LSE Impact Blog: The academic papers researchers regard as significant are not those that are highly cited

LSE Impact Blog: The academic papers researchers regard as significant are not those that are highly cited . “For many years, academia has relied on citation count as the main way to measure the impact or importance of research, informing metrics such as the Impact Factor and the h-index. But how well do these metrics actually align with researchers’ subjective evaluation of impact and significance? Rachel Borchardt and Matthew R. Hartings report on a study that compares researchers’ perceptions of significance, importance, and what is highly cited with actual citation data. The results reveal a strikingly large discrepancy between perceptions of impact and the metric we currently use to measure it.”

Nature Index: Open-access model is a return to the origins of journal publishing

Nature Index: Open-access model is a return to the origins of journal publishing. “The history of Philosophical Transactions is not exceptional in the annals of journal publishing. Members of scientific associations, such as the Royal Society, subsidised publications from their subscriptions for their first three centuries. Only in the last 50 years or so did the situation reverse, leading them to subsidise their subscriptions from their publications. Yet the period of profitability is disproportionately shaping researchers’ thinking about journal publishing.”

Research Remix: Where’s Waldo With Public Access Links

Research Remix (what a great blog name!): Where’s Waldo With Public Access Links. “Was digging into some publisher pages today, and I noticed a trend. Links to Public Access author manuscripts that CHORUS says are publicly available thanks to funder mandates are often very difficult to actually find on publisher pages. Want to see what I mean?”

Medium: What are the ten most cited sources on Wikipedia? Let’s ask the data.

Medium: What are the ten most cited sources on Wikipedia? Let’s ask the data.. “Citations are the foundation of Wikipedia’s reliability: they trace the connection between content added by our community of volunteer contributors and its sources. For readers, citations provide a mechanism to validate and check for themselves that what Wikipedia says is sound and trustworthy: they act as a gateway towards a broader ecosystem of reliable knowledge. In an effort to spearhead more research on where Wikipedia gets its facts from, and to celebrate Open Citations Month, we asked ourselves: what are the most cited sources across all of Wikipedia’s language editions?”

EurekAlert: PLOS announces new website for peer reviewers

EurekAlert: PLOS announces new website for peer reviewers . “The Reviewer Center is designed to support reviewers working on manuscripts submitted to PLOS journals, with information and resources freely available to anyone–those interested in learning more about how peer review works, those looking for instructional resources, and those reviewing for other journals and publishers. All content is provided under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license, meaning it is free and open for anyone to access, regardless of whether they review for PLOS.”

Techdirt: Research Shows That Published Versions Of Papers In Costly Academic Titles Add Almost Nothing To The Freely-Available Preprints They Are Based On

Techdirt: Research Shows That Published Versions Of Papers In Costly Academic Titles Add Almost Nothing To The Freely-Available Preprints They Are Based On. “Academic publishers justify their high prices and fat profit margins by claiming that they ‘add value’ as papers progress through the publication process. Although many have wondered whether that is really true — does a bit of sub-editing and design really justify the ever-rising subscription costs? — hard evidence has been lacking that could be used to challenge the publishers’ narrative. A paper from researchers at the University of California and Los Alamos Laboratory is particularly relevant here. It appeared first on arXiv.org in 2016 (pdf), but has only just been ‘officially’ published (paywall). It does something really obvious but also extremely valuable: it takes around 12,000 academic papers as they were originally released in their preprint form, and compares them in detail with the final version that appears in the professional journals, sometimes years later, as the paper’s own history demonstrates. The results are unequivocal…”

Larry Ferlazzo: “Iris.ia” Seems Like A Very Useful Research Tool

Larry Ferlazzo: “Iris.ia” Seems Like A Very Useful Research Tool. “I just learned about Iris.ia from Nik Peachey, who is always an excellent source of resources. Iris.ia lets you paste the url address of any academic paper or TED Talk and then, in return, it provides you with a free interactive mosaic of related research papers.”