LIBLICENSE-L Archives

LibLicense-L Discussion Forum

LIBLICENSE-L@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
LibLicense-L Discussion Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 4 Jan 2017 19:25:07 -0500
Content-Type:
multipart/alternative
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (3218 bytes) , text/html (7 kB)
From: "Peretsman-Clement, Gail" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2017 14:04:58 +0000

Dear Anthony & Colleagues,



Thank you for posting about Publications, MDPI’s open access journal
covering scholarly communication. I wanted to add a little history from the
start up period of this journal that may add additional perspective on the
evolving reputation of this journal. It sounds like the journal’s practices
have matured from their early days.  But there may be also be good reasons
for the relatively tepid reputation of this journal.



The spoiler alert is that I resigned from the editorial board of
Publications because of ethical concerns that it was a ceremonial editorial
board, used to gain prestige for the journal, not to utilize our
demonstrated expertise or experience.



When the journal was first starting, MDPI contacted me to serve on the
Editorial Board (accepted) and, shortly thereafter, to serve as Editor in
Chief (declined due to lack of EIC experience with new OA journals).  They
addressed me as ‘Dr.’ in all correspondence and on the masthead, despite my
explicit disclosure that my extensive did not possess a doctoral degree. As
an editorial board member, I was never contacted for any matter concerning
journal policies or directions or to perform a peer review. The only
correspondence received were requests to promote the journal. I discussed
concerns with a few other board members and found agreement that the
handling of the board was, at a minimum, ‘odd’. This combination of
circumstances ultimately led to my resignation.



This was a few years ago and clearly the journal management has evolved.
The take home message for me has been that assessing OA journal reputation
is a complex matter requiring careful analysis, not just strict application
of formulaic criteria. New journal start ups may not be “predatory” by
intention, but may make some newbie mistakes that hurt their reputation.



- Gail



*Gail P. Clement*  | Head of Research Services  | Caltech Library  | Mail
Code 1-43  | Pasadena CA 91125-4300  | 626-395-1203 <(626)%20395-1203>

http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5494-4806 | *library.caltech.edu
<http://library.caltech.edu>*







*From:* LibLicense-L Discussion Forum [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
*On Behalf Of *LIBLICENSE
*Sent:* Tuesday, January 03, 2017 12:21 PM
*To:* [log in to unmask]
*Subject:* Publications, Volume 4, Issue 4 (December 2016) Released



From: Anthony <[log in to unmask]>

Date: Sat, 24 Dec 2016 10:12:54 +0000



I appreciate that this will not be accepted for posting until the end of
the holiday season but I am sending on this notification because of recent
correspondence on various lists about the lack of reputable open access
journals in information science and publishing especially journals that
cover scholarly communication. PUBLICATIONS is a reputable journal with a
serious peer review process. I am on the editorial board and have been
involved in some the peer review. Dr Alan Singleton, who will be known to
some of you as the former editor of Learned Publishing, has edited the
journal during the past year. Yes I suspect it is little known. Getting
brands recognised is not easy.



Anthony


ATOM RSS1 RSS2