Peer review in megajournals compared with traditional scholarly journals: Does it make a difference?
Peer review in megajournals compared with traditional scholarly journals: Does it make a difference?
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/leap.1007
复制
发表时间：
2016-01-01
影响因子：
2.8
通讯作者：
Catani, Paul
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Bjork, Bo-Christer;Catani, Paul
megajournal是一种开放获取的期刊，出版任何呈现科学上可信的经验结果的手稿，而不会在出版前询问潜在的科学贡献。大型期刊的产出迅速增加，目前每年发表约50 000篇文章。我们报告了一个小型的试点研究，在该研究中，我们研究了与传统同行评审期刊相比，大型期刊中文章的引用分布，这些期刊也评估文章的贡献和新奇。我们发现，接受率非常低的精英期刊没有或很少引用的文章要少得多，但与大型期刊相比，在选定的传统期刊样本中，引用两次或更少的文章的长尾实际上更大。这表明需要进行更系统的研究，因为研究结果提出了许多问题，即目前的同行审查制度在现实中如何有效地履行其过滤功能。
A megajournal is an open-access journal that publishes any manuscript that presents scientifically trustworthy empirical results, without asking about the potential scientific contribution prior to publication. Megajournals have rapidly increased their output and are currently publishing around 50,000 articles per year. We report on a small pilot study in which we looked at the citation distributions for articles in megajournals compared with journals with traditional peer review, which also evaluate articles for contribution and novelty. We found that elite journals with very low acceptance rates have far fewer articles with no or few citations, but that the long tail of articles with two citations or less was actually bigger in a sample of selective traditional journals in comparison with megajournals. This indicates the need for more systematic studies, because the results raise many questions as to how efficiently the current peer review system in reality fulfils its filtering function.