Social and Behavioral Sciences Commons^™

Human Inquiry In Scholarly Communication: Reconnecting With The Foundations Of Research, Emily Ford

Library Faculty Publications and Presentations

This column discusses refocusing our scholarly communication work on human inquiry and provides actions we can take that will allow us to move forward on that path.

Supplemental Slides For "Data Management Failures: Teaching The Importance Of Dmps Through Cautionary Examples” In The Acrl Data Literacy Cookbook, Richard M. Mikulski

Library Faculty Publications and Presentations

This supplemental presentation slide deck was created to accompany the chapter "Data Management Failures: Teaching the Importance of DMPs through Cautionary Examples" in the ACRL Data Literacy Cookbook (2022). Researchers frequently express frustration when confronted with Data Management Plan (DMP) requirements, particularly when drafting or completing a grant application. This sense of annoyance is further fueled by a too-common view that the DMP is “yet another hurdle” that researchers need to confront during the grant writing process. Once researchers and students understand the purpose and utility of DMPs, however, many of these reservations and frustrations subside. The purpose of this …

Reimagining Peer Review, Emily Ford

Library Faculty Publications and Presentations

As you may recall, the 2020 Critical Library and Pedagogy Symposium instituted an open peer review process—not masking submitters’ names and other identifying information—to review proposed sessions. This decision came after the committee noted a lack of diversity in accepted sessions using a closed review process. Using open peer review allowed the committee to balance accepted proposals and offer a diverse range of views and experiences among presenters. This hour-long facilitated discussion will examine bias and power structures inherent in peer review. It will be an interactive session that allows participants to critically examine their views and previous experiences with …

Moving Peer Review Transparency From Process To Praxis, Emily Ford

Library Faculty Publications and Presentations

Scholarly publications often work to provide transparency of peer-review processes, posting policy information to their websites as suggested by the Committee on Publication Ethics’ (COPE) Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Publishing. Yet this falls short in providing peer-review transparency. Using examples from an interview-based qualitative study, this article argues that scholarly publications should move from peer-review process transparency to a praxis of transparency in peer review. Praxis infers that values inform practices. Scholarly publications should therefore use clear communication practices in all matters of business, and bolster transparency efforts, delineating rights and responsibilities of all players in …

Heard On The Net: “Academic” And “Freedom” Are Two Words For Nothing Left To Lose, Jill Emery, Amy Buckland, Ashley Farley

Library Faculty Publications and Presentations

Opinion piece on the use of Academic Freedom as an argument against open access publishing.

Demystifying Peer Review: Using Open Peer Review In Information Literacy Instruction, Emily Ford

Library Faculty Publications and Presentations

Peer review pervades the academic library. In the information literacy (IL) classroom we teach students how to find peer-reviewed articles and engage students in understanding the peer-review process. Undoubtedly, peer review is part of the scholarly conversation, and falls under the "Scholarship as a Conversation" frame of ACRL's Framework for Information Literacy. Yet, despite our best pedagogical efforts, the peer-review process can remain a mystery for students. How can we demystify it for them when it is hidden in a black box? Open peer review (OPR)--a form of peer review that rejects the black box and brings the process into …

Advancing An Open Ethos With Open Peer Review, Emily Ford

Library Faculty Publications and Presentations

Guest Editorial

Open source. Open access. Open data. Open notebooks. Open government. Open educational resources. Open access workflows. To be open is to have a disposition favoring transparent and collaborative efforts.

Open is everywhere. Since the late 90’s when developers in Silicon Valley adopted the term ‘open source’ (suggested by Christine Peterson), the open movement has grown by leaps and bounds. The developers, who met after the web browser company Netscape made its source code open, articulated that ‘open’ “…illustrated a valuable way to engage with potential software users and developers, and convince them to create and improve source code …

Keeping Up With… Open Peer Review, Emily Ford

Library Faculty Publications and Presentations

Open Peer Review is a current and developing practice in scholarly publishing that librarians need to continue to explore and discuss. To that end ACRL should continue to support experiments with and conversations about OPR in its publications. As academic librarians, we observe and engage with new practices in scholarly communication, and OPR should be no exception. Whether academic librarianship embraces OPR as a model of peer review for its publications, or we simply observe experiments in other disciplines, we can position ourselves to better support our patrons and our publishing ventures by examining OPR.

Heard On The Net: Developing The Balance Of Discovery And Respect With Primary Resources, Jill Emery, Tara Robertson, Peggy Glahn

Library Faculty Publications and Presentations

Within libraryland social media this past spring and summer, an emerging story began to unfold. A relatively new upstart company, Reveal Digital has begun developing digital archives of primary resources which are funded by institutions pledging upfront support. The eventual result of this work will be collections made available as Open Access content to everyone. The majority of the content is being sourced from research libraries’ archival collections. Those pledging money get early access to the content as it is being digitized and made available. In addition, source libraries obtain digital copies that they can dark archive. Pledging libraries also …

Opening Review In Lis Journals: A Status Report, Emily Ford

Library Faculty Publications and Presentations

Introduction: Peer-review practices in scholarly publishing are changing. Digital publishing mechanisms allow for open peer review, a peer review process that discloses author and reviewer identities to one another. This model of peer review is increasingly implemented in scholarly publishing. In science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) disciplines, open peer review is implemented in journal publishing processes, and, in the humanities and social sciences, it is often coupled with new scholarship practices, such as the digital humanities. This article reports findings from an exploratory study on peer-review and publishing practices in Library and Information Science (LIS), focusing on LIS’s relationships …

Data From: Opening Review In Lis Journals: A Status Report, Emily Ford

Library Faculty Publications and Presentations

This data includes a .csv file with data from survey responses. The following abstract describes the research study. The purpose of this study was to gain an overview of open peer review practices and attitudes of scholarly journal editors in the field of Library and Information Science. The survey posed questions regarding current publishing and review practices, and inquired about changes journals may have made to publication and review processes. Survey participation was solicited from 253 journal editors of LIS journals listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals and Journal Citation Reports. 42 complete responses and 11 incomplete responses …

Open Peer Review At Four Stem Journals: An Observational Overview [Version 2; Referees: 2 Approved, 2 Approved With Reservations], Emily Ford

Library Faculty Publications and Presentations

Open peer review, peer review where authors' and reviewers' identities are disclosed to one another, is a growing trend in scholarly publishing. Through observation of four journals in STEM disciplines, PLOS One, Atmospheric Chemistry & Physics, PeerJ, and F1000Research, an observational overview is conducted. The overview relies on defined characteristics of open peer review. Results show that despite differing open peer review implementations, each journal retains editorial involvement in scholarly publishing. Further, the analysis shows that only one of these implementations is fully transparent in its peer review and decision making process. Finally, the overview contends …

Defining And Characterizing Open Peer Review: A Review Of The Literature, Emily Ford

Library Faculty Publications and Presentations

Changes in scholarly publishing have resulted in a move toward openness. To this end, new, open models of peer review are emerging. While the scholarly literature has examined and discussed open peer review, no established definition of it exists, nor are there uniform implementations of open peer review processes. This article examines the literature discussing open peer review, identifies common open peer review definitions, and describes eight common characteristics of open peer review: signed review, disclosed review, editor-mediated review, transparent review, crowdsourced review, prepublication review, synchronous review, and post-publication review. This article further discusses benefits and challenges to the scholarly …