Our final session of the event! @pippasmart and @mattjhodgkinson went head to head, with seconders, Alice Ellingham and Jadranka Stojanovski in the controversially framed debate on "open access will reduce quality in scientific publishing"
Smart - arguing for the motion:
The principle of open access is putting too much strain on academic publishing.
Approach to accessibility favors only the wealthy at the expense of quality and reliability of articles.
Journal performance beyond the #ImpactFactor. Cristina Huidiu at Elsevier (a former librarian) says responsible use of metrics - article metrics, journal metrics, & #altmetrics - can be business indicators to help publishers to make decisions.
Can get insights into impact beyond citations and trends in fields, from patents and funding.
Collaboration patterns of existing authors can show new directions of their work.
What are the core functions of journals, asks James Butcher:
Filter (rejection)
Enhance (revisions, copyediting)
Amplify (brand, press releases)
Leadership and advocacy also matter for many influential journals, such as #TheLancet where James worked. They have "convening power" to gather stakeholders and cross-pollinate ideas between disciplines.
Early signals of advances can be highlighted to readers, and authors can get recognition and visibility.
What is the future of journals, asks James Butcher.
The demise of journals has been long predicted, but funders such as the Wellcome Trust are now disintermediating publishers using online platforms to directly post research.
What will be lost if journals disappear? Tweet by richard horton @richardhorton1 It would be a mistake to see science journals as merely repositories for research. They also stand for something. They advocate a set of values, articulate a vision for their discipline, and defend the rights of the communities they serve. These roles are worth protecting. 10:42 AM Sep 5, 2018 193 Retweets 29 Quotes 474 Likes 2 Bookmarks
Manipulation at scale by #PaperMills and peer review rings is rife in the industry, esp. in special issues. In a year, Hindawi identified 1700+ compromised articles to retract, using data analysis and manual checks. Mass retraction, using a standardised notice, does not wait for author responses if there is a sufficient signal of manipulation or paper mills.