科学网

 找回密码
  注册

tag 标签: 声望

相关帖子

版块 作者 回复/查看 最后发表

没有相关内容

相关日志

开放存取期刊中高价未必总能买到高声望
热度 1 wangyk 2015-8-10 01:46
王应宽 编译 Wang Yingkuan Beijing, China 2015-08-10 开放存取期刊中高价未必总能买到高声望 Nautre 刊载文章,报道了 Zo Corbyn 利用名为 “ Cost Effectiveness for Open Access Journals ,” 的评价工具,对汤姆孙路透收录的 657 种开放存取期刊(其中 356 种 OA 期刊不收取任何费用)的收费价格与声望信息进行分析,通过计算论文影响值赋分与成本收益比,然后进行排序,得到性价比最高的 10 种 OA 期刊和性价比最低的 10 种 OA 期刊。可见,高收费的 OA 期刊未必影响力大,收费低或不收的 OA 期刊未必就影响力小。主要还要看论文本身的选题和质量以及传播的平台。 详情参见刊载在 Nature 网站的原文。 文章来源: http://www.nature.com/news/price-doesn-t-always-buy-prestige-in-open-access-1.12259 Price doesn't always buy prestige in open access Online comparison tool reveals which journals provide the biggest bang forthe buck. Zo Corbyn 22 January 2013 Article tools Rights Permissions Expand The open-access journals that charge the most aren't necessarily the mostinfluential, an online interactive tool suggests. The freely accessible tool,launched earlier this month, shows that a journal's fees do not correlateparticularly strongly with its influence, as measured by a citation-basedindex. “We have brought together a way of measuring prestige and price and comeup with a metric that can be used by authors to help them decide between thedifferent venues they could publish in,” says Jevin West, a network-science andbibliometrics researcher at the University of Washington in Seattle. West ledthe development of the online tool as part of the Eigenfactor Project, whichseeks alternative ways to rank and map science. The “real goal”, West says, is to help to create a transparent market inopen-access publishing. “We hope to clean up a little of the predatorypublishing, where publishers might be charging more than their value merits.” The tool, called Cost Effectiveness for Open Access Journals ,incorporates pricing and prestige information for 657 open-access journalsindexed by Thomson Reuters, including 356 that do not charge any fees. The data are plotted to show a journal's Article Influence (AI) scoreagainst the fee it charges per article. (Where charges are on a per-page basis,an article length of 15 pages is assumed, based on what the authors judge is atypical article length.) The AI score is calculated by dividing the EigenfactorScore 1 of the journal by the number of articlesin the journal, normalized so that the average journal has an AI equal to 1.Eigenfactor Scores are like impact factors in that they are based on citations,but they also take into account the source of the citations. Field data The plot can be filtered to look at any one of 35 subject fields. Doing soshows that some fields have a stronger correlation between the AI score and thefee charged, while others show very weak correlation. Journals covering thefield of molecular and cell biology, for example, seem to have a strongercorrelation than do those from physics or mathematics. But the tool also ranks journals' bang for the buck, with a table of cost-effectivenessvalues — which are calculated by dividing the journal's AI score by the priceto publish. Of the 301 fee-based open-access journals considered, the mostcost-effective was the Publication of the Astronomical Society of Japan (see Best-value journals ); the least cost-effectivewas the Journal of Physical Therapy Science (see Least-value journals ). Among the largestopen-access publishers, the Public Library of Science had three journals — PLoSBiology , PLoS Genetics and PLoS Medicine — ranked within thetop 15 journals for cost effectiveness. A BioMedCentral journal, the IrishVeterinary Journal , ranked among the lowest. Peter Suber, director of the Harvard Open Access Project in Cambridge,Massachusetts, welcomes the tool as a way to drive competition into the market.He adds, however, that he is sceptical about using a metric based solely oncitations to judge prestige. Bo-Christer Bjrk, an open-access researcher at the Hanken School ofEconomics in Helsinki, says that factors other than prestige — from the speedof the review process to layout — also could influence researchers' decisionsabout where to publish. But he agrees that the tool will be useful. Future improvements planned for the tool include incorporating journalsthat are only partly open-access; adding open-access journals outside thoseindexed by Thomson Reuters; and further refining subject categories. “We intendto include any journal that has some open-access ability,” says West. Best-value journals Fee-based open-access journals across all fields providing the greatest cost effectiveness. Ranking Journal Publisher Price (US$) AI Score Cost effectiveness 1 Publications of the Astronomical Society of Japan Astronomical Society of Japan $73 1.30 17.84 2 Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology Polish Physiological Society $64 0.51 7.98 3 Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention Asian Pacific Organization for Cancer Prevention $50 0.30 5.92 4 Journal of Clinical Investigation American Society for Clinical Investigation $1,500* 7.23 4.82 5 Climate of the Past European Geosciences Union $468* 1.78 3.81 6 Oceanography The Oceanography Society $500 1.90 3.80 7 DNA Research Oxford University Press $500 1.90 3.79 8 Biogeosciences European Geosciences Union $471* 1.75 3.71 9 Molecular Medicine Feinstein Institute for Medical Research $500 1.77 3.54 10 The Cryosphere European Geosciences Union $465* 1.59 3.41 *Journals charge per page. Fee assumes 15-page articles. Least-value journals Fee-based open-access journals across all fields providing the least cost effectiveness. Ranking Journal Publisher Price (US$) AI score Cost effectiveness 1 Journal of Physical Therapy Science Society of Physical Therapy Science $4,030* 0.07 0.018 2 Journal of Engineering Technology American Society for Engineering Education $1,125* 0.03 0.027 3 Journal Of The Food Hygienic Society Of Japan Japanese Society for Food Hygiene and Safety $1,920* 0.06 0.033 4 Revista Brasileira de Zootecnia Sociedade Brasileira de Zootecnia $2,420* 0.08 0.034 5 Biomedical Research Scientific Publishers of India $1,125* 0.05 0.041 6 BioScience Trends International Advancement Center for Medicine Health Research $2,100* 0.09 0.042 7 Pakistan Journal of Botany Pakistan Botanical Society $1,300* 0.07 0.051 8 Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering Architectural Institute of Japan $1,600 0.08 0.051 9 Irish Veterinary Journal BioMed Central $1,625 0.08 0.051 10 African Journal of Agricultural Research Academic Journals $600 0.03 0.054 *Journals that charge per page. Fee assumes 15-page articles. Nature :doi:10.1038/nature.2013.12259 References West, J. D., Bergstrom, T. C. Bergstrom C. T. Coll. Res. Libr. 71, 236–244 (2010). Showcontext Related stories Predatory publishers are corrupting open access Predatory publishers are corrupting open access Europe joins UK open-access bid More related stories
个人分类: OA开放存取|7274 次阅读|1 个评论
撤稿对个人声望有什么影响?
热度 1 editage 2012-9-7 15:07
尊敬的 Eddy 博士:   最近我收到一封期刊编辑部的邮件让我很难过,我的文章已经发表在该期刊上,但他们在我的数据跟统计分析找到错误,所以要求撤稿。我很担心如果我有撤稿记录的话对我的声誉会有影响。我可能没法申请到下一个研究基金。请说说您的建议好吗?   很遗憾期刊做出撤稿的要求。建议你能正面回复期刊然后接受撤稿的要求,如此一来,期刊会发出撤稿公告通知读者由于资料问题经由期刊与作者双方同意撤下稿件。   虽然撤稿是大家不乐见的结果,也有可能对研究人员有负面影响,但如果是真正的错误导致撤稿,而你又能注明错误并遵循科学利益时,将可把个人声誉及申请基金的伤害降到最低。   简短说明如下:   撤稿有 2 大原因:第 1 ,真正的人为错误,例如实验数据或统计分析错误;第 2 ,学术不端行为,像是捏造、隐蔽利益冲突、违反道德规范和剽窃等。如同我们所知,后者比前者情节重大许多,但不幸的目前类似案例持续增加。学术不端行为不仅仅严重伤害科研成果价值,更对研究学者的地位及职涯发展不利。如果作者否认该情事并拒绝撤稿将会使状况更严重。这会迫使期刊对作者的回应发表极度负面的反馈,这无疑对作者声望造成无法抹灭的污点。   根据 国际发表道德协会 发行的 学术不端指南 (英文),其目的是保护科研诚实正直,而不是惩罚作者。期刊编辑会考虑撤稿的根本原因是有怀疑科研文章可信度的确实信息。   如果期刊编辑有明确理由相信任何期刊发表文章有可疑的数据,他们会首先调查该案例。如果数据错误不大,期刊会发出更正声明说明错误,但如果调查结果不确定,期刊会针对该文章发出关注声明。撤稿是最后的选项,只有在数据错误过大和影响整个研究结果可信度时才会做出的决定。   期刊并不会从撤稿获得好处,实际上,频繁的撤稿会降低期刊的声誉同时让读者质疑期刊同行评审过程。依照目前的情况看来,我建议你与期刊编辑站同一阵线,同意撤下你的研究。在申请国际基金时,诚实提供期刊撤稿声明,基金审核单位就知道你的撤稿是由于真正的人为错误而不是行为不端。最后,持续追求好科学,发表高质量研究,你的努力与成果质量会说话并将真正人为错误的撤稿造成的负面影响降到最低。加油! ∷ Eddy 博士国际期刊发表支持中心内容由 意得 辑 论文发表 专家 团队 支持提供 ∷ 【意得辑提供专业 英文论文编校 、 学术论文翻译 、 英文期刊发表一站式服务 www.editage.cn 】 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 此文同步刊载于 意得辑专家视点 频道: http://www.editage.cn/insights/eddy/撤稿对个人声望有什么影响?
个人分类: 国际发表要闻|7572 次阅读|1 个评论
哪些学科能给学校带来声望,给个人带来经济效益?
panfq 2008-12-18 10:00
(转自光明网 作者 UniReview) http://blog.gmw.cn/u/shuimt/archives/2008/38682.html 生科、化工与材料:有重大突破和给学校带来声望、给个人带来经济效益的学科。 到生科学院,才算大开眼界,深受教育。敞亮的办公室,配备良好的实验室设备, 30 出头的年轻教授,……这使那些如今 40 多岁、头发花白还在为评职称奔波的社科教师自惭形秽。 就经济收入来说,该学院一位年轻教授仅 2007 年一年发表的高层次论文津贴收入,就达 7 万多,因为他一年所发的文章被 SCI 收录就达 14 篇, 14*5000=7 万。更不用那数目可观的课题经费。 整个生科院去年高层次论文 38 篇,共奖励 16 万,平均每篇 4210 元;其次是化工学院, 37 篇,共奖励 133000 元,平均每篇 3954 元;材料学科 33 篇,共奖励 103500 元,平均每篇 3136 元;其他理工学科每篇均在三千以下。社会人文学科(除了办班多的经济管理)则很难望其项背。 虽然这样统计不尽合适,论文的奖励要看论文发表的期刊档次,平均数字还应该考虑该院人才数量,但从中也可以看出一些学校资金的流向。也可以看出国家、学校投资哪些学科才能尽快出效果,为学校、为国家争光。生物科学、材料科学也是有可能获得创新成果、创造经济效益的学科。 看你从事的社会人文学科哪有此殊荣?国内发一篇核心文章 ,不倒贴就算不错了。与 SCI,EI 更不沾边。 看看人家的工作,才知道什么叫“ 科学 ” ,什么叫硬(梆梆的)科学,什么叫软(蛋)科学?什么叫与市场贴近的学科,什么叫与市场远离的学科?什么叫学术资本? 那些只知纸上谈兵的软(蛋)学科赶快滚蛋吧。不过,社会人文学科告诉你,要有一颗平静的心,要置身于功利之外。如果只看重经济效益,只恨你当初选错了学科,如同投错胎一样。 一年发表 14 篇被 SCI 收录的论文,其中的经验值得学习,这些论文 多发表在 生化生理研究通讯、 分子、 分子生物学杂志上。希望该作者在这些领域能有重大突破。
个人分类: 高等教育|4468 次阅读|0 个评论

Archiver|手机版|科学网 ( 京ICP备07017567号-12 )

GMT+8, 2024-6-2 20:47

Powered by ScienceNet.cn

Copyright © 2007- 中国科学报社

返回顶部