Copy
View this email in your browser
ISSN 2318-1958

Issue 33, August 30th, 2017

Persistence and normalization of data were the main topics of the III SciELO-ScholarOne Updating Course

The III SciELO-ScholarOne Updating Course is a continuation of the SciELO Program’s commitment to raise the level of professionalism of its journals. The event took place at the FAPESP auditorium in São Paulo and brought together about 150 representatives from 70 SciELO journals seeking to improve their editorial management and had as main topics the persistence and normalization of data. [Read more]

Highlights

Science is largely a collective enterprise. That collectivity needs to be recognized more explicitly
There is a disconnect between the collective nature of science, and the way the publishing and scholarly credit and reward systems focus very strongly on individual achievements. This results in problems that affect not only science, but society’s trust in science, and thus society as a whole. [Read more]
Texture – an open science manuscript editor [Originally published in eLife in July/2017]
The Substance project released in 24 July 2017 the Alpha3 version of the Texture editor, which reads and produces XML files according the Journal Article Tag Suite (JATS) used by SciELO to structure scientific texts. It is a major step towards a complete solution for editing JATS articles and its application in publishing workflows. [Read more]
What will peer review be like in 2030?
Although the scientific literature has always been reviewed before it was published, current forms of peer review are only a few decades old and from the outset have been subjected to criticism and limitations. Open review and preprints servers have emerged in recent years as possible solutions in a world of growing communication in scientific research. Open reviews, artificial intelligence, collaborative and “cloud” reviews… what will peer review be like in 2030? [Read more]
Editorial ethics – other types of plagiarism… and counting
Plagiarism and fraud multiply in a variety of ways. Recently two less frequent types have come up – accidental plagiarism and referee plagiarism. In any case, plagiarism is an ethical breach that erodes public confidence and we must prevent it. [Read more]
The editors’ role on peer review: how to identify bad referees
A theoretical peer-review model assesses the effects of referees’ unethical conduct on approving and rejecting articles and how journal editors can mitigate this behavior. What is at stake is the reliability, transparency and efficiency of pre-publication peer review. [Read more]
Share
Tweet
+1
Forward to Friend
 

Creative Commons License

All the contents on this newsletter, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License.