A megajournal as a new type of scientific publication

Scientific and Technical Information Processing

Volumn 43, Issue 4, 2016, Pages 241-250

  Domnina, T N ^a  

^a All Russian Institute for Scientific and Technical Information   (Russian Federation)

Author keywords

altmetrics; article processing charges; megajournals; open access; peer review; role of scientific journal

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SCIENCE;

ALTMETRICS; MEGAJOURNALS; OPEN ACCESS; PEER REVIEW; SCIENTIFIC JOURNALS;

DATA PROCESSING;

EID: 85013784601     PISSN: 01476882     EISSN: 19348118     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3103/S0147688216040079     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Suber, P., Open Access, Cambridge: MIT Press, 2012, p. 4.
2. Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), 2016. https://doaj.org. Cited April 7, 2016.
3. Wellen, R., Open Access, Megajournals, and MOOCs on the Political Economy of Academic Unbundling, 2013. http://sgo.sagepub.com/content/3/4/2158244013507271.article-info. Cited April 7, 2016.
4. Norman, F., Megajournals, blog post, Occam’s typewriter, 2012. http://occamstypewriter.org/tradingknowledge/2012/07/09/megajournals/. Cited April 7, 2016.
5. Björk, B.C. and Catani, P., Peer review in megajournals compared with traditional scholarly journals: Does it make a difference?, Learned Publ., 2016, vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 9–12.
6. Wikipedia. Mega journal, 2016. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mega_journal. Cited April 9, 2016.
7. Pinfield, S., Open-Access Mega-Journals (OAMJ): Initial Results Presented at 2016 RLUK Conference, 2016. http://www.slideshare.net/ValrieSpezi/openaccess-megajournals-oamj-initial-results-presented-at-26016-rluk-conference. Cited May 14, 2016.
8. Björk, B.C., Have the “mega-journals” reached the limits to growth?, 2015. doi 10.7717/peerj.981. Cited April 21m 2016.
9. PLoS ONE. Journal Information–2016. http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/journal-information. Cited May 21, 2016.
10. Binfield, P., PLoS ONE: New approaches and initiatives in the evolution of the academic journal, Against the Grain, 2009, vol. 21, no. 3. doi 10.7771/2380-176X.2309. Cited April 17, 2016.
11. Esposito, J., Comment: PLoS’ Squandered Opportunity–Their Problems with the Path of Least Resistance, 2010. https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2010/04/27/plos-squandered-opportunity-the-problemwith-pursuing-the-path-of-least-resistance/. Cited May 14, 2016.
12. Binfield, P., Open access megajournals–have they changed everything?, Creative Commons, 2013. http://creativecommons.org.nz/2013/10/open-accessmegajournals-have-they-changed-everything. Cited April 11, 2016.
13. Björk, B.C. and Solomon, D.J., Developing an effective market for open access article processing charges, Report. Wellcome Trust, London, 2014. http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/stellent/groups/corporatesite/policy_communications/documents/web_document/wtp055910.pdf. Cited April 11, 2016.
14. About Altmetrics: An Introduction to altmetrics and how they can be used, 2016. https://www.altmetric.com/about-altmetrics/. Cited May 3, 2016.
15. Mazov, N.A. and Gureev, V.N., Alternative approaches to the assessment of scientific results, Vestn. Ross. Akad. Nauk, 2015, vol. 85, no. 2, pp. 115–122.
16. Davis, P., Cascading peer review–the future of open access?, Scholarly Kitchen Blog, 2010. http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2010/10/12/cascading-peer-reviewfuture-of-open-access/. Cited May 15, 2016.
17. BMJ. Frequently asked questions, 2014. http://bmjopen.bmj.com/site/about/faqs.xhtml#4. Cited May 6, 2016.
18. Beall's List of Predatory Publishers, 2016. https://scholarlyoa.com/2016/01/05/bealls-list-of-predatory-publishers-2016/. Cited May 3, 2016.
19. Ware, M. and Mabe, M., The STM Report: An overview of scientific and scholarly journal publishing, STM: International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers, 2015. http://www.stmassoc.org/2015 02 20 STM Report 2015.pdf. Cited May 5, 2016.
20. Solomon, D. and Björk, B.C., A study of open access journals using article processing charges, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol., 2012, vol. 63, no. 8, pp. 1485–1495. doi 10.1002/asi.22673
21. Björk, B.C., The hybrid model for open access publication of scholarly articles: A failed experiment?, J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol., 2012, vol. 63, no. 8, pp. 1496–1504. doi 10.1002/asi.22709
22. Research Information. SAGE open lowers APCs for HSS researchers, 2013. http://www.researchinformation.info/news/news_story.php?news_id=1089. Cited May 4, 2016.
23. Sugimoto, C., Lariviére, V., Ni, C., and Cronin, B., Journal acceptance rates: A cross-disciplinary analysis of variability and relationships with journal measures, J. Informetrics, 2013, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 897–906.
24. Overview: Nature’s peer review trial, Nature, 2006. doi 10.1038/nature05535. Cited May 4, 2016.
25. Chatterjee, A., Ghosh, A., and Chakrabarti, B., Universality of citation distributions for academic institutions and journals, 2014. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1409.8029.pdf. Cited June 6, 2016.
26. Solomon, D.J., A survey of authors publishing in four megajournals, 2014. doi 10.7717/peerj.365. Cited May 5, 2016.
27. Open Access Mega Journals and the Future of Scholary Communication, 2016. http://oamj.org/. Cited May 5, 2016.