#publons

[myousuf78]

5 Minutes Information Channel Episode # 29 Publons Profile and Reviewer ...

[myousuf78]

5-Minutes information Channel Episode # 28 Publons the Peer review site?...

[bsoubeyr]

Publons, Microsoft Academic... des identifiants académiques pour Wikidata et la visiblité numérique

Publons, Microsoft Academic… des identifiants académiques pour Wikidata et la visiblité numérique

Lors des précédents ateliers HAL organisés à l’UPEM, de nombreuses ressources en ligne ont été abordées. Celles-ci vise à donner une meilleure visibilité numérique à ceux qui travaillent dans le milieu ou en appui à la recherche scientifique. Certains identifiants, comme celui de Publons (anciennement ResearcherID) peuvent être renseignés sur le CV HAL dans le widget correspondant.

On peut…

View On WordPress

[lindortech]

Academic Startup Publons Gives Peer Reviewers Credit For Their Work

Academic Startup Publons Gives Peer Reviewers Credit For Their Work

The traditional anonymous peer review process used in academic publishing is meant to ensure objectivity, but it means reviewers give up their moment for very small award. The lack of transparency is also vulnerable to exploitation, which can guide to flawed (if not fraudulent) research making it into prestigious publications. Publons, a platform for post-publication peer review, wants to address…

View On WordPress

[cogitoergodeusnonest]

Credit for reviewing & editing — it's about bloody time

Credit for reviewing & editing — it’s about bloody time

As have many other scientists, I’ve whinged before about the exploitative nature of scientific publishing. What other industry obtains its primary material for free (submitted articles), has its construction and quality control done for free (reviewing & editing), and then sells its final products for immense profitback to the very people who started the process? It’s a fantastic recipe for…

View On WordPress

[peerj]

PeerJ Partners with Publons - Reviewers Get More Credit

At PeerJ, we have been very impressed with Publons and their innovative approach towards giving Peer-Reviewers due credit for the work they do.

In addition to being a site for the ‘post-publication peer-review’ of articles, Publons also works with publishers to verify their peer-reviewers (and to confirm the fact that they conducted a peer-review). As a result, those individuals are then able to ‘claim’ their reviews at Publons and build up a profile which reflects their verified ‘reviewing activity’ across multiple journals or publishers. This is a unique and interesting solution to the problem of giving appropriate credit to reviewers and is very much in line with the PeerJ philosophy of giving due credit to all.

Therefore, we are very pleased to announce that PeerJ is the first publisher to enter into a formal partnership with Publons to facilitate this process. Although all of our public peer-reviews are reproduced under a CC-BY license (and hence are open for anyone to reuse) we are happy to have a more formal arrangement with Publons to make this happen in an ‘official’ manner.

How Does It Work? Provided the PeerJ peer-reviewer chooses to name themselves (something which ~40% of our reviewers choose to do); and provided the authors of the article also choose to make their review history public (something which ~85% of our authors do), then Publons will take a copy of that public peer-review from our site. We then email the reviewer to inform them that they can ‘claim’ the review at Publons (this is entirely optional - having an account at Publons is completely opt-in).  

What Are The Benefits? By registering themselves on the Publons site, individuals are able to add information about reviews they have conducted across different journals or publishers, and in this way build up a comprehensive record of their contribution to the scholarly publication process. At long last, reviewers are able to get credit for the vital, but usually unsung, work they perform across the whole of the scholarly publishing system!

See below, for an example of a profile showing with contributions from more than one publisher.

.

[fritfilter]

Scientists joke about things like the minimum publishable unit (also least publishable unit, or, for short “publon”). Maximizing the number of publications while minimizing their intellectual content doesn’t serve any broader interest. But it’s the inevitable result when the number of publications (which is objectively verifiable) becomes disproportionally important in relation to the quality of insight. Academic administrators have grown increasingly concerned with the “impact factor” of journals—i.e., how often the journal is cited. This, in turn, has led to pressure on researchers to cite for the sake of citing.

Federal Research Public Access Act, the Research Works Act, and the open-access movement. - Slate Magazine i wish it were as much a joke, but it is all too real a problem.