Category Archives: Lecturer

Enago launches Open Access Journal Finder (OAJF) – Improving accessibility of authentic open access journals

Open Access Journal Finder

New York: Enago, the leader in editing and publication support services, today announced the worldwide release of Open Access Journal Finder (OAJF) that aims at enabling research scholars to find open access journals relevant to their manuscript. OAJF uses a validated journal index provided by Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) – the most trusted non-predatory open access journal directory. The free journal finder indexes over 10,700 pre-vetted journals and allows researchers to compare their paper with over 2.7 million articles and counting. Seeing the positive response in the initial pilot stage, OAJF has also been rolled out in languages other than English, primarily Chinese, Japanese, and Korean.

Sharad Mittal, CEO, Enago said, “Open access means critical academic advances and breakthrough scientific theories are accessible globally and instantly.” Commenting on the launch, he added, “Countless predatory journals have slipped into the scholarly landscape, diluting the manuscripts of scholars with misleading findings. OAJF promotes research integrity by enabling accessibility to open access publishing environment that is free from predatory journals.”

Researchers looking for open access journals can now simply add their research abstract and OAJF will make use of advanced search algorithm to deliver contextual search results sorted by relevance. In its search results, the tool displays vital journal details to the scholars including publisher details, peer review process, confidence index (indicates similarity between matching keywords in the published articles across all journals indexed by DOAJ), and publication speed. The dynamic platform also lets scholars filter search results based on preferences such as peer review process and approval of journals, among others.

Sharad expressed his enthusiasm, “We are thrilled, and expect thousands of our scholarly authors to widely benefit from this open access movement.” Researchers can now find relevant research literature from multiple disciplines, and explore publication details from one convenient place without any fear of data privacy. Open access journals on OAJF are indexed from publishers ranging from 120+ countries globally. The publications cover all areas of science, technology, medicine, social sciences, and humanities. Sharad concluded, “OAJF’s mission to increase the ease of accessing open access journals is based on a true vision of creating a useful, fairer and transparent research environment for scholars.”

Promote Your Research with These 7 Simple Techniques!

Research

There is a lot of published research data now available and this makes it harder for your target audience to find your academic research. Promoting your research has therefore become very important.

Stand Out From the Crowd

To help you stand out from the crowd, you should have an ORCID profile. This will allow others to find you even if you change your name or institution. Research identifiers such as a DOI can be useful. They can be used to track the interest in your paper.

What are some other ways that you can get more people to read your research?

Step 1: You Need A Strategy

This is something every researcher is familiar with. If you want more people to find your work, think about your audience. Who are they? What are they interested in? Where do they work? Are they only in your department or further afield?

Once you know who they are, think about how to reach them. Where do they spend time online? What types of online habits do they have? Use this information to help you decide where to promote your work. Is Twitter with its very open platform going to reach your audience more effectively or are you more likely to find them on LinkedIn?

You could also look at the strategy other researchers in your field are using. Install the Altmetric bookmarklet in your browser. Then navigate to a paper in your field and click on the Altmetric donut. This will give you details about where members of the public are discussing the paper. Use similar channels to promote your work.

Step 2: How Committed Are You?

Some social media channels require a lot more investment than others. Before you begin, work out how much time you are willing to devote to the channel(s) you chose. Using Twitter means that you will need to tweet several times a day. Some of the tweets should promote and discuss your work. However, most of the tweets should not be about you. Retweet interesting tweets that your followers might like. Reply to other users’ polls and questions. Share research that interests you and tag the authors.

LinkedIn may be a better fit for your schedule if you are very busy. LinkedIn allows you to share updates on your research. It also has a blog-like feature where you can write short articles. This allows you to share your expertise. Of course, if your target audience is not on LinkedIn it would be better to choose a platform where they will see your work.

Be prepared for feedback. There will be honest questions and comments. Some members of the audience may be more interested in starting a fight or advancing their own agenda than what you have written. Remember to engage with each comment respectfully and professionally.

Step 3: Get Involved

Online communities are great but don’t forget to interact in real life too. Is there a club or society that might be interested in your work? Volunteer to give a talk or a seminar at one of their meetings. Again, audience is key. Make sure your presentation is clear to your audience. How you present data at a conference is different from how you give a talk to people who are interested in science but have no formal training.

Step 4: Use Your Email Signature

It can be really easy to add a link to your research in your email signature. It could be a link to your LinkedIn or Kudos profile. This is an easy way to help the people you communicate with find your work.

Step 5: Make it Easy to Read

Create a plain English summary of each paper. This will make each article less intimidating. It will also help people decide if they want to read the full paper. Post this summary on a blog or discussion group that you belong to. If a science reporter sees it, they may contact you for an interview.

Step 6: Use Hashtags

Hashtags are an easy way to find content related to a topic. Twitter is famous for using hashtags. They are basically a topic or phrase with a “#”
at the beginning. Depending on the paper, you could use #science, #microbiology, #astrophysics to categorize your work. Use Hashtagify to identify which hashtags are really popular. Using a popular hashtag makes it more likely that people will find your work.

Step 7: Teamwork

Many journals have a social media strategy to promote articles they publish. The research office at your institution likely has a PR strategy for promoting research that includes social media, email lists, news outlets, and government departments. Speak with them about promoting your work.

It can be a little scary to promote your research at first. However, it is an essential part of attracting grants, collaborators, and students. Use Altmetrics to find out where others in your field are promoting their academic research. Choose a similar platform, being aware of how much time it will take. Use a platform like Kudos to provide a plain English summary of each of your papers. Make sure you use unique research identifiers. Get an ORCID profile to help others keep up with your research data. Above all, participate in the research community.

How Sharing Peer Review Data Helps Counter Scientific Misconduct

Peer Review Data

Life science research is going through a reproducibility crisis. Indeed, 70% of researchers have tried and failed to reproduce another scientist’s experiments. This has prompted scientists to question peer review models and promote the sharing of peer review data. All of this has come as an effort to promote scientific integrity and effectively minimize instances of scientific fraud.

Analyses in psychology and cancer biology have revealed shocking facts about experimental reproducibility. According to a recent study, only 40% of the reports from psychology and 10% from cancer biology are reproducible. This lack of reproducibility is largely due to the selective reporting of data, pressure to publish, low statistical power/poor analysis, insufficient replication, poor experimental design, or unavailability of raw data. One way to address this is to promote the peer review of manuscript data. This will significantly facilitate the assessment of data accuracy.

Sharing Raw Data

Efforts to promote data sharing have been increasing. Nevertheless, only a few journals have actually implemented policies to meet the goals of establishing transparency.

Some journals review data sets, but they do not share such data sets. Furthermore, peer review itself has not been systematically reviewed for efficacy (perhaps, this has consequences for reproducibility too). There continue to be discussions on enhancing resources that are available to editors and researchers. One possible solution is to work with meta-researchers and create experimental peer review systems that can be validated easily. Incorporating plagiarism detection software for detecting copied data sets could also help to some extent.

Peer Review of Shared Data Sets

Currently, several journals require that authors submit data sets for peer review. Journals then perform a technical and subject-area review of data sets, which includes an assessment of the following:

  • Data logic
  • Consistency
  • Formatting
  • Open access plausibility
  • Quality
  • Handling/reuse
  • Units of measurement
  • Quality of collection methods
  • Presence of any anomalies

Meanwhile, several researchers still hesitate to share data sets, presumably because of the extreme competition and reduced research funding.

Journals Should Share Peer Review Data

Sharing all aspects of peer review could help promote transparency. PEERE, a large European cohort, worked with Elsevier, Springer Nature, and Wiley to develop a protocol to do so. Ultimately, their efforts seek to develop a normalized system for publishing peer-reviewed data sets.

In addition to the PEERE initiative, several peer review models need modifications to enhance the transparency of manuscripts and experimental data sets. In summary, the peer review of shared data sets is expected to decrease instances of scientific misconduct

Elsevier Journal Finder: How to Select an Appropriate Journal for Publishing

Elsevier Journal Finder

Researchers frequently spend time thinking about journal selection. What should be the best journal to publish their academic research? Academic publishing giant Elsevier aims to simplify this process. They have added the Elsevier Journal Finder to their list of research tools.

Why Elsevier Journal Finder?

Elsevier Journal Finder uses the Elsevier Fingerprint Engine. This Fingerprint Engine creates an index of weighted terms that defines the text. The text can be any scientific document including grants and project summaries. The Fingerprint Engine basically compares the fingerprint of your article to other articles. The Journal Finder will then suggest an Elsevier journal which has published articles with a similar fingerprint to yours.

Elsevier’s Fingerprint Engine uses many thesauri in order to be effective. It uses thesauri from the Life Sciences, Engineering, Earth and Environmental Sciences, Arts and Humanities, Social Sciences, Mathematics, and Agriculture. It is also possible for the Fingerprint Engine to use an institution’s thesauri.

Elsevier’s Journal Finder helps researchers match their abstract to one of more than 2,200 Elsevier journals. These journals cover the Health Sciences, Life Sciences, Physical Sciences, and the Social Sciences. Using this fingerprint matching system helps authors submit their papers to journals that are the best fit. This should reduce the number of rejections that researchers have to face. Fewer rejections means less time spent on re-submissions.

How to Use the Elsevier Journal Finder

Selecting a journal is easy. A researcher will enter the title, abstract, and/or keywords on the Journal Finder page. It is possible to select up to three research fields to refine the search. You may also choose to limit the results to Open Access journals. Clicking on “Find Journal” will take you to the results page.

This research tool will show the top ten search results. Each listing includes a set of headings such as the journal name and how well its fingerprint matched your article. The listing includes the journal’s CiteScore and impact factor. Elsevier Journal Finder also reports the average review speed, acceptance rate, publication speed, and Open Access fee. The Journal Finder makes it possible to sort the results by any of the headings. From the search results page, you can access information on the journal’s scope. It is also possible to go to the journal’s page or submissions portal.

Elsevier Journal Finder

The current version of the Elsevier Journal Finder uses new Natural Language Processing (NLP) technology to analyze the data a researcher enters. The research tool uses noun phrases, avoids bias due to journal size, and utilizes the Best Matching Algorithm (BM25). This means that authors can expect better accuracy from its recommendations.

Benefits of the Process

One of the major reasons a paper is rejected is because it did not fit the scope of the journal. This can happen even if the paper is excellent. If more authors submitted their work to appropriate journals, rejection rates should go down. Using a system that helps with journal selection by matching a paper to journals that have published similar works should save an author’s time.

The Elsevier Journal Finder takes the guesswork out of finding a good journal for your next paper. It gives authors a list of journals that have published similar work. The convenient format of the search results also allows authors to sort based on the headings that are most important to them. The only limitation is that the search returns the best Elsevier journal matches.

Elsevier Journal Finder

There are thousands of journals available today. Journal selection is therefore a complex choice. Being aware of the scope of a journal can definitely help to narrow the list of potential journals to publish in. Even after doing this, however, your academic research may still be rejected. Elsevier Journal Finder is an easy to use research tool that takes selection a step further. It uses NLP and algorithms to find the most relevant journals having similar published articles. It also gives you additional details about the journal to help you make a final decision.

IEEE Style Guide: How Do You Add References and Citations in Your Manuscript?

IEEE

The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) is an organization whose mission is to advance technology to benefit humankind. IEEE is recognized for its continuing support of technical professionals and its contributions to increasing innovations in technical fields, such as electronics and computer science.

IEEE has its own referencing and citation style that is used in various technical publications. Here, we provide information and examples for the most common types of published works.

In-Text Citations

IEEE uses numerals within brackets to denote each reference as it appears in the text. Each reference has only one number associated with it, and the numbers are ordered in sequence. For example,

Wolves have the innate ability to limit the size of their litters based on the availability of food[1].

Note the placement of the numeral. Each numeric citation is enclosed in brackets in line with the text. Space is inserted before the bracket and punctuation is placed after the bracket. When the same reference is used throughout the document and you want to call attention to a specific page or illustration, you can format the reference as follows:

Wolves have a system of hierarchy that allows only the alpha male and female in the pack to mate [2, Fig. 4].

Each in-text citation stands alone. For example, when several citations are necessary, they would appear as follows:

[1], [2], [5], [8] – [10]

Note that each is bracketed. Note also that the first three citations stand alone and are separated by a comma and space. The final citation denotes a range and en-dash (not a hyphen) is inserted between the brackets.

These are the preferred formats. Some publications will accept a somewhat altered format (e.g., [1, 3, 5]) but always check your author guidelines. When in doubt, use the preferred methods.

Citing Authors More Than Once

When making references to the same author(s), it is not necessary to type the author’s name each time. You can merely refer to the same bracketed numeral used in the first citation. For example:

First citation:

Smith and Jones found that a higher percentage of people contract viruses during winter[7].

Subsequent citation:

In [7], it was determined that using antibacterial soaps and wipes were not as effective in preventing illnesses as once suspected.

Note the format in the second example using only the citation numeral with “in” placed before it.

If your reference has three or more authors, you use “et al.” instead of listing all the names. For example, if the authors of the first citation were “Smith, Jones, and Jackson,” the citation would be as follows:

Smith et al. [7] found that a higher percentage of people contract viruses during winter [7].

Check author guidelines to determine whether et al. should be italicized.

References in General

The reference list corresponds to the numeric citations and is formatted sequentially, not alphabetically. There are three specific reference parts:

  • Name of author(s): First initial or name followed by a comma and complete last name.
  • Title of article/printed/electronic work: In quotation marks.
  • Title of publication: In italics.

 

The following formatting rules apply:

  • List references sequentially.
  • Use citation numerals in brackets before each reference.
  • Place numbered brackets flush left.
  • Use single spaces within references and double spaces between them.
  • Indent the reference text.

 

Some parts of references, such as punctuation and dates, might vary. Be sure to check guidelines for examples of several reference types not provided here.

Electronic Documents

Following are some examples of references for electronic documents.

E-books

[5]        B. Jacobs, R. Smith, and D. Jones, Software for Gaming, 2nd ed. Reading, MA: Addison Wesley, 2003. [E-book] Available: (name of source).

Journal Article Abstract

[17]      B. Smith and P. Miller, “Bitcoins,” Information and Software Technology, vol. 100, no. 860 p. 333, June 2010. [Abstract]. Available: (website name). [Accessed December 25, 2017].

Journal Article (open access)

[2]        B. Smith, “Hypertext hype,” Current Issues in Education, vol. 6, no. 12, July, 2005. [Online serial]. Available: (website URL). [Accessed date].

Note the spacing, punctuation, and fonts of each. For more complete examples, please refer to the link above.

Printed Documents

The following are some (fake) examples of references from books with one or more authors:

[1]        W. K. Smith, Making Sense of Networks. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Press, 2005.

[2]        J. L. Smith and B. H. Jones, Eds., Sensory Signals. New York: Wiley-Liss, 2006.

Note in the second example, the names presented are denoted as the “editors” of the book.

When referencing a section from a book, the format would be as follows:

[3]        E. D. Smith and B. D. Jones, “Sensory Receptors,” in Sensory Signals, J. L. Smith and B. H. Jones, Eds. New York: Wiley-Liss, 2006, pp-1-64.

When there are three or more authors, the same rules apply. The authors are listed using the same format.

Books or manuals are referenced by the organization name but use the same formatting structure as follows:

[1]        Council of Biology Editors, Scientific Style and Format: The CBE Manual for Authors, Editors, and Publishers, 6th ed., Chicago: Cambridge University Press, 2006.

[2]        IBM Corporation, New and Improved Software Systems, IBM Corporation, 2010.

Datasheets follow the same principles as those for electronic and printed matter but use the manufacturer’s name, name of the data sheet, and model or product identification code in the reference. For example,

[10]      Texas Instruments, “R&S®RTO oscilloscopes,” 74HC4051 datasheet, Nov. 2016.

The same rules apply to references for government publications and conference proceedings.

General Rules

These are just a few of the many types of references that you might encounter in your technical writing. Most references will follow similar IEEE formats. In addition, reference programs such as EndNote encompass IEEE style and some of its variants. Always check with your department or journal on its preferred reference style to ensure accuracy.

Similarity Check: A Unique Plagiarism Screening Tool

Similarity Check

Manuscripts provide novel insights that reflect the authenticity and originality of the work when writing and sharing data. To combat plagiarism in manuscripts, CrossCheck (now Similarity Check) has been increasingly used to prevent plagiarism, or reduce the number of duplicate submissions. Similarity Check, powered by iThenticate, evolved as a collaboration between major publishers and CrossRef. It allows editors, publishers, authors, and readers to check submitted articles against a database of millions of other academic journals. This tool allows people to detect plagiarism using an automated text similarity checker.

Features of Similarity Check

After an article is uploaded, Similarity Check scans the manuscript for similarities to previously published content. It compares full-text manuscripts against more than 38 million articles and more than 20 billion web pages. You can check here if your journal uploads its information.

Of course, some writing will be very similar to various other articles. Hence, results are reviewed to determine the nature of the duplicated text. Nevertheless, several organizations use this software, including Springer, BiomedCentral, Adis, Birkhauser, and Bohn Stafleu van Loghum.  Meanwhile, other organizations, like the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), require all papers for proceedings and conferences be screened via a plagiarism detection process.

Volunteers or staff of various organizations then review the reports generated by Similarity Check to determine the nature of the similarity and if any action is warranted.

A Quick User’s Guide

Staff members of various publishing organizations and publications volunteers (e.g., authors, editors, etc.) upload new manuscripts into the database. This can either be done manually or might require some help from the publications volunteer.

When a publication reaches a threshold, such as 30% (as recommended by the IEEE), the person who has uploaded the manuscript is notified electronically. This threshold can be modified to any amount and is linked to an email alert system.

The submission is then reviewed. A report is generated that highlights similarities, which must be carefully reviewed to discern actual plagiarism from coincidental writing. The report shows the combined or total score of individual similarities. These reports can be modified based on similarity, content tracking, or largest matches.

Similarity Check for Authors from Aries Systems Corporation on Vimeo.

Similarity Check for Editors from Aries Systems Corporation on Vimeo.

What Your Results Mean

The similarity reports have several features:

Text is highlighted in a color and indicated by a number

The original source is then indicated on a side panel and is colored and numbered to match the in-text coding

The percentage of similarity of the article to an individual source is indicated for each article or source that shares common language

The summation of individual article similarity scores is presented

An individual must review this report and consider several variables, such as the extent of the similarity, the originality of the copied material (e.g., standard or routine language), the context of the similar material, and the attribution to author or source. When considering the individual similarity scores of each source, Springer recommends that a score of 1-5% requires no checking, >10% requires quick checking, and >20% requires thorough checking.

Important Considerations

Given the nature of publishing and academic writing, duplicated text might become unnecessarily flagged for several reasons. These can include when updating a systematic review, mentioning contributions of an author, self-citation, or “patch writing” that involves several small segments of routine language

In some instances, cultures vary on the nature of plagiarism. Some communities may believe that copying is a sign of respect while others value individuality or uniqueness. Furthermore, senior authors may not have been aware of a junior author’s missteps. Alternatively, authors may have granted permission to duplicate or reuse the text.

Ultimately, the integrity of a scientist is paramount to ensure that the research work is perceived with trust. Using Similarity Check’s report, an author can review what others are writing and ensure that his or her text does not inadvertently repeat the work of another author. As science progresses and becomes more competitive, the writing of scientists will come under greater scrutiny.

How to Withdraw Manuscript after Submission

Manuscript

You have just completed manuscript submission process for your target journal. The next steps would be initial review by the editor followed by the peer review by the invited experts. During these steps, you wait for the decision.  However, in some cases, you may want to withdraw your manuscript. For instance, you may want to add or revise important points or you may want to correct some errors discovered after the manuscript submission. In these cases, it ends with your manuscript “withdrawn” from the peer-review process, and typically, its ID number deleted from the journal system.

Another common reason to withdraw your submission after acceptance and before publication is that authors suspect or discover a glaring error, possibly when checking the proofs. This error may require removing existing data, performing some experiments again. It may also require doing supplementary analysis. This may seem additional work, but it can help researchers avoids any future retractions

In addition, when authors do not want to make all research data available to the journal (sometimes required by the journals) for copyright or commercial reasons or when they realize that they have made submission to a potential predatory journal, authors can withdraw their paper. There are unethical reasons for a withdrawal though, such as being “unaware of the publication fees”, or just wanting to submit to a higher-impact journal.

A final reason for withdrawal is impatience with peer review. This is not a black or white issue. Nevertheless, at some journals, the editor may not have yet sent your paper for peer review, even after 1-3 months or a peer reviewer has failed to submit his or her report even after ~4-6 months.  This seems unreasonable.

Tips for Manuscript Withdrawal

Timing and publication ethics-these two considerations should guide your action in making a manuscript withdrawal. The quicker you act, the better the outcome for everyone. At the scholarly journal a handling editor, if already assigned to your manuscript, will have to judge the merit of your request. For this to go smoothly providing facts are helpful for clear communication.

First, try the easiest way to withdraw the manuscript: doing it online via the journal submission system. In it, some journal publishers may have a tab, “withdrawing the paper”, or similar. However, this option may not work for many journals. For example, it seems that the widely used ScholarOne Manuscripts system does not offer this option for an online manuscript withdrawal.

If that does not work, immediately contact the editor handling your submission or the editorial office of the journal. Write a clear and concise letter, signed by all authors, explaining the situation surrounding the manuscript, and the reason(s) for its withdrawal. Often, through the online manuscript submission process, there is a tab or link to directly “contact the editor”, or you can look up his/her email from the website. At some journals, however, it may not be always necessary to give a full, in-depth explanation for the manuscript withdrawal.

There is a big difference between asking for manuscript withdrawal within 1 week of submission and during or after peer review, say in 1-6 months. In the former case, it should not be a problem. However, in the latter case, it is trickier, if not impossible because the journal may forbid it, and you should clearly argue your case on scientific reasons to resolve any misconduct.

Hopefully, you should receive an acknowledgment letter. This may acknowledge the withdrawal, or ask you for more information to adjudicate the issue on more scientific grounds. For the latter, it is important to cooperate and respond in time.

Possible Consequences

Ensure not to simultaneously submit your paper to more than one scholarly journal. This is a standard code of publication ethics. It is unethical to withdraw a manuscript, just because it was accepted sooner elsewhere. Nevertheless, what if you do not get a reply even after multiple requests. Write to the editor-in-chief this time indicating your plans to revise the manuscript, and eventually go ahead with a new submission at another journal after the acknowledgment.

Most journals are not keen on withdrawing your submission. It wastes their resources and the author may incur a penalty for manuscript withdrawal. This penalty could range from 200 to 1000 USD, depending on the journal. This information, however, should be transparent and clearly stated on the journal’s policy webpage. If authors withdraw manuscript on unethical grounds, journals may also blacklist the author and co-authors for future publications.

Some Parting Advice

Be courteous and keep records of all email correspondence with the journal publisher, when planning for manuscript withdrawal. To avoid such situations and any penalties, take extra time to check over your work before the manuscript submission.

PubPeer 2.0: Post-Publication Peer Review

PubPeer

Traditionally, both informal and formal peer review happens before a paper is published in a journal (or a book). However, the peer review process is struggling to do its job properly. One key task of peer review is to identify flaws and bad science before publication.

With an emerging alternative,  post-publication peer review the scientific community can engage in discussion and comment on shared research papers on relevant platforms. One such web-based platform is PubPeer. This should strengthen the self-correcting practice in science and improve its overall published quality.

PubPeer 2.0 is here!

 Founded in 2012, PubPeer, an online, moderated platform for discussing scientific publications, which originally begun as a “spare-time” project, has since cemented its presence as a platform for post-publication peer review. Starting in early 2013, its users could comment anonymously as so-called “Peers”. This factual and verifiable feedback has led to many editorial corrections, and even retractions because of discovered research misconduct.

Now, PubPeer has given itself an upgrade and new look. This PubPeer 2.0 is effectively a rewrite of the platform from the bottom up PubPeer has made changes and added new features for its users and readers.

How is PubPeer Better Used?

One big change is how users can identify themselves.  A signed account is still available and it is not anonymous to the readers who can access the website’s contents. However, choosing anonymity becomes now more secure and guaranteed. In addition, using the “tree of life” to assign pseudonyms, PubPeer users can now obtain an account with just a code (safeguarded by the user). The authenticity of your grey listed account requires vetting before approval. Therefore, it will be near impossible for anyone to know your real identity.

Another big change involves the improved reading and formatting of the peers’ comments. Since it began, PubPeer users had to follow certain guidelines. All the comments go through moderation (for facts and truth). Now, these comments related to either methods, images or more will be more professional and academic.  In addition, mathematicians and physicists might become more involved in PubPeer and its mission, because PubPeer 2.0 platform now supports LaTeX equations.

One new and thoughtful feature for users is the pre-viewing of comments (to detect any spelling and grammatical error). This should improve the quality of comments visible to the readers and the public. The comments now appear in a chronological order to the readers with embedded links.

PubPeer: Pros & Cons

For-profit subscription journals generally remain uninterested in the post-publication peer review process.  as it may cast doubt on the quality of their journal content. With PubPeer 2.0, it is possible to help correct and weed out the low-quality-yet-already-published science. Such platforms also offer an alternative to the traditional peer review landscape dominated by the academic journal publishers.

Moreover, PubPeer 2.0 centralizes the post-publication peer review process. This makes it easy to search from anywhere by anyone.  With the help of this detailed peer review via a 3rd-party platform, scientists might become encouraged to take more care in the design, execution, and reporting of their research before publication.

A drawback still persists. By allowing post-publication peer review develop along a Facebook or Twitter model may make it difficult to share objective reviews on flaws and merits. This will not be fair to those qualified researchers trying to do sound science.

Finally, does the enhanced anonymity of the peers become a good or bad thing? Depends on who you ask. Certainly, it helps junior researchers participate in peer review without reservations when reviewing the work of their peers or experienced researchers. When coupled to an open post-publication peer review process, it can also mitigate any potential conflicts of interests. These conflicts can sometimes arise between peer reviewers assigned by the journals and authors of the paper.

Peering Ahead…

With PubPeer 2.0, the online platform for post-publication peer review has improved. A key pillar of PubPeer is strong anonymity in peer review. However, this might rub the open access promoters the wrong way. Therefore, it is likely poised to grow in influence and to get much busier.

What are your views on this model of post-publication peer review? Is it bound to find more support? Share your thoughts in the comments section!

How to Find Open Access Journals to Publish Papers

Open Access Journal

The open access model has garnered support from scientific communities over the years.  OA allows members of the public to access the content without permission and paywall barriers. OA journals make it easier for scientists to share their data with a wide audience. Most research done in public institutions use government research grants. These public institutions also pay journal subscription fees to allow their staff and students to read these journals. This means that public funds help in supporting and accessing research. This is one of the reasons that governments and funding agencies support OA journals.

Types of Open Access Journals

The open access model has evolved into many variants.

  • Megajournals: In this model, journals offer full open access for a relatively low article processing fee and high volume. These megajournals have an objective peer review. They also tend to offer rapid publication. PLOS One, BMJ Open, and Scientific Reports are examples of megajournals.
  • Delayed: These journals involve an initial embargo period. The journal chooses a time duration during which all their articles are behind the paywall. After that period, the articles are freely accessible. Let us say you choose to publish in a delayed open access journal in January 2017. If the journal has a 12-month embargo period, your article will remain behind the paywall until January 2018. As of 2018, your article will become fully open access. Some OA journals also allow self-archiving or green open access. In this model, the published version of the article exists behind the paywall. The journal allows you to deposit a copy of your paper in a public place. This could be your website or your institution’s repository. The version can be pre-print or post-print based on journal copyright policies.
  • Hybrid: These open access journals still offer a subscription service. They give authors the option to make their articles open access. If you decide to publish your article as open access, you have to pay an article processing fee.
  • Flipped: These subscription-based journals have now changed into OA. For example, Nucleic Acid Research and Nature Communications.

Choosing an Open Access Journal

How do you find an open access journal to publish in? You can use following platforms to find OA journals:

  • DOAJ: You can find a list of open access journals in the Directory of Open Access Journals. The DOAJ also makes it possible for you to access content in OA journals.
  • ROAD: You can also use ROAD (Director of Open Access Scholarly Resources). ROAD identifies open access resources which have been given ISSN numbers. The corresponding ISSN records are updated. ISSN records are matched with coverage lists provided by indexing databases, registries, and journal indicators. This process creates bibliographic records of open access content.
  • SciELO: The Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO) is another option. It is a digital library of open access journals. SciELO is used for electronic publishing in developing countries. It was launched in Brazil in 1997. It hosts more than 1,161 OA journals and more than 500,000 open access articles.
  • Ulrich’s Knowledgebase: It has information on more than 300,000 periodicals. This list includes OA journals. Ulrich’s can be searched which makes discovery of open access journals easy. The database also includes links to full-text and other content.
  • BASE: Bielefeld Academic Search Engine is one of the most voluminous search engines especially for academic web resources available through open access.

Overleaf LaTeX: A Convenient Authoring Tool for Academics

Overleaf LaTeX

Most of the work published today is interdisciplinary and international, involving authors from different research areas and locations. In recent years, the cloud-based authoring tool, Overleaf has made sharing and publishing documents in an international environment much easier and effective.

The online platform allows real-time collaboration between different authors of a file and automatically generates a structured and fully typeset output in the background as they type. This means that authors can directly see a preview of their projects while they are working on them. Overleaf LaTeX can be used to create a range of documents including journal articles, slides, books, conference posters, and CVs.

Collaborative Writing

With this online tool, academics can collaboratively write and/or edit documents in Rich Text or LaTeX anywhere, anytime. The service allows them to share and invite colleagues to co-author, check, edit, or comment on a file without having to pass a manuscript around or deal with several versions of a document. It also minimizes errors and helps prevent long email discussions.

A basic version of Overleaf, which offers a storage space of up to 1GB and allows up to 60 files per project, can be used for free. However, if users require more storage or additional features, they can purchase the Pro or Pro + Teach versions. The service offers several benefits to authors, institutions, and publishers.

Overleaf for Authors

Thanks to its many interesting features, many institutions offer the Pro version to their members for free. Moreover, some publishers have partnered with Overleaf to simplify the submission process. For a number of journals, authors can use the readily available Overleaf LaTeX templates and submit directly from Overleaf to the journal’s editorial office.

Some of the main features of the online tool are intended to help authors write, edit, and submit documents faster and more efficiently.  The following list showcases the important features of Overleaf:

  • You can start working and collaborating online right away without having to install a software program.
  • You can see and edit your projects—or check the changes made by your colleagues—in real time from remote locations.
  • You can send a sharable secret link (assigned to every project) to your colleagues to start a collaboration. Only authorized users can have access to the corresponding file.
  • You always access the latest version. All the changes made by you or your co-authors are synchronized.
  • You can communicate with your co-authors by adding comments and/or notes to the files.
  • You can edit in Rich Text or LaTeX and easily switch between the two modes.
  • You can quickly rectify any error based on the alerts received. You can use various templates and features to create tables, prepare great presentations, draft journal manuscripts, compile theses, or create bibliographies.
  • You can create protected projects for enhanced privacy with the Pro version. You can also add and remove collaborators at any time.
  • You can use journal-provided manuscript templates and make direct submissions to journals from several publishers or to repositories instantly through an integrated feature.
  • You can incorporate reference managers such as Mendeley or Zotero when drafting your manuscripts.
  • Overleaf has launched a new LaTeX validation service, the details of which are available here.

Overleaf

Using Overleaf

Do you think that Overleaf could help you communicate your research better? Are you interested in learning more about this service? In the next part of this series, we will provide a user guide with information on how to sign up and work with different templates. You can also find more information in this short introductory video.

<div data-mce-bogus="all" class="mce-offscreen-selection" id="sel-mce_0" style="top: 2170.98px;">&nbsp;<span class="mce-preview-object mce-object-iframe" data-mce-object="iframe" data-mce-p-data-mce-fragment="1" data-mce-p-allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" data-mce-p-frameborder="0" data-mce-p-src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/g8Ejj0T0yG4?enablejsapi=1" data-mce-p-id="widget2" contenteditable="false"><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/g8Ejj0T0yG4?enablejsapi=1" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0"></iframe><span class="mce-shim"></span></span>&nbsp;</div>

If you are already an Overleaf user, we would love to hear about your experience with this exciting tool. Does it make your work with colleagues more effective? Is it easy to use? Which features do you like most? Please feel free to share your thoughts with us by commenting in the section below.