European Science Editing最新文献

{"title":"European Science Editing is in full open access now","authors":"K. Baždarić","doi":"10.3897/ese.2020.e50566","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3897/ese.2020.e50566","url":null,"abstract":"I am excited to announce that with this volume European Science Editing (ESE) has shifted from the print to a fully digital open access version. The journal underwent several changes last year. First of all, our publisher, the European Association of Science Editors (EASE) was generously offered – and accepted – a new ARPHA submission system (powered by PenSoft). Together with the EASE president Pippa Smart and EASE Council, we decided to transform ESE into a fully open access online journal. After several months of planning and re-thinking our strategy, a small working group (some members of the EASE Council and of ESE’s associate editors) prepared a proposal, the main idea of which was to divide the journal in two overlapping publications: European Science Editing and EASE Digest. The former will continue to publish original articles, reviews (formerly “essays”), viewpoints, and correspondence using the fully open access ARPHA submission system (flow publishing) but will drop the other sections, namely News notes, The editor’s bookshelf, This site I like, and EASE Forum Digest). These sections, which our readers consider particularly valuable, will now be published in EASE Digest with a few selected articles from ESE. The Digest will be available to EASE members only. As the proposal was accepted by the EASE Council in September 2019, the journal’s transformation is already under way. I wish to thank Silvia Maina (This site I like), Fiona Murphy (Book reviews), Elise Langdon-Neuner (EASE-Forum Digest), Anna Maria Rossi (The Editor’s bookshelf), and James Hartley and Denys Wheatley (members of the International Advisory Board) for the great work they have done and for their cooperation.","PeriodicalId":35360,"journal":{"name":"European Science Editing","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44076729","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Editors should allow only significant digits","authors":"A. Polderman","doi":"10.3897/ese.2020.e50999","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3897/ese.2020.e50999","url":null,"abstract":"“Out of 80 experiments, 45 (56.3%) had a favourable outcome.” If you read this sentence in a manuscript, would you want to edit the figures?I certainly would. There are too many digits in ‘56.3%’. The decimal 3 is meaningless; 56% is precise enough. If the number of favourable outcomes is 44, the percentage score is 55%; with 46 successes it is 58%. There is no uncertainty here.\u0000 But what should we do when we are dealing with 237 out of 623? Both 237 and 238 result in a score of 38%. Wouldn’t it be wise to distinguish these outcomes by writing 38.0% and 38.2% respectively? Well, if such precision is important, we can simply present the absolute values. Absolute values are always accurate; percentages and fractions are only approximations.\u0000 What might be the purpose of accurate percentages? I appreciate that percentage scores and fractions are better for comparisons than absolute values. With percentages I can see at a glance that 237/623 is more than 165/465 (38% and 35% respectively). Percentages are quick – and inaccurate, even with additional decimals.","PeriodicalId":35360,"journal":{"name":"European Science Editing","volume":"46 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41518861","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Retractions of research papers by authors from the Arab region (1998-2018)","authors":"S. A. Alryalat, Muayad I. Azzam, A. Massad, D. Alqatawneh","doi":"10.3897/ese.2020.e51002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3897/ese.2020.e51002","url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To provide an overview of retractions of research papers contributed by authors from the Arab region.\u0000 Method: Papers in which the first author was affiliated to an Arabian country were selected from the Retraction Watch database covering the period 1 January 1998 to 31 December 2018. The retrieved records were divided into nine categories based on the reasons for retraction.\u0000 Results: The search yielded 322 retractions, and the most frequent reason for retraction was plagiarism (34.5%). The median time from publication to retraction was 14 (25%-75% percentile 5-30) months. The number of papers retracted each year as well as the number of papers published in a given year but subsequently retracted increased steadily over the 21 years. The proportion of retracted papers to the total number of published papers (0.17%) was higher than the global proportion and was the highest for Algeria (1%) and the lowest for Lebanon (0.03%). Of the countries within the Arab region, 12 out of 14 countries showed either plagiarism or duplication as the most common reason for retraction; however, the countries differed in terms of the number of retractions and the time from publishing to retraction.\u0000 Conclusion: Plagiarism was the most common cause of retraction in the Arab countries. The increase in the number of papers retracted each year was probably because searches now extend farther in the past, whereas the increase in the number of papers published in a given year but subsequently retracted can be attributed to the overall increase in the number of papers published.","PeriodicalId":35360,"journal":{"name":"European Science Editing","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46904015","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Manipulation of bibliometric data by editors of scientific journals","authors":"V. Lazarev","doi":"10.20316/ese.2019.45.19011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.20316/ese.2019.45.19011","url":null,"abstract":"Although a bibliometrician myself, I believe that we, bibliometricians, are partly responsible for the bibliometric perversions currently in vogue to evaluate the performance of scientists. Bibliometricians are often negligent about, or indifferent to, how bibliometric indicators are interpreted by others, the terms used for referring to concepts, and other terminology, particularly terms referring to the properties of items assessed using bibliometric indicators. I support this serious charge against my colleagues with some examples. Take the fashionable term ‘altmetrics’, which reflects no particular domain or discipline (in contrast to ‘bibliometrics’ or ‘scientometrics’); using the term ‘metric’ instead of ‘indicator’ is a sign of overvalued evaluative ambitions, as is the frequent but uncritical use of the pairs ‘value’ and ‘quality’ as full synonyms. Such misuse of terms not only justifies the erroneous practice of research bureaucracy of evaluating research performance on those terms but also encourages editors of scientific journals and reviewers of research papers to ‘game’ the bibliometric indicators. For instance, if a journal seems to lack adequate number of citations, the editor of that journal might decide to make it obligatory for its authors to cite papers from journal in question. I know an Indian journal of fairly reasonable quality in terms of several other criteria but can no longer consider it so because it forces authors to include unnecessary (that is plain false) citations to papers in that journal. Any further assessment of this journal that includes self-citations will lead to a distorted measure of its real status. An average paper in the natural or applied sciences lists at least 10 references.1 Some enterprising editors have taken this number to be the minimum for papers submitted to their journals. Such a norm is enforced in many journals from Belarus, and we, authors, are now so used to that norm that we do not even realize the distortions it creates in bibliometric data. Indeed, I often notice that some authors – merely to meet the norm of at least 10 references – cite very old textbooks and Internet resources with URLs that are no longer valid. The average for a good paper may be more than 10 references, and a paper with fewer than 10 references may yet be a good paper (The first paper by Einstein did not have even one reference in its original version!). I believe that it is up to a peer reviewer to judge whether the author has given enough references and whether they are suitable, and it is not for a journal’s editor to set any mandatory quota for the number of references. Viewpoint","PeriodicalId":35360,"journal":{"name":"European Science Editing","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46268164","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"5th Peer Review Week: Perspectives from European Association of Science Editors and the Asian Council of Science Editors","authors":"","doi":"10.20316/ese.2019.45.19018","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.20316/ese.2019.45.19018","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":35360,"journal":{"name":"European Science Editing","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49629500","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Retracted articles by Croatian authors: a case study","authors":"A. Glasnović, Tamara Krajna, J. Petrak","doi":"10.20316/ese.2019.45.19009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.20316/ese.2019.45.19009","url":null,"abstract":"comparable to Croatia in terms of expenditure on R&D and the number of active researchers.","PeriodicalId":35360,"journal":{"name":"European Science Editing","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42418420","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Academic science writing: an inconsiderate genre?","authors":"","doi":"10.20316/ese.2019.45.19002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.20316/ese.2019.45.19002","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":35360,"journal":{"name":"European Science Editing","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48966573","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Data sharing and data citation: join the movement!","authors":"","doi":"10.20316/ese.2019.45.19010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.20316/ese.2019.45.19010","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":35360,"journal":{"name":"European Science Editing","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46833179","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"“Do I really have to … pay?”","authors":"","doi":"10.20316/ese.2019.45.19001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.20316/ese.2019.45.19001","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":35360,"journal":{"name":"European Science Editing","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44504522","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Multilingualism in Russian journals: a controversy of approaches","authors":"Lilia K. Raitskaya, E. Tikhonova","doi":"10.20316/ESE.2019.45.18024","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.20316/ESE.2019.45.18024","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":35360,"journal":{"name":"European Science Editing","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42002550","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}