About us | About Scoope | Contact us
Scopelogo
 
google

 
  
 Sponsor Links
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
resources
White Papers STM PUBLISHING INDUSTRY RESOURCES
| Articles | White Papers | Presentations 
 


Articles                                                                                                  TOP

E-books: Royalties vs. respect

(cbc.ca): With competition between electronics makers taking off for the fledging e-reader market, which is expected to hit 14 million units in the United States alone this year, the book publishing industry is being rapidly redefined. New players such as Amazon and Apple aren't just competing with traditional retailers such as Indigo and Borders, they are also going head to head with the publishers themselves by making it easy - and potentially lucrative - for authors to skip going through regular channels to get their books out to readers.
   
Click here

Are medical research subjects adequately informed?

(naturalnews.com): When a person signs up to participate in medical research, he or she is given a form to sign that is supposed to state the goal of the study as well as all the known possible risks of the drug or procedure being tested. But a new report by researchers from the University of Pennsylvania Law School and Columbia University concludes informed consent forms are often too long and complicated -- full of legalese and technical gobbledygook -- for many people to understand.
   
Click here

New impact factors yield surprises

(the-scientist.com): Thomson Reuters has released its 2009 Journal Citation Report, cataloging journals' impact factors, and shuffling in the top few spots have some analysts scratching their heads. Specifically, the publication with second highest impact factor in the "science" category is Acta Crystallographica - Section A, knocking none other than the New England Journal of Medicine from the runner's up position.
   
Click here

Falling demand of OUP's open access model deserves closer examination

(iwr.co.uk): OUP's conclusion that when given a choice, most authors are not yet choosing to publish their articles under an open access model is too simplistic. On June 16, IWR has received a letter from Frederick Friend, JISC scholarly communication consultant and the honorary director scholarly communication at UCL. His letter said: The factors involved in author choice are very complex. It may be that OUP's publication fee is too high, or that authors in the disciplines covered by the OUP open access journals are choosing to deposit their articles in an institutional repository or in the UK PubMed Central database, thus giving them open access through another route.
   
Click here

Peer Review vs. Peer Ranking: Dynamic vs Passive Filtration

(openaccess.eprints.org): Chen&Konstan's (C&K) paper, "Conference Paper Selectivity and Impact" is interesting, though somewhat limited because it is based only on computer science and has fuller data on conference papers than on journal papers. The finding is that papers from highly selective conferences are cited as much as (or even more than) papers from certain journals. Journals of course also differ among themselves in quality and acceptance rates.
   
Click here

For banner ads click here