The overall goal of publication is to benefit science by making high-quality research accessible to everyone. ç SCI ç³»åï¼ä¸ä¸ªæ¯å¤©æçï¼å¦ä¸ä¸ªåæ¯æ¬§ç¾ççã. Professor Bishop covers more about the history of the platform and other recent public statements made by academics over how they view it – it’s worth a read, so I won’t cover this ground again here, but it shows that this isn’t just a paranoid rant from me: those considering publishing in this venue should be very careful. And Frontiers in Digital Humanities are refusing to take my name off their website. Predatory publishers are corrupting open access (commentary). I stress that when his senior editorial board reaches gender parity, we can revisit this, and I would be happy to support him and his work on this, if he can find women for his senior editorial board. If you read into the comments section of that post, the author herself, points out that the shortfalls of Frontiers are common across many many journals and “has led to a revelation that all publishers are as bad as each other..” Thus, I’d like to say, in contrast, that not all journals are as good as Frontiers either. As the Editor-in-Chief of Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences, a journal that is part of the publisher Frontiers, I feel compelled to correct an error in this blog post. It’s about standing up for what you believe in – and as I point to in my update to my post, there are other senior researchers also questioning the Frontiers mode of publishing, so I’m not alone. You, personally, allowed this to happen. 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. An integral aspect of publishing is selecting a journal that is of appropriate topic and scope, respected among other researchers in the discipline, and widely indexed and accessible to readers to permit effective dissemination of the work. Formats and venues included a 1-day workshop at the annual meeting of the American Society for Veterinary Clinical Pathology (ASVCP) in Montreal, Canada (November 2013); a 1-day workshop at the UCD School of Veterinary Medicine (December 2013); a 1-unit graduate course at the UCD School of Veterinary Medicine (January 2014 and April 2014); a seminar series at the University of Wisconsin-Madison (UW) School of Veterinary Medicine; a 2-h seminar at the UW School of Medicine and Public Health (March 2014); a 1-day workshop at the UCD School of Medicine, Clinical and Translational Science Center (August 2014); and a 1-day workshop at a Faculty (School) of Veterinary Medicine in southern Europe (Eur-SVM) (September 2014). I have asked for my name to be removed in protest for gender balance issues in their senior editorial board appointments,Â but “To remove it would… cause damage to the author of that article”. In this study, we assessed awareness of open-access and predatory journals among prospective authors attending scientific writing workshops; our long-term goal was to inform educational goals for the workshops. Frontiers of Medicine is dedicated to publishing original research and review articles on the latest advances in clinical and basic medicine with a focus on epidemiology, traditional Chinese medicine, translational research, healthcare, public health and health policies. I was surprised when they sent me the journal article to review â given it was written by Frederic alone. King’s College London That’s right! Nevertheless, data are conflicting on citation advantages. I’ve reviewed for many other journals, both in DH and beyond, and am happy to see other journals flourish (DHQ isn’t for profit, and we’re snowed under!) Participants were informed that the survey was anonymous, its completion was optional, and results would be shared and used to guide and improve the content of future workshops and courses. And in the break I find him, and talk to him in person. 496 people? Vet. I had trusted Frederic. I dont mean this to come across as an attack on one particular person. Peer-review processes can be identified by browsing a journal’s website or guidelines to authors, discerned through direct or indirect experience with a journal, and surmised by critically evaluating the quality of articles published in the journal of interest. Frontiers is based in Lausanne, Switzerland. See how this is a professional development opportunity I wasn’t expecting: in retrospect, I now realise that if Iâve rejected a paper for complete rewrite, it should really go to others for peer review afterwards to get another opinion, but I didn’t make that stance at the time and felt pressurised by Frontiers in DH with their many emails. Explaining why they wont remove my name from Frontiers in Digital Humanities, Frederick Fenter, Executive Editor of Frontiers, said: “To remove it would… cause damage to the author of that article. Our survey did not explicitly address respondent experience with publishing, an aspect that could be included in future surveys, and responses may have been influenced by lack of publishing experience, especially among Eur-SVM respondents who likely had the least prior experience. They have ups and downs, like all journals, but they really appear to be consistently attempting to make good science open to the world via a innovative platform. The journal consists of three sections: Landmark Edition, Scholar Edition, and Elite Edition, with slightly different sc Sitting in the audience, waiting for the first plenary speaker in the opening ceremony, I open the conference bag, and lo! Through workshops and mentoring, we can educate authors about critical evaluation of articles and important aspects of publishing, guiding them to avoid predatory journals and select the best journal for their work. We surveyed participants of writing workshops at veterinary and medical schools and an international conference over a 1-year period. They are clearly not opposed to having female representation – they are trying to get it but didn’t have it at the time of launch for whatever reason. Frontiers Media SA is a publisher of peer-reviewed open access scientific journals currently active in science, technology, and medicine.It was founded in 2007 by a group of neuroscientists, including Henry and Kamila Markram, and later expanded to other academic fields. Published: 13 August 2015. Frontiers in Medical Case Reports serves authors and the scientific community by publishing high-quality, peer-reviewed content.. All articles published by Frontiers in Medical Case Reports are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. 12. In which a favour for a colleague leads to being associated with un-scholarly peer review practices, un-collegiate behaviour, and predatory open access publishing mechanisms. Respondents were faculty (18, 15.5%), postdocs (16, 13.7%), graduate students (46, 39.6%), residents (22, 18.9%), and other (14, 12.0%). In concluding, I’d like to point out that this particular Frontiers journal is just getting off the ground. At all venues, the survey was distributed and completed prior to presentation or discussion of journal types and selection. Also in the case of Frontiers in Medicine, someone is acting as editor, one way or the other. I think many researchers all over the world will complain in some way or another about the peer review process regardless of which journal or which exact process- every journal has its peer review pitfalls for someone, in your case with Frontiers, being the sole reviewer (but this does not seem to be the norm for frontiers journals anyway). Something isn’t right here. I would be setting up a checking stage for gender equality before launch, and rigorously policing it. J Qual Res (2001) 1:385–405. Is it standard practice then that reviewers who agree to this are just allowed to change their minds and expect the original agreement to be discarded? Figure 5. I think I’ve said all I have to say, for now, on this – I’m still disappointed in how all this unfolded, but I have work to do. This allegation should be removed from the blog post. In case there is any doubt, I no longer support Frontiers in Digital Humanities in protest at the fact that they only have men on their senior editorial board. I had worked with Frederic on running DH2014, still the largest ever international meeting of Digital Humanities scholars. I do not agree that gender bias is not reason enough to doom Fontiers. Xia J, Harmon JL, Connolly KG, Donnelly RM, Anderson MR, Howard HA. (2004) 27(4):122–3. Thank you for writing it. Of these definitions, 36/93 (38.7%) were by respondents who had indicated awareness of the term “predatory journal.” Twenty-nine of 144 (20.1%) definitions comprised themes unrelated to predatory journals, including high-quality journals; all these definitions were by respondents who had not previously indicated awareness of the term “predatory journal.”. I had worked with Frederic on running DH2014, still the largest ever international meeting of Digital Humanities scholars. doi:10.1177/146879410100100307. We look forward to hearing from your lawyers.” Responding to criticism regarding the gender issue of the Frontiers in DH board, Fenter said “Our CEO is a woman, 80% of our editorial office employees are women”. I’m fairly certain there was some sort of agreement that your name would be published as a reviewer? Next time I’m approached to review for a new journal, I’ll be a tonne more skeptical, and, sadly, less trusting. thanks. Even within the model of open-access journals, fees charged to authors vary widely from substantial fees to none, with some open-access journals being subsidized by institutions or government agencies. Its expensive to publish with them. ii) the editorial board as listed on the journal website is trumped up by the inclusion of guest editors that are on board for special issues, plus what Frontiers calls Review Editors. The editor-in-chief is Siamak Tabibzadeh. Our community needs more venues to publish in, Digital Humanities has a commitment to open access, and having helped set up an online, peer reviewed, open access, Digital Humanities journal myself, I know how difficult it is to get any established scholars to support you in the early days. Differences in levels of agreement based on role, veterinary vs medical audience, and site for survey statement #12. Butler D. The dark side of publishing. More qualified person should get the job, so to actually see if there is a gender bias in Frontiers, you would have to supervise their admission process. 1. Right-oh. It was established in 1996 and covers all biological and medical sciences. Many aspects of the Frontiers publishing model are very good – for example, I like that the peer review isn’t blind. Most respondents (120/145, 82.7%) agreed/strongly agreed that the decision to accept a manuscript should not be influenced by publication charges, but 50% (56/112) indicated that they “didn’t know” how publishing costs were supported. I hadn’t been able to check out the journal before getting involved in the peer review process – there was nothing to check out, given there was nothing online, and I had trusted Frederic. Thanks very much, Annalisa, for getting in touch – appreciated. ( Log Out / First, of course, I take to the twitter (as do others): Then I email Frederic and ask him to remove my name from the journal, as I can no longer give it my support. 4. But I was prepared to let the whole thing go, and chalk it up to experience (given I had indeed undertaken the peer review for them, and I did accept that the changes had been made to the journal article making it a much stronger paper than originally submitted), although I was decided I would not review for them ever again. Eur-SVM respondents, who had no awareness of the Science article, comprised a small and homogeneous group of graduate (Master’s) students who had recently completed their studies in veterinary medicine and had the least experience in publishing compared with other groups; their workshop also was held later than other groups (farthest date from publication of the Science article) and they were geographically distant from the U.S., so media exposure to the Science article was likely less. The highest proportion of “don’t know” responses (56/112, 50.0%) was for statement #12 (how publishing costs are supported), followed by statements #5 (47/144, 32.6%) and #8 (45/143, 31.4%), which addressed the rigors of the peer-review process and ethical policies. Annalisa Pastore Recently I was invited to be a review editor. They will not remove my name. Figure 1. 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. You mention that you’re on another DH journal editorial board…is it possible that you are threatened by the success of other Frontiers journals and are subconsciously (or even consciously) concerned that the success will extend to Frontiers in DH and thus, undermine your efforts with your own journal? I probably should have said âconflict of interestâ there, but the Digital Humanities community is so small, we often are asked to review things by people we know, and I think I can take an objective stance, so I undertook a careful review. Trends in Medicine Journal offers broad-ranging coverage of all subspecialties of Medicine. Nature (2013) 495:421–2. When there are lots of women around being very helpful, and here, in 2015, we have a new journal launched that can only find men to put in senior positions. Increasingly, agencies are requiring that funded research be published in open-access journals, making identification of legitimate journals with sound editorial policies even more important. I did undertake a peer review for them once, in good faith. You also state that Frontiers will not ‘own’ their mistakes but this is also a contradiction because in the CEOs email to you, she actively tries to engage with you in a polite manner, and she certainly does make it clear that they are aware of the issue and trying to find solutions (even from you). It seems that because you cannot have your way, you want Frontiers in DH to smoulder into ashes for ever having dared refuse your possibly unreasonable request? I get an email from Dr Kamila Markram, CEO & Co-Founder on Frontiers, on the 16th July 2015, trying to persuade me that Frontiers “are of course extremely sensitive about the representation on our external editorial boards” stating: we work hard to be demographically representative.Â We find that women, for whatever reason, are many times less likely to accept an editorial appointment, given comparable career advancement – much to my personal disappointment… because we are sensitive to the gender bias within academia and publishing, we do make an extra effort to seek out and approach women who will become part of the solution, become active editors in our journals and help change the field. Having reviewed for Frontiers I was aware when accepting to do the review that if accepted for publication that my name would be listed as a reviewer alongside the other metadata for the paper. But hey! Sensitivity to and awareness of cultural and geographic considerations for publication are important. Please can you tell me why you think having one peer reviewer per article is adequate? But now I have to be helpful to the wider online community to discuss what happens when you lend your name to a Frontiers publication. Personally, I donât see Frontiers as a predatory publisher. Responses were numbered and results entered into an Excel spreadsheet (Microsoft, Redmond, WA, U.S.). Change ), You are commenting using your Twitter account. Frontiers in Medicine citation style guide with bibliography and in-text referencing examples: Journal articles Books Book chapters Reports Web pages. Field Chief Editor of Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences. Question for clarification: when you are requesting your name/affiliation to be removed from the FinDH website do you mean from the web version of the paper/pdf (stating you were the peer reviewer)? Even more unfortunately, this blog piece comes across, as being driven by a personal reason (which has little place in science discussion) rather than a professional one. Frontiers Meetings Organizes International Conferences & Expoâs in USA, Europe & Asia in the fields of Life Sciences, Pharmaceutical Sciences, Healthcare and Engineering which covers all the subjects like Medical, Clinical, Nursing, Oncology, Neuroscience, Paediatrics, Pathology, Microbiology, Chemistry, Physics, Environmental Sciences, Materials Sciences etc., Significant differences in awareness were observed based on site (Figure 6), and a higher proportion of medical (11/28, 39.2%) vs veterinary (20/104, 19.2%) respondents was aware of the term “predatory journal” (P = 0.0329). Thirty-four of 142 (23.9%) respondents were aware of the DOAJ; 7/143 (4.8%) were aware of Beall’s list, 33/143 (23.0%) were aware of the term “predatory journal”, and 24/142 (16.9%) were aware of the Science article about predatory journals. The CEO does not respond. A predatory journal is one that will accept virtually any article as long as they are paid to publish that article. |, Veterinary Humanities and Social Sciences, http://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.html, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/08/health/for-scientists-an-exploding-world-of-pseudo-academia.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0, Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). Respondents attending the ASVCP workshop came from a variety of countries (Australia, Austria, Canada, Germany, Japan, South Africa, Sweden, Switzerland, and the U.S.). FastTrack Access: view PDFs of articles before they are indexed (âpre-publicationâ viewing). If you are lucky you can win the cost of publishing a journal article with them! Have updated. Do you realise that only appointing men to senior editorial positions (which is categorically what you have done with Frontiers in DH), and women to more junior positions (I hear 80% of your copy-editors are women! Why I do not trust Frontiers journals, especially not @FrontDigitalHum, online, peer reviewed, open access, Digital Humanities journal, http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fdigh.2015.00001/full, transparency and claims for revolutionising publishing. Figure 3. Read the latest articles of Frontiers in Laboratory Medicine at ScienceDirect.com, Elsevierâs leading platform of peer-reviewed scholarly literature åºçå¹´ä»½ï¼2014 å¹´æç« æ°ï¼70 æç¨¿å½ä¸çï¼53.57%. I always felt the best way to shift the balance is to be a part of the change by setting a positive example of achievement. Because our survey was used as part of each workshop itself, the face-to-face format was important; furthermore, respondents were unable to search for answers to questions or use online resources, making their responses a true reflection of their current awareness. I think it’s important to note here though that you are dooming the entirety of the Frontiers mode of publishing and its reputation across all of its journals by applying your experience with one of the their very young journals based on certain criticisms (eg gender bias, inadequate peer review, etc etc). Publishing in peer-reviewed scientific journals is the cornerstone of academic assessment and the gold standard for communication of research findings. As a result I’m left recommending that others in Digital Humanities do not go anywhere near Frontiers in Digital Humanities, to prevent any damage to themselves, or their own scholarly reputation. I’ve already detailed, above, how the peer review process left me feeling it was inadequate. This, in my mind, is not reason enough to doom Frontiers. I believe I rejected the article, stating that it needed a complete rewrite before resubmission, and provided guidance in order for that to happen, including the need for adequate referencing and examples, and pointing out where I just plain disagreed with the paper. Instructions: first, find the journalâs publisher â it is usually written at the bottom of the journalâs webpage or in the âAboutâ section.Then simply enter the publisherâs name or its URL in the search box above. This poor peer-review process is completely disgusting. Respondents also were asked to specify whether they were a graduate student, resident, postdoctoral researcher (postdoc), faculty member, or other. Differences in levels of agreement based on role, veterinary vs medical audience, and site for survey statement #3. If I were you, I’d be refusing to launch new journals in any field unless there were at least 30% female senior editors already appointed. Journals have been termed “predatory” when they present a seemingly legitimate face for an illegitimate publication process that lacks basic industry standards, sound peer-review practices, or a solid basis in publication ethics (7). *Correspondence: Mary M. Christopher, University of California-Davis, 4206 VM3A, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA 95616, USA, firstname.lastname@example.org, Front. Congratulations, you are now the peer reviewer in a substandard peer review process which isnât all as it seems, with its claims for transparency and claims for revolutionising publishing â the whole thing seemed like a predatory rush job. Nothing. Would I help him out in being a reviewer? Now, these guidelines makes for very interesting reading, and there are numerous stages where Frontiers in DH didn’t follow the rules – only one peer review, instead of two (despite the hundreds of editors! This ensures accountability and thus, reviewers will take their review much more seriously. Authors, especially those with little experience, may find evaluating the quality of journals difficult. Croat Med J (2013) 54:403–6. I stress that sexism in academia is an important issue for me, and I have to take a stand against such blatant exclusion of women from the academic commons. Vet. Lock C. Open Access and the Future of Scientific Publishing. Uh-oh. And for the record, I do take to Twitter and all these other social media places because I’m not claiming to be a respectable scientist in digital humanities. In case you think this is a hatchet job, I’ve been telling Frederic and the journal editors for two weeks now that I intend to talk about it publicly if we cannot get it sorted out: they have had every opportunity to act in a collegiate manner, but I dont believe they have. I will repeat my call regarding gender and the make up of editorial boards: these Equal Opportunity Research Publishing guidelines should have some consideration for the constituency of the boards, including gender representation, and it wouldn’t be hard for them to insert a clause about this on page 9 if they truly were invested in supporting women in academia. I’m sorry if this revelation makes you uncomfortable in any way…. BINDERS FULL OF WOMEN, I tell you. Publishing in peer-reviewed scientific journals is the cornerstone of academic assessment and the gold standard for communication of research findings. The workshop at UC Davis School of Veterinary Medicine was supported by a grant from the Virginia Perry Wilson Endowment. Just appoint women, it’s not very difficult…… I think pressure like this (boycot junior functions) is needed to change these practices. Department of Basic and Clinical Neuroscience Dear Melissa, your blogpost has just been read among the commentators at Beall’s blog right here: http://scholarlyoa.com/2015/08/11/frontiers-launches-oa-library-science-journal/, It seems some commentators are using your entry to take a hack at Frontiers while others are taking the other side… One commentator suggested your experience could be just the way scientific publishing works even without any malicious input from anybody’s side and she/he implied that you unintentionally delayed the said paper for 7 months with the potential of prolonging further by requesting to remove your name as reviewer, hence “cause damage to the author of that article”. doi:10.1038/495433a, 5. Of the 142 respondents who answered, 33 (23.0%) indicated awareness of the term “predatory journal”; 34 (23.9%) were aware of the Directory of Open Access Journals; 24 (16.9%) were aware of the Science “sting” article about predatory journals; and 7 (4.8%) were aware of Beall’s list. People make mistakes, sure (I certainly do) – but when people don’t want to own their mistakes, or try to change, then we have an issue. , more important, much less willing to take my name associated with them you... Also in the publishing group has been subject to intense criticism in recent.... Those review editors are men, btw ) and commented: this is a predatory.. And Brussels to DH2015, and its difficult to know what ’ s launch... Take Beallâs assessment lying down the history of peer review and publishing model, fair enough or... Open-Access and subscription journals: a comparison of scientific impact my heart signed an agreement with Frontiers have... Cultural and geographic considerations for publication are important are corrupting open access scientific journals the. Name from the publication per article is a tricky task, but some colleague told me that the majority them! You tell me why you think having one peer reviewer per article is a tricky task, but peer! ) by site for survey statement # 1 intention to disturb you especially that... An Excel spreadsheet ( Microsoft, Redmond, WA, U.S. ) Perry Wilson Endowment goal of publication to... Information on writing workshop participants based on role, veterinary vs medical,... Open-Access-Fachzeitschriften, die von der Frontiers Media is an academic publisher of peer-reviewed open access ( commentary ) to... Good faith, Received: 05 June 2015 ; Published: 13 August.. At the same time I strongly feel that you have the right to know what will new journal: in. And discussed with the Frontiers editorial team trainees, may find evaluating the quality of difficult. Hear from you!: but the whole thing feels icky science by making high-quality research accessible everyone!, how the peer review and publishing model, the senior editors are at! Largest ever international meeting of Digital Humanities are frontiers in medicine predatory to remove someone ’ s now look at the criteria determining. International meeting of Digital Humanities scholars in Sydney, Australia, not Frederic, for getting touch. Site for survey statement # 3 access ( commentary ) London: Taylor & Francis open access journals... Medicine & Molecular Diagnostics September 14-15, 2017 FastTrack access: free access to articles until articles indexed. I did it literally astounded by your display of maturity…i.e if your maturity measured! Ever occurred, on MR Beall ’ s now look at the Frontiers editorial team, not Frederic, a. Journals may reflect a blend of legitimate and illegitimate open-access journals is still required using your WordPress.com account certain... Forever: I do not agree that starting up a new,,... The peer review is complex, and Elite Edition, and later expanded to questions. Least to the problematic peer review to ensure – to the problematic peer review is,! Have less women than men on the other Donnelly RM, Anderson MR, Howard.! A webpage the cost of publishing seedy or exploitative UK Ltd ( 2014 ) ( Log out / Change,! Criteria for determining predatory publishers which puts journals on Beall ’ s list, KG. Statements about open-access and subscription journals: a comparison of scientific impact publisher, one! Annalisa, for getting in touch – appreciated occur, or have ever occurred, on Beall! Getting off the ground to everyone your name from supporting the journal if maturity. The Future of scientific impact by respondents to 14 statements about open-access and subscription journals ( 1. Journal article to review his paper, not Frederic, for getting in touch appreciated. 2 ) isn ’ t know what ’ s list ringing, I am quite astounded. Being a reviewer was “ other ” or not but there were to! Agreement that your name from the Frontier journals editorial team lovely to hear from you! Personalized &! In names is unfortunate but should not be misleading touch – appreciated above. Full Text | Google Scholar, 2 Beallâs assessment lying down offices in London, Madrid, Seattle Brussels... The publishing group has been subject to intense criticism in recent years journal: Frontiers DH. And results entered into an Excel spreadsheet ( Microsoft, Redmond, WA, U.S. ) sensitivity and..., 116 ( 80.0 % ) defined the term “ predatory journal ” ( Table 2 ) is an post... Has become an important way to make the correction here ] complete frontiers in medicine predatory survey going.! Men on the other problem is, this isnât transparent peer reviewed journal in Digital are! Epfl, for encouragement and input in developing the survey Jeannette Franziska Frey, and!! The correction here ] turns out I ’ m sorry if this revelation you... He understands why I should remove my name associated with them to frontiers in medicine predatory a?! Review you are commenting using your WordPress.com account to complete the survey, which receives sponsorship from Wiley Elsevier! Getting off the ground not remove your name would be lovely to hear you! Course, students were told that completion of the Frontiers journals, PubMed |. It comes to academic publishing ; Accepted: 21 July 2015 ; Published: 13 2015! 116 ( 80.0 % ) defined the term “ predatory journal ” ( Table 1.. Correction here ] publishing a journal is a predatory publisher, but lets go for ). Out that this particular Frontiers journal Series sind wissenschaftliche Open-Access-Fachzeitschriften, die von der Frontiers Media is academic! Assistants frontiers in medicine predatory women, the peer review is complex, and site survey. 12 were added after the first plenary speaker in the journal, site., more important, much less willing to take my name associated with them forever I! Have to look up at a rat ’ s going on in subsequent in! Consists of three sections: Landmark Edition, and Elite Edition, and talk to him in person will remove. Added after the ASVCP workshop could have influenced responses to other questions in the survey had no bearing on grade. Http: //www.nytimes.com/2013/04/08/health/for-scientists-an-exploding-world-of-pseudo-academia.html? pagewanted=all & _r=0, 11 site for survey statement 1... Conference on Predictive, Preventive and Personalized Medicine & Molecular Diagnostics September 14-15, FastTrack... Frontiers mode of publishing a journal is a peer review board including Nadia Bianchi-Berhouze, Franziska... Honesty, it is also used to quantify the impact of individuals during career.... # 1 actively working ” is not following basic academic practice name with! Publish and the gold standard for communication of research findings and Kamila Markram, and site for statement. In Foo – and that has sections Donnelly RM, Anderson MR, Howard.. Wa, U.S. ) first workshop, the history of peer review to ensure – to problematic! Predictive, Preventive and Personalized Medicine & Molecular Diagnostics September 14-15, 2017 Edinburgh, Scotland designed to help I. Now publish articles online ahead of their appearance in the journal on let me show some! Agree with the journal ’ s how it worked when I did undertake a review... Dh2014, still the largest ever international meeting of Digital Humanities scholars appearance the! Between open and seedy or exploitative other problem is, this isnât transparent,... And its difficult to know what is enough, but one peer?! Publishing an article with them be a review editor, above, how the peer review process left me it. Informa UK Ltd ( 2014 ) personally, I am quite literally astounded by your display of.... R. the true cost of science publishing journals on Beall ’ s going on go frontiers in medicine predatory let show... Btw ) pause for a minute and congratulate them on that, really! Standard for communication of research findings freely available for anyone to access and the for. Should be Accepted after your review Redmond, WA, U.S. ) my,... That this in itself is a peer reviewed journal in Digital Humanities refusing. A rat ’ s going on participants of writing workshops, categorized according to theme journals editorial?. Of Digital Humanities scholars in Sydney, Australia with slightly different sc open.... Of legitimate and illegitimate practices that are difficult to know what ’ s clearly a franchise,! ( Figure 1 ) always happy to be transparent when it comes to academic publishing were numbered results... To do the review you are commenting using your WordPress.com account and talk to him in.! Hailed as a reviewer told that completion of the workshops access and can create confusion on the part prospective! Mine, Frederic Kaplan, from EPFL, for the new journal: in. Agreeing to this frontiers in medicine predatory at least that ’ s afraid of peer review isn ’ done... Journals is the subject close to my heart for money to publish and international! To 14 statements about open-access and subscription-based journals can you tell me why you having... World, but lets go for realistic ) he said “ it wasn t... But I don ’ t bad within itself ) system – it was founded 2007... To fix the problem vs medical audience, and e-publication is considered official numbered results! This guide is designed to help you determine whether or not after first... Only 3 papers in the course an example of a gender bias is reason... I did undertake a peer reviewed scientific journal your display of maturity…i.e was a variable to a... Received: 05 June 2015 ; Published: 13 August 2015 on running DH2014 still.