Open-Access Academic Articles Requires Peer-Review Makeover: Consistency Is the Key

被引:0
|
作者
Ostafinski, Witold [1 ]
机构
[1] Pontifical Univ John Paul II Krakow, Krakow, Poland
关键词
Open Access model; traditional peer-review process; academic journals; open access peer review; academic manuscript publishing; history of Open Access;
D O I
10.15633/pch.4080
中图分类号
B9 [宗教];
学科分类号
010107 ;
摘要
The internet has greatly altered the way that people and institutions communicate. One of the most recent changes is the growth of the Open Access (OA) model, where research articles are provided free of charge to readers online. Such changes are having a domino effect on traditional communication. In most cases, articles in professional journals have been evaluated by a strict peer-review system. However, due to the inherent problems with these peer reviews, such as the length of time it takes referees to complete their analysis and the reviewer's personal biases and potential unethical behavior, there is a growing consensus that a different review method needs to be developed for OA articles. In addition, the internet has led to the development of many new professional journals, which range from poor to excellent, based on the articles accepted. Unfortunately, some journals are being published solely for monetary gain from high author fees. Presently, different review methods are being suggested or implemented for articles, such as ranking systems, online commentaries and crowdsourcing, Also, various institutions are publishing lists that rate academic journals on their quality level. Such experimentation of review models is important. However, after the trial period, the primary OA sources need to agree on using the same review model. Consistency of evaluation is critical for readers to be able to make objective comparisons of scholastic articles from one OA site to another.
引用
收藏
页码:243 / 256
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Leveraging peer-review aspects for extractive and abstractive summarization of scientific articles
    Majadly, Muhammad
    Last, Mark
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF DATA SCIENCE AND ANALYTICS, 2024,
  • [42] Open access, open data and peer review
    Ule, Jernej
    [J]. GENOME BIOLOGY, 2020, 21 (01)
  • [43] Open access, open data and peer review
    Jernej Ule
    [J]. Genome Biology, 21
  • [44] Open-access mega-journals The future of scholarly communication or academic dumping ground? A review
    Spezi, Valerie
    Wakeling, Simon
    Pinfield, Stephen
    Creaser, Claire
    Fry, Jenny
    Willett, Peter
    [J]. JOURNAL OF DOCUMENTATION, 2017, 73 (02) : 263 - 283
  • [45] Free and open-access satellite data are key to biodiversity conservation
    Turner, W.
    Rondinini, C.
    Pettorelli, N.
    Mora, B.
    Leidner, A. K.
    Szantoi, Z.
    Buchanan, G.
    Dech, S.
    Dwyer, J.
    Herold, M.
    Koh, L. P.
    Leimgruber, P.
    Taubenboeck, H.
    Wegmann, M.
    Wikelski, M.
    Woodcock, C.
    [J]. BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, 2015, 182 : 173 - 176
  • [46] Peer-Review and Academic Archaeology: Quality, Epistemology and Science Policies
    Diego Salazar
    Horacio Ramírez
    Sebastián Yrarrazaval
    Amapola Saball
    Andrés Troncoso
    José Rogan
    Clara Correa
    [J]. Archaeologies, 2019, 15 : 227 - 253
  • [47] Peer-Review and Academic Archaeology: Quality, Epistemology and Science Policies
    Salazar, Diego
    Ramirez, Horacio
    Yrarrazaval, Sebastian
    Saball, Amapola
    Troncoso, Andres
    Rogan, Jose
    Correa, Clara
    [J]. ARCHAEOLOGIES-JOURNAL OF THE WORLD ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONGRESS, 2019, 15 (02): : 227 - 253
  • [48] An Intramural Peer-Review Concept to Support Development in Academic Medicine
    Jennifer D. Newcomb
    Richard F. Lockey
    [J]. Medical Science Educator, 2021, 31 : 411 - 415
  • [49] Patient compliance is key to the success of an open-access colonoscopy program
    Raju, GS
    Boening, SK
    Mielsch, EJ
    Jafri, SF
    Bhutani, MS
    Szauter, K
    Snyder, N
    Nath, SK
    Faruqi, S
    Pasricha, PJ
    [J]. GASTROINTESTINAL ENDOSCOPY, 2003, 57 (05) : AB112 - AB112
  • [50] An Intramural Peer-Review Concept to Support Development in Academic Medicine
    Newcomb, Jennifer D.
    Lockey, Richard F.
    [J]. MEDICAL SCIENCE EDUCATOR, 2021, 31 (02) : 411 - 415