- From: Alexander Garcia Castro <alexgarciac@gmail.com>
- Date: Sat, 12 Aug 2017 22:08:16 +0200
- To: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>
- Cc: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, janowicz@ucsb.edu, Ian Horrocks <ian.horrocks@cs.ox.ac.uk>, Sarven Capadisli <info@csarven.ca>, Steffen Staab <staab@uni-koblenz.de>, "semantic-web@w3.org" <semantic-web@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CALAe=OJ03RN-WBsjywQ6HU4fRdwJe5tCp_csXecUnnU1kY2MLQ@mail.gmail.com>
Is there any study indicating that the current semi blind review process works better than existing alternatives? On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 5:06 PM, Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org> wrote: > Do we have a link or reference for the study? > > On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 5:04 PM Krzysztof Janowicz <janowicz@ucsb.edu> > wrote: > >> On 08/12/2017 06:34 AM, Ivan Herman wrote: >> >> >> On 11 Aug 2017, at 16:01, Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org> wrote: >> >> Peer review is usually not public because it can be embarrassing to the >> author. >> >> >> +1. Which also means that conscientious and mindful reviewer may also >> decide to be less outspoken, less detailed, etc, on his/her review. As a >> consequence the quality of the review may suffer. >> >> >> We were not able to see such effect in all the years we are running the >> Semantic Web journal and also have an anonymous review op-in option used by >> less than 20% of all reviewers. The literature also does not confirm such >> effect. >> >> >> While I understand some people preferred to be embarrassed in public >> (such as on mailing lists), this may not be in everyone's interest and may >> not lead to more or better research,. Not sure of any experimental results >> on the effect of open reviews on submissions or quality. >> >> >> One example is anecdotical, but I would probably refrain from submitting >> to a journal with a 100% open review, nor would I accept to act as a >> reviewer. >> >> Ivan >> >> >> >> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 12:44 PM Sarven Capadisli <info@csarven.ca> >> wrote: >> >>> On 2017-08-11 10:59, Steffen Staab wrote: >>> > I have operated the preprint server for 6 years. >>> >>> Cool. I stand corrected. Would you mind reviewing the following >>> statements: >>> >>> * Accepted works at JWS will have a paywalled copy at Elsevier, >>> reformatted to publishers styles, PDF (and/or in other formats), and >>> considered to be final, canonical, and citable. >>> >>> * Accepted works at JWS will have a free PDF copy made available from >>> www.websemanticsjournal.org, but this copy is not to be cited. >>> >>> * As mentioned by Ian Horrocks, "Articles on the preprint server are >>> post-review, and differ from the published version only w.r.t. >>> formatting." [Pending proof] >>> >>> * Authors can choose to give Elsevier exclusive rights to publish and >>> sell their work (to libraries, individuals..), or authors can pay the >>> article processing charge (APC) to make the works accessible for free >>> from Elsevier's access point. In the case of APC, there is no constraint >>> for Elsevier to omit existing charges to libraries for those works. >>> >>> * www.websemanticsjournal.org and its archive (ie. the preprint server) >>> is not funded by Elsevier, but instead funded by public funds. >>> >>> * Research objects (eg underlying data, tools) are not accessible, ie. >>> not hosted by www.websemanticsjournal.org or Elsevier. >>> >>> * Article contributions to JWS may only use non native Web technologies >>> eg LaTeX/Word.. >>> >>> * No JWS Editor to date received payment from Elsevier for their role. >>> >>> * Peer-reviews are carried out by the community as opposed to Elsevier. >>> Reviewers are not paid by Elsevier (or other for-profit). Reviewers may >>> be publicly funded through their academic institutions or labs to carry >>> out the review process. >>> >>> * Peer-reviews for accepted and rejected works are not accessible by >>> public. >>> >>> >>> Corrections and additional information is most welcome. >>> >>> >>> -Sarven >>> http://csarven.ca/#i >>> >>> >> >> ---- >> Ivan Herman, W3C >> Publishing@W3C Technical Lead >> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ >> mobile: +31-641044153 <+31%206%2041044153> >> ORCID ID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0782-2704 >> >> >> -- >> Krzysztof Janowicz >> >> Geography Department, University of California, Santa Barbara >> 4830 Ellison Hall, Santa Barbara, CA 93106-4060 >> >> Email: jano@geog.ucsb.edu >> Webpage: http://geog.ucsb.edu/~jano/ >> Semantic Web Journal: http://www.semantic-web-journal.net >> >> -- Alexander Garcia https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Alexander_Garcia http://www.usefilm.com/photographer/75943.html http://www.linkedin.com/in/alexgarciac
Received on Saturday, 12 August 2017 20:09:02 UTC