|
|
|
|
Issue 40, September 18th, 2018
|
|
At 20 Years, the SciELO Network updates priorities and advances to open science
The 20 Years of SciELO mark the transition to a new period of development of the program, the network of 16 national collections and mainly of the journals, which will be characterized by the progressive adoption of best practices of open science communication that advocates the celerity and transparency in the evaluation processes and communication of research and the opening of the articles’ underlying content in favor of their reuse and the reproducibility of research results. The updating of the priority lines of action will contribute to updating the collections’ indexing policies and the journals’ editorial policies. [Read more]
|
|
|
The current debate on open access is often based on undue generalizations advocating for “silver bullet” models to flip the scholarly communication system globally. This approach is flawed because it doesn’t take into account the diversity of communication practices across the different disciplines and countries. [Read more]
|
|
|
|
J-STAGE is a journal platform on which Japanese academic societies can publish their journals. Although more than 80% of them are freely accessible, most of them do not claim to be open access. Some barriers to open access publishing are described based on our experience obtained through conversations with the societies. [Read more]
|
|
|
|
The Associação Brasileira de Editores Científicos (ABEC) and SciELO have key roles in promoting policies aimed at the advancement of Brazilian science regarding production, dissemination and internationalization, as well as always bringing to discussion topics such as ethics and best practices, aiming to foster the entire Brazilian publishing ecosystem, i.e., from the researcher/author through service providers, until its publication. [Read more]
|
|
|
|
How to think the future of scholarly communication, aiming at its broadest circulation, use, citation, and impact? It is proposed to preferentially focus on meeting the needs of the “Great Dialogue” in knowledge production and less on the financing and survival strategies of canonical forms of scholarly communication before the disruptive effects of open access. [Read more]
|
|
|
|
The concept of mainstream science was consolidated globally because publications became the main axis of institutional and individual evaluation also in the periphery. The use of bibliometrics contributed to reinforce the extension of a progressively homogenous style of publication and the International Rankings of universities favored the extension of a heteronomous evaluative culture. However, the styles of production and circulation of the so-called science in the periphery are very diverse. [Read more]
|
|
|
|
SciELO has been a shining example of how a publicly supported infrastructure could bolster scholarship and knowledge as public goods. However, its increasingly focus on “professionalization” and “internationalization” may serve to reduce the intellectual and linguistic heterogeneity of the region, while subjecting the evaluation of quality to “standards” largely set by multinational corporations that are far more interested in profit extraction than in local development. [Read more]
|
|
|
|
What are journals for? In one view they are a brand, a masthead that stands as a widely recognized proxy for some notion of quality assurance or interest. An alternate view is that they are communities, even “clubs” as we have explored in one article. The first of these views privileges the concept of “international” journals and an assumption that general interest implies better work. The second focuses attention on local needs and interests. Here the question is different, how well does a specific journal serve a specific community. [Read more]
|
|
|
|
The open access movement in Latin America has a historic opportunity to connect with other practices, tools and experiences of open science - open data, open parts evaluation, open laboratory notebooks, open software and free hardware - and invite other actors to participate and share their contributions to science. [Read more]
|
|
|
|
Scientific research papers with large numbers of authors have become more commonplace, increasing the likelihood of authorship disputes. Danielle Padula, Theresa Somerville and Ben Mudrak emphasise the importance of journals clearly defining and communicating authorship criteria to researchers. As well as having a policy for inclusion, journals should also indicate unethical authorship practices, clarify the order of authors at an early stage, consider recognising “contributorship”, and refer any disputes that do arise to the authors’ institutions. [Read more]
|
|
|
|
Brazilian scientific research, seen through its articles and their impact reveals a scenario that 30 years ago could not have been described. SciELO concretizes what Garfield envisioned for Latin America in the 1990s, allowing to delineate the citation flow, as in many countries, as yet unseen, and allowing to question the pertinence of Gibbs’s expression: “lost science in the third world”. [Read more]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
