The 3 dangers of publishing in “megajournals”–and how you can avoid them | Impactstory blog

peter.suber's bookmarks 2014-04-10

Summary:

"You like the idea of 'megajournals'–online-only, open access journals that cover many subjects and publish content based only on whether it is scientifically sound. You get that PLOS ONE, PeerJ and others offer a path to a more efficient, faster, more open scholarly publishing world. But you’re not publishing there. Because you’ve heard rumors that they’re not peer reviewed, or that they’re “peer-review lite” journals. You’re concerned they’re journals of last resort, article dumping grounds. You’re worried your co-authors will balk, that your work won’t be read, or that your CV will look bad. Well, you’re not the only one. And it’s true: although they’ve got great potential for science as a whole, megajournals (which include PLOS ONE as well as BMJ Open, SAGE Open, Scientific Reports, Open Biology, PeerJ, and SpringerPlus) carry some potential career liabilities. But they don’t have to. With a little savvy, publishing in megajournals can actually boost your career, at the same time as you support a great new trend in science communication. So here are the biggest dangers of megajournal publishing–and the tips that let you not have to worry about them: 1. My co-authors won’t want to publish in megajournals ...  2. No one in my field will find out about it ... 3. My CV will look like I couldn’t publish in 'good' journals ..."

Link:

http://blog.impactstory.org/the-3-dangers-of-publishing-in-megajournals-and-how-you-can-avoid-them/

From feeds:

Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) » peter.suber's bookmarks
Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) » abernard102@gmail.com

Tags:

oa.new oa.comment oa.megajournals oa.gold oa.publishers oa.business_models oa.benefits oa.misunderstandings oa.obstacles oa.p&t oa.incentives oa.journals

Date tagged:

04/10/2014, 11:21

Date published:

04/10/2014, 07:07