hungary 1516 Budapest, PO Box 245.
CH-6330 Cham, Switzerland Gewerbestrasse 11.
Responsible
Publisher		 Chief Executive Officer, Akadémiai Kiadó
ISSN 0138-9130 (Print)
ISSN 1588-2861 (Online)

Monthly Content Usage

Abstract Views Full Text Views PDF Downloads
Jun 2023 5 0 2
Jul 2023 1 0 0
Aug 2023 9 0 0
Sep 2023 4 0 0
Oct 2023 8 4 0
Nov 2023 4 8 0
Dec 2023 0 0 0