How will we report the results of scholarly research in the future? Probably not on paper. Digital, accessible, machine-readable, reproducible describe the foundations of open science. And, increasingly, the question for funders, publishers, and institutes is becoming: can we influence how research is done by changing the requirements and attributes of the research “paper”?
With the growing opportunities of the digital world, the demand for open access to research articles developed into an open science movement that strives for science to be done in an “open, and reproducible fashion where all components of research are open”. The process of making all aspects of science open, transparent, and interoperable is a huge endeavour and means different things for different communities. ScienceOpen’s commitment to open science has been clear from its foundation: we make science open. Our latest project in the realization of this goal has been integrating ‘BMJ Open Science’ as a new open access featured collection on our platform.
Preprints, first draft research manuscripts, have existed almost as long as the Internet. Scientists have been taking advantage of online communication to speed up research for almost 3 decades. ScienceOpen understands the importance of allowing researchers to openly share their results with the scientific community at an early stage in their research. The advantage for researchers is that they get early feedback from peers but can still publish the final version in most peer-reviewed journals of their choosing. To support researchers in fully utilizing the benefits of preprint publishing, ScienceOpen is pleased to launch open and free preprint publishing on our platform! With this beta service, anyone can now upload, publish, and promote their preprint using a free and simple interface with access to a full suite of tools for peer review, constructive discussion through comments, and usage and impact tracking.
Peer Review Week is a global event celebrating the role of peer review in maintaining scientific quality. This year marks the event’s fourth anniversary of bringing together researchers, institutions, and organizations committed to the message that good peer review is crucial to scholarly communications. This year Peer Review Week on the topic of diversity aims:
To emphasize the central role peer review plays in scholarly communication
Although peer review itself is not as young as the week-long event organized in its celebration, it is still a relatively new invention. Albert Einstein published his original papers in non-peer-reviewed German journals through 1933, most famously in the Annalen der Physik. Max Planck, one of the journal’s editors of the time, described his editorial philosophy as:
To shun much more the reproach of having suppressed strange opinions than that of having been too gentle in evaluating them.
After moving to the US, Einstein was so shocked that his paper submitted to the Physical Review in 1936 was met with negative criticism that he decided not to publish with them at all. Ironically, the paper in question hypothesized that gravitational waves do not exist. In retrospect, peer review saved Einstein the controversy and the embarrassment that would have ensued if he had published his original article. Continue reading “Diverse Approaches to Peer Review”
ScienceOpen provides researchers with a wide range of tools to support their research – all for free. Here is a short checklist to make sure you are getting the most of the technological infrastructure and content that we have to offer. What can a researcher do on ScienceOpen?
Multi-dimensional search in millions of article records for quick orientation: Filter your search by 18 filters including open access, preprint, author, affiliation, keyword, content type, source, and more. Sort your results by Altmetric score, citations, date, usage, and rating. Use the article Collections by other researchers to help narrow your search.
Export search results in EndNote, BibTex, and Reference Manager (RIS) formats for easy integration with other reference management systems. Up to 200 citations exported at a time.
Save your search to find the newest articles in your field with one click. ScienceOpen is adding thousands of articles to the database daily.
Bookmark the articles you are interested to explore later.
Missing an article or citation from ScienceOpen, or want to add more of your own publications? Users can now request articles to be integrated into our database via their dashboard. These can be your own articles, or someone else’s – the choice is yours!
All we need are either a list of:
Simply upload a file or copy and paste them in, click the button and away you go! We’ll send you a notification by email to let you know the status of each article. We’ll work our magic behind the scenes and integrate your selection as soon as is computationally possible.
Boost your citations
One of the great things about this new feature is that you can add a list of DOIs of articles that cite your own work. We provide a free and open citation network for each of our users, based on extracting citation data from peer reviewed publications. Thanks to initiatives like I4OC, it is becoming easier to provide enriched citation information like we do for researchers for free.
By adding research that cites your work, we provide an easy and great way to make sure that your citation profile is complete! This isn’t gaming the system, it’s simply making it comprehensive and open. That’s important. Put this in the context of our recently launched author-metrics, and you’re on to a winning academic profile!
For collection editors
If you have a collection at ScienceOpen, you can specify that these records be automatically integrated into them. You can add these in bulk, with 100 DOIs per request for now. Personalising your collections and making them complete has never been easier! If you want to set up your own collection and try out these features, contact us here!
Integration and validation
By using the new ‘claim authorship’ feature, your articles will be directly integrated with your ScienceOpen profile and ORCID. This provides crucial cross-validation of your research history, a unique feature of ScienceOpen. If you’re adding you own article records, these will be available in your ‘Claim your articles’ section of the Dashboard, where you can easily add them to your profile.
We recognise that no research database is complete, and ScienceOpen is no exception. We work closely with publishers, ORCID, and platforms like PubMed to integrate new content on a daily basis. But we can’t pick up everything, and that’s where you come in!
By adding personalised content, you help us to fill in the blank spots in our database. This helps to enrich our network by putting this content into our semantically linked network. We are currently only indexing research articles and not book chapters, proceedings or other content types.
So pop over to your dashboard, try it out, and let us know what you think!
ORCID have recognised the discovery and networking platform ScienceOpen for leadership in integrating their services as part of their Collect and Connect program.
Under ORCID’s mantra of “Enter once, reuse often”, Collect and Connect is designed for member organizations to collect, display, connect and synchronize data between research information systems. This was developed to streamline the integration process across a range of research systems, funders, and publishers.
ORCID has been at the foundation of ScienceOpen since inception, enabling verified users to integrate their published content, build collections, and perform post-publication peer review across publishers and journals for free.
CEO of ScienceOpen, Stephanie Dawson, said “We are delighted to be among the first recognized by ORCID as part of their Collect and Connect Program. ORCID has been essential to our development, and together we will continue to build a robust scholarly infrastructure for all stakeholders.”
ScienceOpen features alongside other leaders, including eLife, Overleaf, and Editorial Manager, all committed to creating valid assertions about scholarly connectivity in a reliable, trustworthy, and transparent way.
Laure Haak, Executive Director of ORCID, said “ScienceOpen has been a huge supporter of ORCID – both by demonstrating in practice how iDs enable profile platforms and also through your incredible researcher engagement activities. Our badges are a small but important official acknowledgement for your actions. Thank you for your leadership in the open research community!”
In the current ecosystem of academic publishing, research outputs make a long journey from the desks of researchers to research platforms. Once a preprint has been turned into a published paper, authors have almost no influence on metadata tagging, or whether their articles got indexed in a whole world of databases and research platforms. If you have ever come across a ‘ghost profile’ of yourself on the Web, this is where it came from.
With MyScienceOpen, our vision was to create a holistic platform where researchers can flexibly interact with their research outputs, and control the content themselves. In addition to our range of visibility enhancement services and impact monitoring tools, it remains crucial to enable authors to freely manage their articles on our platform and add new content easily and in a 100% legal way.
Flexible interaction with content from publishers
As a result, we are excited to announce our new article integration feature. This is the first time that a major research networking platform facilitates interaction with content from publishers, as opposed to manually uploaded records from individual authors.
In a time where we are all over-worked, it is crucial not to add to researcher fatigue. This is why we leverage ORCID for seamless and efficient integration of your research outputs into ScienceOpen.
Here, we will briefly guide you through our new content management features and share some tips and tricks to make the most out of them. Ready?
How to add your content to ScienceOpen and manage your publications
At the moment, you can add content to your ScienceOpen profile from two sources: from ORCID or form our existing corpus of 32 million article records. In addition, collection editors are also welcome to submit DOI lists, and BibTex or RefWorks files to us, and let us work our magic behind the scenes to integrate these into our database or your profile.
We recognise that some times it’s not clear exactly what you’re supposed to do when joining a new research platform. What are the important features, what’s everybody else doing, how do I make my profile as strong as possible? Well, hopefully this will make it easier for you. If you’re still wondering ‘What’s that ScienceOpen thing all about?’, hopefully this will add a bit of clarity too!
Here are the main things you need to know about ScienceOpen:
Get an ORCID account
More than 3 million researchers already have an ORCID account, which acts as both a unique identifier and an integrated profile for them. Registration for it takes 30 seconds, and is now a core part of scholarly infrastructure, with many journals requiring an ORCID profile prior to article submission. Make sure it’s well-populated with all of your published papers, (drawn automatically from Web of Science, Scopus, or CrossRef). Easy!
How can something exclusive, secretive, and irreproducible be considered to be objective? How can something exclusive, secretive, and irreproducible be considered as a ‘gold standard’ of any sort?
Traditional, closed peer review has these traits, but yet for some reason held in esteem as the most rigorous and objective standard of research and knowledge generation that we have. Peer review fails peer review, and its own test of integrity and validation, and is one of the greatest ironies of the academic world.
What we need is a new standard of peer review that is suitable for a Web-based world of scholarly communication. This is to help accommodate the increasingly rapid communication of research and new sources of information, and bring peer review out of the dark (literally) ages and into one which makes sense in a world of fast, open, digital knowledge dissemination.
What should a standard for peer review look like in 2017?
The big test for peer review, and any future version of it, is how does the scientific community apply its stamp of approval?