Quantcast
Channel: Comments for Scholarly Open Access
Viewing all 10802 articles
Browse latest View live

Comment on New OA Publisher: the Council for Innovative Research by Bill White

0
0

Thanks Jeff!
The authors of this paper seem answering the question posed in another paper about the same topic:
“The disaster of the impact factor” where we can read the question:
“…Why such a biased tool continues to exist in Science?…”:
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs11948-014-9517-0

but Casadevall and Fang do not cite the source paper!
This is unethical!
Other information is also overlapping with this paper without proper citation!

Unethical and patronizing behavior from Casadevall and Fang?


Comment on Journal Indexing: What it is, and What it’s Not by Paul Blobaum

0
0

sd, “REAL” indexing services are often those published by a society (such as Social Work Abstracts, from the National Association of Social Workers) and MEDLINE (which is the authoritative index to biomedical literature… PubMed merely reports articles depisited in pubMed Central, and also Medline citations, and publisher provided citations that are not indexed for MEDLINE). Look for who the publisher is, and who the market is. Other reputable publishers also have scholarly indexes, such as EBSCO, Proquest. CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health) is published by Ebsco but was originally published by a non-profit clearinghouse that built a reputation for quality over the years. When it comes down to it, if in doubt, ask a professional librarian.

Comment on Journal Indexing: What it is, and What it’s Not by Paul Blobaum

Comment on Journal Indexing: What it is, and What it’s Not by Paul Blobaum

0
0

Cabell’s directories. I am finding faculty have a misconception that inclusion of titles in Cabell’s signifies authenticity and scholarly reputation. I have found no vetting process for Cabell’s, so my view is that Cabell’s is a directory and reports the information publishers send them. I don’t see inclusion criteria.

Comment on New Japanese OA Publisher Tempts Authors with Cash Prizes by Jeff Shrager

0
0

p.s., “Grade is determined by proofreaders, …” (From the linked page: http://www.spp-j.com/editorial_policy.php#link5_2) So at least there are proof readers. This actually makes some sense (although it’s slightly random): pay for value delivered; if you are going to work the proofreaders, you get to pay for the privilege. Actually, nothing in this seems senseless or evil, just slightly random – perhaps poorly thought out. I give them points for creativity, and for being up front about it all (although they could use a copy editor on their web site). Having to pay the entry fee to get a prize is completely normal. And prizes, although weird in academic journals, aren’t the worst thing in the world; conferences give out best student paper prizes all the time. (Which I personally hate bcs it creates un-necessary competition between students! But it’s what’s done, so a cash prize from a journal … dunno that that’s all that bad. As you point out, not enough to make me send a paper, but if I was from a country where it was cheap … ?) And 15% off the crowd sourcing…? Again, they need to keep the lights on somehow.

All in all this all seems pretty tame, and even slightly interesting.

(As previously discussed, it is not the job of the publisher nor reviewers to look for plagiarism, just their job to respond it once pointed out. But that hasn’t happened here, yet, so let’s try not to go down that rathole again! :-)

Comment on LIST OF PUBLISHERS by Open season on academics: My brush with predatory publishing | Academic Matters

0
0

[…] Colorado librarian Jeffrey Beall has compiled a valuable list of dubious and predatory publishers (http://scholarlyoa.com/publishers) – those who prey upon academics who face more and more pressure from their administrations to […]

Comment on Appeals by Abhishek Rai

Comment on Research by sadia

0
0

Dear Jeffrey,

Can you tell me about the Scientific World Journal (ISSN:1537-744X). Is it listed in Thomson Reuter’s (Science Citation Index Expanded, 2013) list. I have one paper published there. My university only accept Thomson Reuter’s (Science Citation Index Expanded).

please help me by providing this information.

regards
sadia


Comment on New Mega Open-Access Scholarly Journal Publisher by Sayedur R Chowdhury

0
0

While it is true that a journal’s quality depends on the authors who would send their quality research manuscripts for publications, but then again where would you invest your best work in? A crappy, phantom, poorly managed/administered journal apparently not even knowing the basic of peer-review publication process? The knowledge, experience, integrity and ethical standard of the people behind a journal – do not these have any bearing to you?

Comment on Chinese Publisher MDPI Added to List of Questionable Publishers by Pepijn van Erp (@pjvanerp)

0
0

I had one experience with MDPI which shows a lack of sincere interest by the editors to look into possible problems with articles. It’s quite easy to publish pseudoscientific articles in their journals it seems and to get away with it.

This has to do with an article of a special issue of Animals “Combination of Western and Chinese Medicine in Veterinary Science” (http://www.mdpi.com/2076-2615/2/3/415 ) It’s on using electroacupuncture in cattle. You could argue that this is pseudoscience anyway, so why bother to look at it at all. I was however intrigued by the fact that the authors had used a device that was supposedly developed by the Soviet Russian Space Program. A Russian reference was given for this, but could not be found anywhere. As I found out this was all made up by a Russian pseudoscientist. Another problem is that the last author of the article is the owner of the firm which sells this device and the first author is member of the scientific advisory committee of this firm, however: “The authors declare no conflict of interest” the article states.
I pointed this out to the editor of Animals and got a reply by an assistant editor. They had looked into it and told me that they had found a reference to this machine. But this was from a German esoteric magazine, which just promotes all kinds of pseudoscientific nonsense. They didn’t report back on the COI issue. Case closed from their side. The firm is happily telling its customers that scientific research has been published on their device :-(

I’ve written a blog on this: http://www.pepijnvanerp.nl/articles/veterinary-acupuncture-and-the-soviet-space-program/ which goes a bit further than just this connection with MDPI.

Comment on Research by Jeffrey Beall

0
0

Yes, this journal has a valid impact factor and is in SCI. It is NOT a predatory journal. I think this journal should meet your university’s requirements. Good luck.

Comment on Appeals by Jeffrey Beall

0
0

Thanks — this appears to be a subscription publisher.

Comment on Misleading Metrics by Khabri Lal

Comment on Misleading Metrics by Jeffrey Beall

0
0

Thanks for sharing this. I’ve added it to the Meaningless Metrics page.

Comment on Misleading Metrics by Jeffrey Beall

0
0

Thanks — this appears to be some sort of attempt at creating a new abstracting and indexing service.


Comment on Beall’s List of Predatory Publishers 2013 by Guest Post: Reviewing the Peer Review System | PEER REVIEW WATCH

0
0

[…] of the current peer review system more than anything else. The study took many journals from ‘Beall’s list’, a known list of hoax open access journals previously defined by Jeffrey Beall, so sceptics […]

Comment on LIST OF PUBLISHERS by 09 – Bibliographic Essay – Tasha A. | BIS 300-1 Course Blog Spring 2014

0
0

[…] based on several criteria: the reputability of the publisher (from Beall’s List of Publishers, http://scholarlyoa.com/publishers); the associated bodies of work by its contributors; and whether they are recognized subject matter […]

Comment on Combining Fake Journals with Fake Conferences: Global Business & International Management Conference by M.M. Islam

0
0

This is not true. They reviewed and guided me for preparation of papers and provided the link for viper plagiarism tool also. Even they didn’t charge any fee. If you want hard copy you can buy journal book. There is no fee for publication. It is a free journal. It’s my point of view.

Comment on Two Publishers Each Have a Journal With the Same Title by Open Science

0
0

[…] Two publishers each have a journal with the same title […]

Comment on New Japanese OA Publisher Tempts Authors with Cash Prizes by Martin Rundkvist

0
0

“filed with lots of rules” –> filled

Viewing all 10802 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images