scholarly journals Editorial

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-2
Author(s):  
Ibrahim Sirkeci
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Border Crossing ◽  
Editorial Team ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
Open Issue

On behalf of the editorial team of Border Crossing journal, I am pleased to introduce the first issue of the tenth volume. Border Crossing aims to offer a multidisciplinary venue for sharing interesting and novel research from any fields of Social Sciences and Humanities. The “open issue” model we have started last year seems appreciated by authors and readers as it allows us to release the articles once they are through the peer-review process and finalised without delay which is normally the case for most journals. In this issue, we bring four articles and a book review to you.

scholarly journals Editorial

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-2
Author(s):  
Ali Tilbe
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Border Crossing ◽  
Editorial Team ◽  
Board Members ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
Refereeing Process ◽  
Open Issue

On behalf of the editorial team of Border Crossing journal, I am very delighted to introduce the first issue of the twenty first volume. In the first instance, our journal is an international multidisciplinary peer-reviewed journal that has been in publication since 2011 and publishes quality articles from any fields of Social Sciences and Humanities. We would like to emphasize that Border Crossing has switched to the “open issue” model and promises to complete the rapid refereeing process without delay according to the wishes of the authors. Thus, we publish two issues per year covering the first and second half of each year. Herewith, we would like to express our sincere gratitude to our authors, reviewers, editorial board members, co-editors and readers who contributed to the development and success of our Journal.

scholarly journals The Uptake and Impact of a Label for Peer-Reviewed Books

2022 ◽  
Vol 6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eline Vandewalle ◽  
Raf Guns ◽  
Tim C. E. Engels
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Quantitative Methods ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Formal System ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
Funding System ◽  
The Social ◽  
Book Publishers

This article presents an analysis of the uptake of the GPRC label (Guaranteed Peer Reviewed Content label) since its introduction in 2010 until 2019. GPRC is a label for books that have been peer reviewed introduced by the Flemish publishers association. The GPRC label allows locally published scholarly books to be included in the regional database for the Social Sciences and Humanities which is used in the Flemish performance-based research funding system. Ten years after the start of the GPRC label, this is the first systematic analysis of the uptake of the label. We use a mix of qualitative and quantitative methods. Our two main data sources are the Flemish regional database for the Social Sciences and Humanities, which currently includes 2,580 GPRC-labeled publications, and three interviews with experts on the GPRC label. Firstly, we study the importance of the label in the Flemish performance-based research funding system. Secondly, we analyse the label in terms of its possible effect on multilingualism and the local or international orientation of publications. Thirdly, we analyse to what extent the label has been used by the different disciplines. Lastly, we discuss the potential implications of the label for the peer review process among book publishers. We find that the GPRC label is of limited importance to the Flemish performance-based research funding system. However, we also conclude that the label has a specific use for locally oriented book publications and in particular for the discipline Law. Furthermore, by requiring publishers to adhere to a formalized peer review procedure, the label affects the peer review practices of local publishers because not all book publishers were using a formal system of peer review before the introduction of the label and even at those publishers who already practiced peer review, the label may have required the publishers to make these procedures more uniform.

scholarly journals Open text editing tools for open scholarly communications

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johannes Wilm
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Open Source ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Integrated System ◽  
Current Status ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
The Social ◽  
Scholarly Communications

Scholarly communication is undergoing a revolution with the move to open access. This has opened new opportunities and also new challenges. One of the most problematic issues are the costs of publishing. Some of this may be excessive profits of some publishers, but another part are actual costs associated with typesetting and document conversion.In 2012, the open source Fidus Writer editor was born with the vision of creating a fully web-based semantic editor for academics that would not require manual typesetting after the authors are finished with their text. Since 2015 the GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences and University of Bonn have been working on the “Open Scholarly Communications in the Social Sciences” project. The project is financed by the German Research Foundation, DFG, and it has been enhancing Fidus Writer and connecting it with a number of other tools, such as citation databases for automatic citation retrieval and the Open Journals Systems (OJS) to offer an integrated peer-review process. The aim is to create a fully integrated system for social Scientists and others that does away with conversion steps and makes scientific text creation both less costly and improves the tools available, also for non-technically inclined users.While several other projects have come into being simultaneously with Fidus Writer, their focus has been somewhat different: ShareLatex/Overleaf have focused on LaTeX users and is therefore not suitable for scientists who do not code. Other editors are either not open source, not working as collaborative editors or do not provide the tools needed by humanists and social scientists.We have written several papers collaboratively using our combined tool that have been submitted and published and are now working with two journals to obtain real-world experience using Fidus Writer with social scientists in the journal peer review process. In this poster I would like to present the current status of our tool and project.

scholarly journals Ethics in Ethnobiology Publication

2012 ◽  
Vol 3 ◽  
pp. 96-97
Author(s):  
James R. Welch
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Life Sciences ◽  
Multiple Stakeholders ◽  
The Social ◽  
Cumulative Process ◽  
High Standards ◽  
Published Research

With the recent multiplication of traditional and electronic venues for publishing in ethnobiology, the social sciences, the life sciences, and related fields, it is increasingly important that authors practice self-diligence to ensure that the contents of their publications meet criteria of veracity and ethical soundness. Although the peer-review process encourages high standards, it is an insufficient means for verifying the ethical worthiness of most publications. The ethical merits of published research derive from a cumulative process including formulating a research design, obtaining permissions, collecting and analyzing data, and finally composing and submitting a manuscript. Unfortunately, there is no failsafe ethical gatekeeper at any stage of the process. The importance of ethical publishing is all the more important in the field of ethnobiology, as professionals in the field  often cross the intellectual and methodological boundaries between disciplines, and their research often involves multiple stakeholders in widespread jurisdictions.

scholarly journals Editorial

2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dr. Mousumi Sengupta
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Present Issue ◽  
International Conference ◽  
Emerging Trends

Welcome to the present issue of SDMIMD Journal of Management. There are total nine articles, and one book review, which have been published in this volume. Among them, six articles are the revised and modified version of the papers, presented in the 5th International Conference on Emerging Trends in Finance, Accounting and Banking; and two papers are revised and modified version of the papers, presented in the 2nd International Conference on Inclusive Economic Growth and Sustainable Development. All the articles and the book review, including the above, have been selected for publication following the journal’s guidelines, and after undergoing ‘double blind’ peer review process.

scholarly journals Introduction 3-1

2017 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. i-iii
Author(s):  
Syed Sami Raza
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Acceptance Rate ◽  
Research Articles ◽  
Publication Process ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities

The Review of Human Rights has completed its third year of successful publication process. We received more than two-dozen research articles out of which only five could make it through the review process. The acceptance rate accordingly has reached to 18.5%, which means that its quality considerations are quite high. Our indexing and abstracting has expanded, so has our peer review board. Many renowned scholars in the fields of social sciences and humanities are now connected with us.

Getting Involved in the Peer Review Process

2008 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenya Malcolm ◽  
Allison Groenendyk ◽  
Mary Cwik ◽  
Alisa Beyer
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document