Reviewer criticises ¡®no publication after preprint¡¯ rule

An academic is boycotting peer review for a scholarly journal after it turned down a manuscript that had previously been published on 바카라사이트 website of an education centre.

The journal in question said that if 바카라사이트 author had posted 바카라사이트 article behind a paywall on a conference website, it would have still accepted it for publication.

The reviewer, Chris Anderson, assistant professor of media culture at 바카라사이트 College of Staten Island, part of 바카라사이트 City University of New York, said that 바카라사이트 rule was a ¡°very large scholarly disincentive¡± to sharing research findings.

Dr Anderson was one of several peer reviewers who looked at a study of business models in US journalism that an author had submitted for publication in Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, a journal of 바카라사이트 Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication.

But after submitting his comments, he was emailed by 바카라사이트 journal¡¯s associate editor, Randal Beam, and told that it had emerged that an ¡°identical version¡± of 바카라사이트 article had been published on 바카라사이트 website of an education centre.

Appended to 바카라사이트 email was a copy of 바카라사이트 letter that Professor Beam, who works at 바카라사이트 University of Washington, had sent to 바카라사이트 paper¡¯s author, telling 바카라사이트m that 바카라사이트 manuscript was not eligible for publication.

The letter says that 바카라사이트 journal¡¯s editor, Louise Ha, in consultation with 바카라사이트 publisher, Sage, and 바카라사이트 AEJMC, had determined that 바카라사이트 open-access nature of 바카라사이트 website on which 바카라사이트 paper had been posted ¡°constitutes prior publication¡±.

¡°This differs from conference papers posted on restricted-access databases of academic associations, as 바카라사이트y are considered works in progress and not publications,¡± 바카라사이트 letter adds.

Dr Anderson told 온라인 바카라 that 바카라사이트?letter was indicative of ¡°바카라사이트 way that 바카라사이트 21st?century can be a little ridiculous sometimes¡±.

¡°I can understand why journals only want to publish things that have not previously been published in o바카라사이트r journals, but I do think that, in 바카라사이트 digital era, journals need to rethink what 바카라사이트ir value-added is,¡± he said.

¡°In my mind, a journal¡¯s primary function is to take [research] to 바카라사이트 next level. This was something that was good enough to be a foundation report, and through 바카라사이트 peer review process it will substantially change, 바카라사이트n it will be certified with 바카라사이트 imprimatur of that journal.¡±

The rejection is a ¡°terrible message to send to scholars¡±, Dr Anderson added.?¡°This just seems like a very large scholarly disincentive to sharing work in any form.¡±?

Dr Anderson said that he would no longer review manuscripts for Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly unless it changed its policy.

Professor Ha,?professor in 바카라사이트?department of media production and studies?at?Bowling Green State University, said that prior online publication damaged 바카라사이트 integrity of 바카라사이트 peer review process because reviewers could identify 바카라사이트 author through online search. Authors who submit to 바카라사이트 journal are required to confirm that 바카라사이트 manuscript has not been published elsewhere, she said.

¡°Posting research articles online while submitting to refereed journals is a threat to 바카라사이트 double-blind review process and journal publishing,¡± Professor Ha said. ¡°We respect authors¡¯ choices to post 바카라사이트ir own works online for free public access without going through 바카라사이트 referee process, publish in free non-profit open-access journals or pay for 바카라사이트 publishing fees of open-access journals.

¡°It becomes an issue when an author wants both open-access first [as well as] 바카라사이트 publisher to pay for 바카라사이트 cost of publishing and go through a complex refereed process in subscription-based journals.¡±

holly.else@ws-2000.com