#Journals | Journal of the European Optical Society-
Rapid Publications "Comparison of helium and argon for the production of carbon monoxide (CO) by a plasma jet for biomedical applications"
Really sick of all #journals and #conferences that insert a gray "for review only" (or similar sentence) as a watermark in the background of each papers to be reviewed. This is super annoying as it makes any selection of text in the pdf impossible (for most places). I'm usually often selecting text, for instance to cite authors own words in my review letter, or point them a typo, or a conceptual issue. What does this watermark really prevent? If someone with bad intention really wants to use the reviewed work, they'll find a way and this pseudo watermark won't prevent anything. If a mention "for review only" is needed, why not placing it only on the top or the bottom of the document so that it doesn't corrupt any text selection?
Does anyone know whether there is a project to stock libraries in developing countries with unwanted academic journals from our offices? A colleague is downsizing and has over a decade of JACS that might end up in a recycling bin if there is no alternative. Can you spread the word as I'm curious about what we might be able to do. #academic#sharing#journals@dbellingradt do you and your histodons and bookdons know about this kind of thing?
Did anyone receive this kind of review invitation? Perhaps you @j_bertolotti ?
Apparently, they started paying 20 $ for reviewing! It seems that finally, someone paid attention to all the complaints and the quality of the existing peer review process. The fee may seem too low, but here in Turkey 🇹🇷 it equals 650 Turkish lira, which is about one week's groceries. @academicsunite#academia#research#publishing#journals#peerreview
Hey archaeologists -- have you made any discoveries with relevance for Poland or Central Europe in general? Then you can write about them in English or Polish in Folia Archaeologica, our peer-reviewed journal at the University of Łódź.
"All journal articles will now feature a Code Availability section and authors will be encouraged to share code publicly, using permanent identifiers, and citing code they have used."
you always knew it was the case but here’s some data! Scientific publishing continues to fail at providing meaningful #alttext for images.
Data for 1250 articles across 250 journals (five articles per journal) were collected from March 14 to Sept 30, 2023 […] Alt-text Provides meaningful interpretation: Total: 0
I love how they also considered opthamology journals as a special category :3 Of course they still failed.
We identified that nine (90·0%) of these publishers, including Nature Portfolio (44 [17·6%] journals), Elsevier (43 [17·2%] journals), and Annual Reviews (18 [7·2%] journals), stated a commitment to following WCAG 2.0 or WCAG 2.1. However, alt-text practices across these publishers did not comply with either WCAG version.
Well, this is a novelty. A case where tortured phrases have been substituted in the names of journals in the reference lists, so instead of "international journal of..." we have "global diary of ..." ! https://pubpeer.com/publications/7FE8E045835CC3D412E2EA141EEB7D#2
Funny, but disturbing that IEEE is still accepting AI Gobbledegook in conference abstracts. #papermills#misconduct#journals
I'm grateful to authors who take the time to write up their stories of mistreatment by #journals and #publishers.
The publicity can help in their own cases. It can help unknown authors who didn't have the same freedom to publicize their experience. It can help raise standards in publishing.