[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Open Access means sloppy publications?
- To: "Peter Banks" <email@example.com>, <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Subject: RE: Open Access means sloppy publications?
- From: "David Goodman" <David.Goodman@liu.edu>
- Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 23:02:53 EDT
- Reply-to: email@example.com
- Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org
Dear Peter, By "rather common" I did not mean universal, and I correct my wording to: "A not uncommon practice among low quality titles..." I suggest that perhaps readers (who normally try to read good articles) and certainly editors of good journals, might try the following exercise: Examine some of the journals in the lowest fifth or so of the ISI impact factor rankings in any field with which one is familiar, and then to remember that there are many journals even below that in quality, as ISI is selective. Then look at references to articles in those journals that are 5 or 10 years old, and see what portion have had no citations whatsoever. (I do not imply that ISI impact factors are a precise tool for this, but they will show the broader differences within a particular field.) Dr. David Goodman Associate Professor Palmer School of Library and Information Science Long Island University email@example.com -----Original Message----- From: Peter Banks [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] Sent: Tue 5/3/2005 8:47 AM To: email@example.com; David Goodman Subject: RE: Open Access means sloppy publications? I agree with the basic contention that there both quality and shoddy peer review systems in all types of publications. However, I don't want anyone to think that the process you describe in the first paragraph represents anything close to the norm in respected journals. We, and many other publishers, have invested heavily in both human resources and infrastructure to ensure that peer review is as rigorous and impartial as it possibly can be. Like many top journals, we have created and constantly update an extensive database of reviewers whose work is itself evaluated and scored both for timeliness and quality. It is untrue that there is a "common practice" of "an editor sending out copies to two workers whose standards are as low as those of the prospective author's." If that were the case, we could save ourselves a few hundred thousand dollars and decide publication on the basis of a coin toss. Certainly external peer review is imperfect. But its imperfections are generally not the type of gross negligence you describe. Peter Banks Publisher American Diabetes Association 1701 North Beauregard Street Alexandria, VA 22311 703/299-2033 FAX 703/683-2890 Email: firstname.lastname@example.org >>> David.Goodman@liu.edu 5/2/2005 10:02:43 PM >>> The process you describe is meaningless unless the editor selects appropriate reviewers and uses his judgment about their ratings. What you describe can become the rather common practice of an editor sending out copies to two workers whose standards are as low as those of the prospective author's, and following their expected recommendation to publish. Such journals can be found in all sectors of publishing. On the other hand, review by the editor guided by consultants, is no worse than the standards and knowledge of the editor. Such journals with high standards can also be found in many fields of publishing. The use of the unqualified term "peer review" by Ulrichs, by librarians, and by teachers, as meaning "high academic qualitity" is not justified. Perhaps it is retained as a standard term because it is so conveniently flexible. Dr. David Goodman Associate Professor Palmer School of Library and Information Science Long Island University email@example.com
- Prev by Date: RE: ASPET Makes Accepted Manuscripts Freely Accessible
- Next by Date: US University OA Resolutions Omit Most Important Component
- Previous by thread: RE: Open Access means sloppy publications?
- Next by thread: RE: Open Access means sloppy publications?