Scientometrics

, Volume 88, Issue 2, pp 669–673

Understanding the role of open peer review and dynamic academic articles

Authors’ reply to “Problems with natural selection of academic papers”
  • Pandelis Perakakis
  • Michael Taylor
  • Marco G. Mazza
  • Varvara Trachana
Article

Abstract

We welcome the commentary by L. Egghe (Scientometrics, this issue) stimulating discussion on our recent article “Natural selection of academic papers” (NSAP) (Scientometrics, 85(2):553–559, 2010) 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.

Keywords

Academic publishing Open peer review 

References

  1. 1.
    Egghe, L. Problems with “natural selection of academic papers”. Scientometrics. doi:10.1007/s11192-011-0395-9.
  2. 2.
    Perakakis, P., Taylor, M., Mazza, M., & Trachana, V. (2010). Natural selection of academic papers. Scientometrics, 85(2), 553–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Perakakis, P., Taylor, M., Mazza, M., & Trachana, V. (2010). The roads to open access. In: World Social Science Report 2010 ( pp. 307–309). UNESCOGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Swan, A., & Brown, S. (2004). Authors and open access publishing. Learned Publishing, 17(3), 219–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Xia, J. (2007). Disciplinary repositories in the social sciences. In: ASLIB Proceedings New Information Perspectives (Vol. 59, pp. 528–538). London: Aslib.Google Scholar
  7. 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Evans, J. A., & Reimer, J. (2009). Open access and global participation in science. Science, 323(5917), 1025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Barcinski, M. A. (2003). Disruption to science in developing countries. Nature, 423(6939), 480–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kirsop, B., & Chan, L. (2005). Transforming access to research literature for developing countries. Serials Review, 31(4), 246–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Habib, A. (2010). Challenging the international academic publishing industry. In: World Social Science Report 2010. UNESCO, p. 311.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Taylor, M., Perakakis, P., & Trachana, V. (2008). The siege of science. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics(ESEP), 8(1), 17–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Moed, H.F. (2005). Citation analysis in research evaluation. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Pub.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Seglen, P. O. (1997). Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. British Medical Journal, 314(7079), 497.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Scully, C., & Lodge, H. (2005). Impact factors and their significance; overrated or misused?. British Dental Journal, 198(7), 391–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gura, T. (2002). Scientific publishing: Peer review, unmasked. Nature, 416(6878), 258–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Godlee, F. (2002). Making reviewers visible. The Journal of the American Medical Association, 287(21), 2762.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wilson, R. (2006). ‘Referee factor’ would reward a vital contribution. Nature, 441(7095), 812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Raymond, E. S. (1999). The Cathedral & the Bazaar. Sebastapol: O’Reilly (in press).Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lehmann, S., Jackson, A., & Lautrup, B. (2005). Life, death and preferential attachment. Europhysics Letters, 69, 298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mandavilli, A. (2011). Trial by twitter. Nature, 469, 286–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pandelis Perakakis
    • 1
    • 2
  • Michael Taylor
    • 3
  • Marco G. Mazza
    • 4
  • Varvara Trachana
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of Personality, Evaluation and Psychological TreatmentUniversity of GranadaGranadaSpain
  2. 2.Laboratory of Experimental EconomicsUniversity Jaume ICastellónSpain
  3. 3.Institute for Space Applications and Remote Sensing (ISARS)National Observatory of Athens (NOA)PenteliGreece
  4. 4.Stranski-Laboratorium fur Physikalische und Theoretische ChemieTechnische Universitat BerlinBerlinGermany
  5. 5.Institute of Biological Research and Biotechnology (IBRB)National Hellenic Research Foundation (NHRF)AthensGreece

Personalised recommendations