Dear Dana,
Unfortunately this is only partly true. The "epub ahead of print"
practices vary a lot. Even though articles after acceptance could be
copy-edited straight away and posted, editors and publishers don't want
to have excessive lists of dozens of articles up there, especially if
they haven't been assigned issues and page numbers yet. That would in
itself be bad publicity. For instance JASIST in which I have published
several articles recently tends to put up eprints a couple of months
before final publishing, which means they could have waited half a year
from acceptance already.
A real horror story of a journal is Journal of Civil Engineering and
Management (a Tailor and Frances journal, but essentially run by editors
from a Lithuanian university). Together with a collegue we had an
article accepted in March 2012 which still is waiting to be published.
And they don't do epubs before print. While this is bad service their
practice of publishing articles from Lituanian colleagues much faster
than the rest (can be studied at the websiteI) is clearly unethical.
Bo-Christer
On 12/21/13 8:52 PM, Dana Roth wrote:
Re: "Publishing in scholarly peer reviewed journals usually entails
long delays from submission to publication. In part this is due to the
length of the peer review process and *in part because of the
dominating tradition of publication in issues*, earlier a necessity of
paper-based publishing, which creates backlogs of manuscripts waiting
in line." ... in: http://openaccesspublishing.org/oa11/article.pdf
Isn't is generally true (at least in the science and technology fields) that 'Epub ahead of print' publishing practices have obviated delays in waiting for issues to be completed?
I understand that in mathematics and other fields that delays between 'Epub ahead of print' and the final completed issue can stretch out for ~a year.
Dana L. Roth
Caltech Library 1-32
1200 E. California Blvd. Pasadena, CA 91125
626-395-6423 fax 626-792-7540
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://library.caltech.edu/collections/chemistry.htm
*From:*[email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] *On
Behalf Of *Bo-Christer Björk
*Sent:* Saturday, December 21, 2013 9:27 AM
*To:* [email protected]
*Subject:* [GOAL] Re: Joint Statement on Principles of Transparency
and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing
You could check out
http://openaccesspublishing.org/oa11/article.pdf
as well as
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1751157713000710
green version
http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~sugimoto/preprints/Journalacceptancerates.pdf
<http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/%7Esugimoto/preprints/Journalacceptancerates.pdf>
Bo-Christer
On 12/21/13 5:43 PM, Gerritsma, Wouter wrote:
Dear all,
With regards to this really excellent initiative I am looking in
to the various degrees in transparency of the peer review process.
Has anybody examples at hand of editorials, where they give an
overview of number of articles submitted, and ultimately accepted,
and the time the whole cycle from submission to final publication
actually took. So now and then I have seen this in journals, but
can't find any example right now.
I would be grateful for some hints.
Wouter
Wouter Gerritsma
Team leader research support
Information Specialist -- Bibliometrician
Wageningen UR Library
PO box 9100
6700 HA Wageningen
The Netherlands
++31 3174 83052
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]%0d>
wageningenur.nl/library <http://wageningenur.nl/library>
@wowter <http://twitter.com/Wowter/>
wowter.net <http://wowter.net/>
#AWCP http://tinyurl.com/mk65m36
*From:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
[mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Claire Redhead
*Sent:* donderdag 19 december 2013 16:41
*To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
*Subject:* [GOAL] Joint Statement on Principles of Transparency
and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing
The Committee on Publication Ethics
<http://publicationethics.org/%E2%80%8E>, the Directory of Open
Access Journals <http://www.doaj.org/>, the Open Access Scholarly
Publishers Association <http://oaspa.org/>, and the World
Association of Medical Editors <http://www.wame.org/> are
scholarly organizations that have seen an increase in the number
of membership applications from both legitimate and non-legitimate
publishers and journals. Our organizations have collaborated in an
effort to identify principles of transparency and best practice
that set apart legitimate journals and publishers from
non-legitimate ones and to clarify that these principles form part
of the criteria on which membership applications will be evaluated.
This is a work in progress and we welcome feedback on the general
principles and the specific criteria. Please see the full
statement
<http://oaspa.org/principles-of-transparency-and-best-practice-in-scholarly-publishing/>
on the OASPA blog (http://oaspa.org/blog/).
Claire Redhead
Membership & Communications Manager
Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association, OASPA
http://oaspa.org/
_______________________________________________
GOAL mailing list
[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
_______________________________________________
GOAL mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
_______________________________________________
GOAL mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
