What’s a Journal For? This debate has been raging ever since preprint servers have been launched way back to 1991! Certainly, throughout my current submission of a journal article, one of many questions requested was whether or not the article was already deposited in such a preprint server (in a optimistic sense, and never one excluding additional submission progress). Since my earlier remark on this theme was made greater than three years in the past, I believed I’d replace it.
I’d begin with the commentary that some assume the idea of a journal actually includes three separate parts (as much as eight have been instructed); the story or narrative being informed, the info on which that story relies and the citations or bibliography which set the context of the story. The latter two parts have each developed their very own publishing fashions; the info in a repository and accompanied by wealthy metadata which offers at the least a few of the context and citations which have their personal mannequin. Article metadata additionally contains its personal citations serving to to position the info right into a wider context or “greater image” as expressed by a information graph, which even CAS Scifinder will now reveal primarily based in your particular search!‡. Such metadata can be now usually a part of the general metadata related to journal articles. The info part is being accompanied by in depth work to reinforce the accompanying metadata fashions and we’d anticipate speedy progress to be made right here within the close to future.
So once more to ask “what’s a journal for” if two of its important parts have their very own publishing fashions? The story will at all times have an essential function to play and peer overview of that story† will at all times be an essential facet of the journal – certainly maybe crucial facet. So ought to we focus in our consideration on this? I famous that in 2017, a courageous new experiment claiming “Open entry • Publication cost free • Public peer overview • Wikipedia-integrated” of which public peer overview was an essential part, has accrued comparatively few publications since. I additionally famous an article during which the reviewers (however not their critiques) are clearly indicated. This idea too has not made a lot headway. Will issues change sooner or later? Some assume that they’ve too, or the complete idea of scientific publishing will certainly fragment into many alternative fashions and now not totally serve its objective.
‡I can’t resist together with my very own information graph right here, which reveals properly the impacts of a few of the work I’ve been related to, as represented by the followers on the surface of the central graph.
†Though a serious part of many peer critiques has the give attention to the info and (lacking) citations.