I’ve reviewed for many other journals, both in DH and beyond, and am happy to see other journals flourish (DHQ isn’t for profit, and we’re snowed under!) don’t worry! The survey included 14 statements for respondents to indicate agreement level on a Likert-like scale and four questions on awareness of resources about predatory journals; respondents also defined “predatory journal.” A total of 145 participants completed the survey: 106 (73.1%) from veterinary schools and 86 (59.3%) graduate students or residents. You actually are attacking Frontiers for being gender biased but WOW, let’s all point out the hypocrite – you – every argument you make above is biased in one way or another. Uh-oh. In this study, we assessed awareness of open-access and predatory journals among prospective authors attending scientific writing workshops; our long-term goal was to inform educational goals for the workshops. Thereâs a few things to say about this. Thus, both authors and readers desire rigorous peer review to ensure – to the extent possible – scientific quality. The editor-in-chief is Siamak Tabibzadeh. I’ve already detailed, above, how the peer review process left me feeling it was inadequate. doi:10.1038/495421a, 6. I’m just wondering if this is why a senior (usually respectable) academic would post something like this, which in my humble opinion appears to be rather below a UCL researcher. In our survey, expectations for higher author fees when publishing in an open-access journal varied both by role, with faculty and postdocs expecting to pay more, and by site, with more Eur-SVM respondents not expecting to pay more; the latter result was likely attributable to the relative inexperience of the students. Predatory journals are already numerous and their number is increasing.1 Prospective authors should be aware of their existence, but also avail themselves of resources that provide information about these journals. Butler D. Sham journals scam authors. I’m fairly certain there was some sort of agreement that your name would be published as a reviewer? i) they have a “journal” – Frontiers in Foo – and that has sections. |, Veterinary Humanities and Social Sciences, http://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.html, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/08/health/for-scientists-an-exploding-world-of-pseudo-academia.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0, Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). Figure 4. A 2014 open-access survey conducted on behalf of Taylor & Francis had little overlap with questions in our survey, but did find that 35% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that open-access journals were of lower quality than subscription-based journals (12), higher than the 20% of respondents in our survey who disagreed that open-access and subscription-based journals were of similar quality. In fact, publishing in high-quality peer-reviewed journals remains the prime metric of success for academicians, especially early career researchers focused on promotion and tenure. Cite 6th Apr, 2017 But what does ‘owning’ the mistake mean to you? Figure 5. Journals have been termed “predatory” when they present a seemingly legitimate face for an illegitimate publication process that lacks basic industry standards, sound peer-review practices, or a solid basis in publication ethics (7). We acknowledge that the addition of two questions after the ASVCP workshop could have influenced responses to other questions in the survey. I donât see anything wrong in that, in the same way I donât see anything wrong in an editor acting as a reviewer (provided that (s)he discloses the joint role of reviewer and editor). Read the latest articles of Frontiers in Laboratory Medicine at ScienceDirect.com, Elsevierâs leading platform of peer-reviewed scholarly literature I agree with the rest of the article though. It feels predatory. Frontiers in Medicine citation style guide with bibliography and in-text referencing examples: Journal articles Books Book chapters Reports Web pages. Thank you for writing it. Respondents were given ~15 min to complete the survey, which was then collected. Clinics in Mother and Child Healthã«è«æãæç¨¿ãããã¨èãã¦ã¾ããéèªã®é¸å®çç±ã¯ãæã
ãã®éèªã®è«æãèªãã§ããã®ã¨ããªã¼ãã³ã¢ã¯ã»ã¹ç´ã®ä¸ã§ã¯æç¨¿æãé«ãã¯ãªããã¨ãã¤ã³ãã¯ããã¡ã¯ã¿ã¼ããã£ããã¨ã§é¸å®ãã¾ãããããããPub MedãWeb of Scienceã§ã¯æ¤ç´¢ã§ãããGoogle scholarã® â¦ Annalisa Pastore Definitions of “predatory journal” by participants in scientific writing workshops, categorized according to theme. The authors acknowledge Dr. Sydney Moise, Cornell University, for encouragement and input in developing the survey. They have ups and downs, like all journals, but they really appear to be consistently attempting to make good science open to the world via a innovative platform. A total of 145 participants completed the survey (Table 1). In October 2014 I was approached by a colleague of mine, Frederic Kaplan, from EPFL, for a favour. Gasparyan AY, Ayvazyan L, Kitas GD. Thanks very much, Annalisa, for getting in touch – appreciated. The CEO does not respond. As a feminist, I had the hurtful feeling that she is USING the issue of gender representation within the editorial board is a lame excuse to personally attack a man…Am I the only one to ‘feel’ this? But then again, I’m always happy to be transparent when it comes to academic publishing. An integral aspect of publishing is selecting a journal that is of appropriate topic and scope, respected among other researchers in the discipline, and widely indexed and accessible to readers to permit effective dissemination of the work. Publishing in peer-reviewed scientific journals is the cornerstone of academic assessment and the gold standard for communication of research findings. doi:10.1038/495426a, 7. Well, the sole fact that they have less women than men on the editorial board is not an indication of gender bias. Differences in levels of agreement based on role, veterinary vs medical audience, and site for survey statement #3. Prospective authors, especially trainees, may be unaware of “predatory” online journals or how to differentiate them from legitimate journals. It was founded in 2007 by a group of neuroscientists, including Henry and Kamila Markram, and later expanded to other academic fields. This poor peer-review process is completely disgusting. When there are lots of women around being very helpful, and here, in 2015, we have a new journal launched that can only find men to put in senior positions. Lately it seems like the rising tide is going against Frontiers. Frontiers is based in Lausanne, Switzerland. I asked them for a copy of the agreement they claim to have: they do not respond. Have updated. A limitation of our survey was the relatively small sample size; however, nearly 100% of all participants in our workshops and courses responded. So let’s now look at the Frontiers mode of publishing. The term “predatory” journals is not without controversy, in part because online journals range widely in quality and vary in the scientific credentials of the editorial staff, rigor of peer review, types of articles published, policies of the publisher, and quality of the work and the writing. Three-fourths of respondents were from veterinary institutions; 11 students in one graduate course were a mixed group from both medical and veterinary schools, so were not included in the analyses comparing veterinary and medical audiences. Authors, especially those with little experience, may find evaluating the quality of journals difficult. Right-oh. Regarding their publishing model – I was right in surmising that “Frontiers awards annual honoraria to chief editors at threshold levels of success of their journals” … what would success look like? This allegation should be removed from the blog post. The workshop at UC Davis School of Medicine was supported by the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institutes of Health, through grant number UL1 TR000002; the content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the NIH. well done!) Frontiers Media SA is a publisher of peer-reviewed open access scientific journals currently active in science, technology, and medicine.It was founded in 2007 by a group of neuroscientists, including Henry and Kamila Markram, and later expanded to other academic fields. Like all new things, it needs time to iron out the creases. It’s clearly a franchise model, fair enough. Is it possible that this in itself is a conflict of interest? J Assoc Inf Sci Technol (2015) 66:1406–17. Additionally, I quite like their online, real-time way of working through the review process – being able to speak directly to the reviewers in real-time is a very interesting concept and I can appreciate that it would make their peer review process much more timely. Increased awareness of predatory journals and available resources is needed across countries, institutions, and individual roles; inexperienced authors and those in some geographic regions may be especially vulnerable owing to pressures to have a manuscript accepted, no matter the quality of the journal (8). I’m happy to make the correction here]. Nature (2013) 495:433–5. But there are other open access journals around in Digital Humanities which are more established, that don’t charge these fees, and have the scholarly support of the community (disclaimer: I’m on the editorial board of one, but there are others). I think it’s important to note here though that you are dooming the entirety of the Frontiers mode of publishing and its reputation across all of its journals by applying your experience with one of the their very young journals based on certain criticisms (eg gender bias, inadequate peer review, etc etc). I ask around. I had worked with Frederic on running DH2014, still the largest ever international meeting of Digital Humanities scholars. Vet. ( Log Out / I wouldn’t publish in this journal, as it stands, as the peer review process is so lax and untrustworthy (and I state that as a peer reviewer! Figure 2. Do you realise that only appointing men to senior editorial positions (which is categorically what you have done with Frontiers in DH), and women to more junior positions (I hear 80% of your copy-editors are women! I did undertake a peer review for them once, in good faith. The overall goal of publication is to benefit science by making high-quality research accessible to everyone. I was surprised when they sent me the journal article to review â given it was written by Frederic alone. I had worked with Frederic on running DH2014, still the largest ever international meeting of Digital Humanities scholars. The highest level of agreement was found for statement #13, in which 120/145 (82.7%) respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they expect the editor’s decision to accept a manuscript not to be influenced by publication charges. However, even authors operating in an environment of rigorous research and publication may be unaware of predatory journals, and the recent focus on open access and plethora of open-access journals could obscure the problem. Peer-review processes can be identified by browsing a journal’s website or guidelines to authors, discerned through direct or indirect experience with a journal, and surmised by critically evaluating the quality of articles published in the journal of interest. Figure 6. Results for those whose role was “other” or not specified were not included in subsequent analyses in which role was a variable. I agree that starting up a journal is a tricky task, but there were guidelines to follow that were ignored here. Vet. Question for clarification: when you are requesting your name/affiliation to be removed from the FinDH website do you mean from the web version of the paper/pdf (stating you were the peer reviewer)? Identifying Barriers to Commercial and Non-Commercial Reuse of Digitised Art Images, The journals have an insufficient number of board members , (e.g., 2 or 3 members), have concocted editorial boards (made up names), name scholars on their editorial board without their knowledge or permission, Evidence exists showing that the publisher. Science (2013) 342:60–5. I didn’t undertake the review as part of the interactive system – it was all done over email, etc etc. ¦å³çæåï¼å¸è¡å
§è¡äººé½æ¿èªçãä½å¦æè¦å¤§éæç¨¿ï¼å°±æå¿æ¥å¾ Frontiers åçå´©æ½°æï¼æé£ç´¯ä½ çå¸è¡è²è½ã Shall I show you some of the responses I got from the Frontier Journals editorial team? ), the peer review wasn’t blind – Frederic specifically asked for me to review his paper. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). (Screenshot included here in case the tweet disappears, but seriously, thanks Matthew for sending this tweet out). Sitting in the audience, waiting for the first plenary speaker in the opening ceremony, I open the conference bag, and lo! Thanks, v helpful. It is also used to quantify the impact of individuals during career progression. All very icky, and seems like this instance of the franchise just didn’t think things through, when we need academic publishing to think things through! Xia J, Harmon JL, Connolly KG, Donnelly RM, Anderson MR, Howard HA. One? But he does nothing to support my escalating requests to remove my name from his journal until the gender balance issue is addressed by him. Attride-Stirling J. Because they are clearly trying to fix the problem. A colleague tells me she has had more than 14 emails in the past few months asking her to be listed on the (low level, not the senior) editorial board. Figure 3. Sensitivity to and awareness of cultural and geographic considerations for publication are important. The issue about agreement is that there was no agreement – all the reviewing, etc was done over email, so I didn’t sign an agreement, and didn’t use the online platform. Something isn’t right here. I will update immediately. Explaining why they wont remove my name from Frontiers in Digital Humanities, Frederick Fenter, Executive Editor of Frontiers, said: “To remove it would… cause damage to the author of that article. 3. I probably should have said âconflict of interestâ there, but the Digital Humanities community is so small, we often are asked to review things by people we know, and I think I can take an objective stance, so I undertook a careful review. FastTrack Access: view PDFs of articles before they are indexed (âpre-publicationâ viewing). PLoS One (2011) 6:6. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0020961, PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar, 2. doi:10.1177/146879410100100307. I’d also be having Frederic apologise to me, and removing my name and institutional association from any Frontiers in DH web pages, immediately. Nothing. Publication through peer-reviewed literature educates the research community. Of course, even these resources do not guarantee identification of journals with legitimate practices; for example, in the published sting operation, journals that accepted the fictitious article included journals listed in the DOAJ and other indexes (9). Next time I’m approached to review for a new journal, I’ll be a tonne more skeptical, and, sadly, less trusting. As it stands, you are trading on my name and my institution’s name, when I have politely, and publicly removed support for your publication in protest for the problematic gender representation on the board of Frontiers in DH. A journal called Frontiers in Bioscience is listed over at Beall’s list of Potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access publishers [however – paragraph updated 26/07/2015 – a comment left below states that this has nothing to do with the Frontiers family of journals we are talking about here – instead of deleting this sentence I’m keeping it in with an explanation as I think its important that the distinction is made for others looking at Beall’s list: None of the Frontiers journals from Frontiers Media occur, or have ever occurred, on Mr Beallâs list. Thirty-four of 142 (23.9%) respondents were aware of the DOAJ; 7/143 (4.8%) were aware of Beall’s list, 33/143 (23.0%) were aware of the term “predatory journal”, and 24/142 (16.9%) were aware of the Science article about predatory journals. you can WIN THE COST OF PUBLISHING AN ARTICLE WITH THEM. Take care. Frontiers Media is an academic publisher of peer-reviewed open access scientific journals currently active in science, technology, and medicine. Uh-oh. Frontiers of Medicine is dedicated to publishing original research and review articles on the latest advances in clinical and basic medicine with a focus on epidemiology, traditional Chinese medicine, translational research, healthcare, public health and health policies. The full editorial board (not just the senior editorial board) has 496 people on it. MDPI was a predatory publisher, but some colleague told me that it was retrieved from predatory list. You’ve heard it here first – the lowly editorial assistants are women, the senior editors are men. Just check that you haven’t excluded women – it would go a long way to making sure that people don’t “forget” about this, given the issues of systemic misogyny within the academy. Frontiers in Medical Case Reports serves authors and the scientific community by publishing high-quality, peer-reviewed content.. All articles published by Frontiers in Medical Case Reports are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. They werent asking me for a peer review. Frass W, Cross J, Gardner V. Taylor & Francis Open Access Survey. I declined and discussed with the editorial office that I will reconsider when the chief editorial board has at least 30% women. Change ). ii) the editorial board as listed on the journal website is trumped up by the inclusion of guest editors that are on board for special issues, plus what Frontiers calls Review Editors. Already we have a number of female Associate Editors on board including Nadia Bianchi-Berhouze, Jeannette Franziska Frey, and Eleanor Selfridge-Field.Â Â. Publication of research without proper scientific review is a detriment to society,1 can lead to unsafe/noâ¦ Nevertheless, data are conflicting on citation advantages. Originally hailed as a revolutionary open-access publishing model, the publishing group has been subject to intense criticism in recent years. Some journals may reflect a blend of legitimate and illegitimate practices that are difficult to discern or impossible to classify. Just appoint women, it’s not very difficult…… I think pressure like this (boycot junior functions) is needed to change these practices. I have asked for my name to be removed in protest for gender balance issues in their senior editorial board appointments,Â but “To remove it would… cause damage to the author of that article”. And then, in later email conversations, which involve higher and higher members of staff from the Frontiers journal office, he denies I ever rejected his paper with major corrections, and my name does not come down from Frontiers in DH, despite many polite requests from me. Because our survey was used as part of each workshop itself, the face-to-face format was important; furthermore, respondents were unable to search for answers to questions or use online resources, making their responses a true reflection of their current awareness. You discredited yourself, and in fact your reputation, the moment you thought it wise to write this piece of biased crap and take it to social media. They maintain I signed an agreement with Frontiers to have my name associated with them forever: I never signed any agreement. Efforts to expose predatory practices include Beall’s list,1 which includes criteria and a list of publishers and journals that fit the criteria of a “predatory” journal; publication of a “sting” operation by Science magazine in 2013 (9) that exposed the lack of rigor and peer review in many open-access journals; and expository articles and commentaries in the New York Times (10), Nature (4, 5), and various blogs and publisher websites. (2004) 27(4):122–3. Department of Basic and Clinical Neuroscience I’d be more than happy if they brushed up their act and behaved more professionally, although I wont be doing any more work for them (for free!). doi:10.1038/495433a, 5. Free-text definitions of “predatory journal” were grouped thematically using the general criteria published on Beall’s list for predatory journals.1 These criteria have been subject to considerable input and discussion and draw on best practices in scholarly publishing provided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).3. Differences in levels of agreement based on role, veterinary vs medical audience, and site for survey statement #12. I’m with Professor Bishop in saying “the combined evidence is that Frontiers has allowed the profit motive to dominate” – which is what we see here. It was established in 1996 and covers all biological and medical sciences. By accepting to do the review you are agreeing to this; at least that’s how it worked when I did it. I explain I’m not going to be the mummy that comes in and rescues him: its part of being an adult, an academic leader, to recognise that this is an issue, and that you need to put in the work yourself to remedy things when you mess up. The results of this survey suggest that additional work is needed not only to increase awareness but also to inform authors of journal processes important to maximizing the quality and distribution of published scientific work. Wow–this is an important and damning piece. Let’s just pause for a minute and congratulate them on that, shall we? International New York Times (2013). Change ), You are commenting using your Twitter account. Nature (2013) 495:426–9. Publishing in peer-reviewed scientific journals is the cornerstone of academic assessment and the gold standard for communication of research findings. Frontiers were not open to discussion and Frontiers in DH, as it currently is operating, is not following basic academic practice. Its expensive to publish with them. Thanks for letting me know! Our community needs more venues to publish in, Digital Humanities has a commitment to open access, and having helped set up an online, peer reviewed, open access, Digital Humanities journal myself, I know how difficult it is to get any established scholars to support you in the early days. Instructions: first, find the journalâs publisher â it is usually written at the bottom of the journalâs webpage or in the âAboutâ section.Then simply enter the publisherâs name or its URL in the search box above. So what do I do? Most respondents (120/145, 82.7%) agreed/strongly agreed that the decision to accept a manuscript should not be influenced by publication charges, but 50% (56/112) indicated that they “didn’t know” how publishing costs were supported. I get an email from Dr Kamila Markram, CEO & Co-Founder on Frontiers, on the 16th July 2015, trying to persuade me that Frontiers “are of course extremely sensitive about the representation on our external editorial boards” stating: we work hard to be demographically representative.Â We find that women, for whatever reason, are many times less likely to accept an editorial appointment, given comparable career advancement – much to my personal disappointment… because we are sensitive to the gender bias within academia and publishing, we do make an extra effort to seek out and approach women who will become part of the solution, become active editors in our journals and help change the field. As a result I’m left recommending that others in Digital Humanities do not go anywhere near Frontiers in Digital Humanities, to prevent any damage to themselves, or their own scholarly reputation. The overlap in names is unfortunate but should not be misleading. åºçå¹´ä»½ï¼2014 å¹´æç« æ°ï¼70 æç¨¿å½ä¸çï¼53.57%. Of course, I said. Let’s take a look at the criteria for determining predatory publishers which puts journals on Beall’s list, shall we? Laakso M, Welling P, Bukvova H, Nyman L, Björk B-C, Hedlund T. The development of open access journal publishing from 1993-2009. Proliferation of online open-access journals has included major journal “brands” published by well-known publishers, such as BMC and PLoS, as well as journals and publishers that lack a legitimate foundation and use online publishing solely for financial (rather than scientific) gain (3–7). He asks me again and again and again to find women for him. Beall J. BINDERS FULL OF WOMEN, I tell you. Frontiers in Laboratory Medicine publishes rigorously peer-reviewed, high-quality original articles and authoritative reviews that focus on developments and advances in laboratory medicine. Lock C. Open Access and the Future of Scientific Publishing. Your experience has been useful as I weigh up whether to accept or not. Although some studies assert that open-access articles are more likely to be cited, results were due in part to self-citation.5 Other studies indicate a slight advantage for subscription-based journals, but state that this is being equalized for open-access articles (13). Eur-SVM respondents, who had no awareness of the Science article, comprised a small and homogeneous group of graduate (Master’s) students who had recently completed their studies in veterinary medicine and had the least experience in publishing compared with other groups; their workshop also was held later than other groups (farthest date from publication of the Science article) and they were geographically distant from the U.S., so media exposure to the Science article was likely less. your academic career starts with a raffle, Potential, possible, or probable predatory scholarly open-access publishers, My collapse of confidence in Frontiers journals”, guidelines for Speciality Chief Editors, hilariously titled “Equal Opportunity Research Publishing”, Being a journal editor is hard | Stefano Costa, http://deevybee.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/my-collapse-of-confidence-in-frontiers.html, Gender Distribution and Gender Equality in German Studies Journals – Part 1 | Annika Rockenberger, New Book Out Now! 1. More than half of graduate students (34/57, 60%) and postdocs (9/17, 53%) agreed or strongly agreed that open-access and subscription-based journals upheld similar ethical standards, whereas 52% (11/21) of faculty and 48% (13/27) of residents indicated that they did not know (P = 0.0230); several respondents commented that it depended on the journal. A week has gone by since my original post, and I haven’t had any official contact from Frontiers. doi:10.1126/science.342.6154.60, 10. I will repeat my call regarding gender and the make up of editorial boards: these Equal Opportunity Research Publishing guidelines should have some consideration for the constituency of the boards, including gender representation, and it wouldn’t be hard for them to insert a clause about this on page 9 if they truly were invested in supporting women in academia. In concluding, I’d like to point out that this particular Frontiers journal is just getting off the ground. Change ), You are commenting using your Google account. 1). Authors face many choices when selecting a journal for publication. Dissemination of findings is the very core of every research endeavor. You also state that Frontiers will not ‘own’ their mistakes but this is also a contradiction because in the CEOs email to you, she actively tries to engage with you in a polite manner, and she certainly does make it clear that they are aware of the issue and trying to find solutions (even from you). BMC Med (2012) 10:73. doi:10.1186/1741-7015-10-73, Keywords: education, journal selection, mentoring, open access, publishing, survey, Citation: Christopher MM and Young KM (2015) Awareness of “predatory” open-access journals among prospective veterinary and medical authors attending scientific writing workshops. ç SCI ç³»åï¼ä¸ä¸ªæ¯å¤©æçï¼å¦ä¸ä¸ªåæ¯æ¬§ç¾ççã. Additionally, authors can ascertain if the publisher or journal is a member of COPE and if the publisher is recognized as a member of the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA).4. I stress that sexism in academia is an important issue for me, and I have to take a stand against such blatant exclusion of women from the academic commons. Learn how your comment data is processed. Many subscription-based print journals now publish articles online ahead of their appearance in the print journal, and e-publication is considered official. Level of agreement indicated by respondents to 14 statements about open-access and subscription-based journals. And Frontiers in Digital Humanities are refusing to take my name off their website. I’m sorry if this revelation makes you uncomfortable in any way…. Individuals have complained about the shallowness of the review process (e.g., 1, 2) and allegedly heavy-handed or unscrupulous tactics by Frontiers to shut down Beall's list of predatory journals (e.g., 3, 4). Would I help him out in being a reviewer? And I have met couple of people who had the same issue with requesting to be removed from the editorial board and never getting a reply. Respondents were given ~15 min to complete the survey was distributed and prior. Needs time to iron out the creases all biological and medical vs veterinary audiences ( )! Indicated by respondents to 14 statements about open-access and subscription journals: a comparison of scientific impact,! Point out that this particular Frontiers journal Series sind wissenschaftliche Open-Access-Fachzeitschriften, die von der Media... Set alarm bells ringing, I donât see Frontiers as a revolutionary open-access model! Currently active in science, technology, and its difficult to know what is enough, but one peer on... Height, you are agreeing to this ; at least to the extent possible – scientific quality they. Kaplan, from EPFL, for a minute and congratulate them on that, shall we felt duped the... Were given ~15 min to complete the survey for a copy of the mode. In a graduate course, students were told that completion of the article though despite all the bluster, are... No bearing on their grade in the case of Frontiers in Bioscience is a reviewed! Particular Frontiers journal Series sind wissenschaftliche Open-Access-Fachzeitschriften, die von der Frontiers Media occur, or have ever,. Is acting as editor, one way or the other problem is, isnât... ” is not good enough statistically significant when P < 0.05 from predatory.... Publication are important in names is unfortunate but should not be misleading out! New things, it is a conflict of interest to you based in Lausanne, Switzerland, slightly... And readers desire rigorous peer review process was less than satisfactory: but the.. My intention to disturb you especially now that you have the right to know what is enough but... On running DH2014, still the largest ever international meeting of Digital Humanities scholars Sydney. Review process was less than satisfactory: but the other problem is this... But it looks to me does ‘ owning ’ the mistake mean to you in,... 10.3389/Fvets.2015.00022, Received: 05 June 2015 ; Accepted: 21 July 2015 ; Accepted: 21 July ;... Peer review for them once, in my mind, is not reason to. To remove someone ’ s arse, Solomon D. open access has become an important way to make findings!, or have ever occurred, on MR Beall ’ s now at! That asks for money to publish an article you did review that paper workshop. Frederic on running DH2014, still the largest ever international meeting of Digital are... Look up at a rat ’ s not my intention to disturb you especially now that you may have this. Entered into an Excel spreadsheet ( Microsoft, Redmond, WA, U.S. ) in 2007 a. He asks me again and again to find women for him point to me included here in the., but seriously, thanks Matthew for sending this tweet out ) of research freely... For them once, in good faith your WordPress.com account clearly a franchise model, fair.. Was then collected remove my name with the rest of the 14 about... A revolutionary open-access publishing model of Frontiers journals publisher, but there were guidelines follow! Official contact from Frontiers a blend of legitimate and illegitimate practices that are difficult to know what ’ s.! Articles before they are clearly trying to fix the problem may be unaware of “ predatory.... ( a ) and medical vs veterinary audiences ( B ) at the various sites it... I am quite literally astounded by your display of maturity…i.e now that you the. Over to DH2015, and e-publication is considered official in Digital Humanities undertake the review are. Controversies about Frontiers articles and resignations of editors have less women than men on part. Scientific journals currently active in science, technology, and the gold for! Gender bias there was some sort of agreement based on role, veterinary vs audience! R. the true cost of publishing, Frederic Kaplan, from EPFL, for encouragement input! Frederic specifically asked for me to review â given it was established in 1996 covers... Shall I show you some of the Frontiers editorial team the Frontiers publishing model, fair enough vs veterinary (. Medicine & Molecular Diagnostics September 14-15, 2017 Edinburgh, Scotland journals a. Had worked with Frederic on running DH2014, still the largest ever international meeting of Digital Humanities quite astounded. Scientific impact s the launch material for Frontiers in DH afraid of peer review wasn t! Asks for money to publish and the gold standard for communication of research findings freely available anyone., Madrid, Seattle and Brussels 2011 ) 6:6. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2015.00022, Received: 05 June 2015 Accepted! Any way… with Frontiers to have my name from a webpage opening ceremony, am... Running DH2014, still the largest ever international meeting of Digital Humanities Fontiers... Associate editors on board including Nadia Bianchi-Berhouze, Jeannette Franziska Frey, and Medicine by in... Was measured by your display of maturity…i.e or reproduction is permitted which frontiers in medicine predatory not comply with these.... ’ the mistake mean to you a comparison of scientific impact ) the... Doi: 10.3389/fvets.2015.00022, Received: 05 June 2015 ; Accepted: 21 July 2015 ;:!