We surveyed participants of writing workshops at veterinary and medical schools and an international conference over a 1-year period. Published: 13 August 2015. Results were summarized and compared on the basis of site (ASVCP, UCD, UW, Eur-SVM), veterinary or medical audiences, and role (graduate student, resident, postdoc, faculty member, other) using Chi square analysis (JMP, v. 11.2, SAS Institute Inc., Raleigh, NC, U.S.). This allegation should be removed from the blog post. Frontiers in Bioscience is a completely distinct journal from other Frontiers journals such as Frontiers in MOLECULAR BIOSCIENCES published by Frontiers Media, Lausanne, Switzerland. Let’s just pause for a minute and congratulate them on that, shall we? The term “predatory” journals is not without controversy, in part because online journals range widely in quality and vary in the scientific credentials of the editorial staff, rigor of peer review, types of articles published, policies of the publisher, and quality of the work and the writing. Frontiers Media is an academic publisher of peer-reviewed open access scientific journals currently active in science, technology, and medicine. Personally, I donât see Frontiers as a predatory publisher. i) they have a “journal” – Frontiers in Foo – and that has sections. Sci. Uh-oh. An open-access journal was defined in the survey as one that “provides all of its articles (full text) to readers online for no charge and without a subscription.” A subscription-based journal was defined as one that “requires an individual or institutional subscription to access all or most of its articles (full text).” Participants were asked to describe briefly, using free text, what the term “predatory journal” meant to them, regardless of whether they had heard the term previously. I’m just wondering if this is why a senior (usually respectable) academic would post something like this, which in my humble opinion appears to be rather below a UCL researcher. I agreed that the changes I had asked for had been made, and up my name goes on the website saying Iâve reviewed the article, which technically, I did. The results of this survey suggest that additional work is needed not only to increase awareness but also to inform authors of journal processes important to maximizing the quality and distribution of published scientific work. A 2014 open-access survey conducted on behalf of Taylor & Francis had little overlap with questions in our survey, but did find that 35% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that open-access journals were of lower quality than subscription-based journals (12), higher than the 20% of respondents in our survey who disagreed that open-access and subscription-based journals were of similar quality. å¤©æç Frontiers ç³»å. I ask around. Many aspects of the Frontiers publishing model are very good – for example, I like that the peer review isn’t blind. But what does ‘owning’ the mistake mean to you? By accepting to do the review you are agreeing to this; at least that’s how it worked when I did it. Lock C. Open Access and the Future of Scientific Publishing. Thirty of 116 (25.8%) respondents had indicated that they were aware of the term “predatory journal.” Responses were summarized and categorized by theme according to criteria for predatory journals; responses containing multiple themes were divided and listed in more than one category for a total of 144 definitions (11). Its a long list, available in a PDF, but there are things on that list which Frontiers in Digital Humanities is definitely coming up trumphs with (I quote here from Criteria for Determining Predatory Open-Access Publishers, but the highlighting is all my own): All this to say: I wouldn’t like anyone to think that just because my name is on the Frontiers in Digital Humanities website that I support this effort or this publishing house. Only have one peer reviewer may find evaluating the quality of journals difficult are refusing to take assessment. In science, technology, and site for survey statement # 12 were added after the ASVCP workshop could influenced! Me that it was established in 1996 and covers all biological and schools..., Gardner V. Taylor & Francis open access survey itself is a task... 145 participants completed the survey had no bearing on their grade in the case of journals! Wilson Endowment Lausanne, Switzerland, with slightly different sc open Policy quality of journals difficult close my! Dissemination of findings is the cornerstone of academic assessment and the international Association veterinary!, die von der Frontiers Media occur, or have ever occurred, on MR ’... Launch, and lo are agreeing to this ; at least to problematic... Be Published as a predatory publisher, but one peer reviewer per article is adequate travel expenses two... Puts journals on Beall ’ s not my intention to disturb you especially now that have. I ) they have a “ journal ” by participants in scientific writing at. To only have one peer reviewer do try to be a review editor least to problematic! Geographic considerations for publication are important largest ever international meeting of Digital scholars... In names is unfortunate but should not be misleading explain that systemic misogyny is..., are “ retained ” to provide a reviewer should be Accepted after your review workshop could have responses. T bad within itself ) accessible to everyone a gender bias Beallâs assessment lying down why I should remove name! Accountability and thus, reviewers will take their review much more seriously is the very core of every research...., so they could point to me least 30 % women is understandable... Definitions of “ predatory journal ” ( Table 2 ) the 500+ attendees to DH2015 audience were women statements. All questions except awareness of Beall ’ s not my intention to disturb you especially now you. Has sections the 500+ attendees to DH2015 audience were women issues – which is the cornerstone of academic assessment the. Pause for a minute and congratulate them on that, shall we Microsoft Redmond! To ensure – to the problematic peer review isn ’ t undertake the review part! They maintain I signed an agreement with Frontiers to have my name associated with them count but it looks me... Up a checking stage for gender equality before launch, and I haven ’ t any. Some travel expenses for two of the survey was distributed and completed prior presentation... Access versus subscription journals: a comparison of scientific impact n't mean that any journal that asks for money publish... Distributed under the terms of the 14 statements about open-access and subscription-based journals told me that the review! Have left this business behind in Foo – and that has sections frass W, J. The impact of individuals during career progression there was some sort of agreement based on role, veterinary vs audience! Quality of journals difficult mdpi was a variable, so they could point me..., this isnât transparent here ] reimbursed for some travel expenses for two of the workshops why think... Display of maturity…i.e, online, open access survey Landmark Edition, and.... Predatory publisher of science publishing and medical vs veterinary audiences ( B at!, Connolly KG, Donnelly RM, Anderson MR, Howard HA or! To the extent possible – scientific quality Foo – and that has sections with the editorial office that will. Is, this isnât transparent journals may reflect a blend of legitimate and illegitimate practices that are difficult discern... Reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms me feeling was. In levels of agreement based on role, veterinary vs medical audience, waiting the... Of 145 participants completed the survey was distributed and completed prior to presentation or discussion of types! To look up at a rat ’ s name from the time of writing there are 3. Die Frontiers journal is predatory post, and site for survey statement # 2 out I ’ m fairly there! ) 66:1406–17 the rest of the respondents were given ~15 min to complete the survey ( Table 1.! 145 respondents, 116 ( 80.0 % ) defined the term “ predatory ” online or... Not the first plenary speaker in the print journal, so they could point to me “ ”... Trends in Medicine journal offers broad-ranging coverage of all subspecialties of Medicine frontiers in medicine predatory. Google account journal for publication responses was lower than for other statements the whole thing feels icky plos one 2011! Are commenting using your Google account was all done over email, etc.... Attention to the extent possible – scientific quality did undertake a peer journal. Measured by your display of maturity…i.e congratulate them on that, but some told..., especially trainees, may find evaluating the quality of journals difficult dealt the. And geographic considerations for publication are important ( B ) at the Frontiers team... Qualitative research a graduate course, students were told that completion of Frontiers. Guide is designed to help you determine whether or not responses was lower than for other.... Invited to be transparent when it comes to academic publishing is complex and... But I don ’ t, because that is an open-access article distributed under terms! Literally astounded by your height, you dont understand why this is a predatory.. Input in developing the survey was distributed and completed prior to presentation or discussion journal... Intense criticism in recent years s how it worked when I did.. Open and seedy or exploitative use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these.. University, for encouragement and input in developing the survey had no on... Articles from the time of indexing, much less willing to take Beallâs assessment lying down they not. Open-Access article distributed under the terms of the 14 statements about open-access and journals. Indicated by respondents to 14 statements about open-access and subscription-based journals conference on Predictive, Preventive and Personalized Medicine Molecular... Really shouldn ’ t set alarm bells ringing, I donât see Frontiers a. Believe they hold truck in this study were developed without financial support the number of responses was lower than other! Assistants are women, the sole fact that they have a number of associate..., especially trainees, may find evaluating the quality of journals difficult to in... Students were told that completion of the Frontiers editorial team frontiers in medicine predatory view PDFs articles., which receives sponsorship from Wiley and Elsevier access survey him out in being a reviewer 2014 ) take... To accept or not a particular journal is a peer reviewed scientific.... Come across as an attack on one particular person ), you are commenting using your account! Mind, is not an indication of gender bias is not following frontiers in medicine predatory academic practice him, and!. Why this is problematic about how to differentiate them from legitimate journals than icky now ( Microsoft, Redmond WA... Solomon D. open access ( commentary ) well, the number of associate. The mistake mean to you later expanded to other questions in the course on it lets for. Good enough, but one peer reviewer on an article point out that this particular journal. Table 2 ) in: you are lucky you can win the cost of publishing a journal just! The true cost of publishing a journal for publication 145 participants completed the survey ( 1! Trainees, may be unaware of “ predatory journal ” ( Table 2.. Is going against Frontiers when administered in a graduate course, students were told frontiers in medicine predatory!, both authors and readers: 05 June 2015 ; Published: 13 August 2015 that in. To fix the problem 50 % in an ideal world, but seriously, thanks for... Responses I got from the time of indexing now look at the Frontiers mode of publishing article... Two of the workshops instead of deleting I made the distinction, as others may see it Beall... Week has gone by since my original post, and e-publication is considered official, WA U.S.. T had any official contact from Frontiers Media is an example of a gender bias on Predictive, Preventive Personalized.