Procrastination and inconsistency: Expressions of concern for publications with compromised integrity

Expressions of concern (EoC) can reduce the adverse effects of unreliable publications by alerting readers to concerns about publication integrity while assessment is undertaken. We investigated the use of EoC for 463 publications by two research groups for which we notified concerns about publication integrity to 142 journals and 44 publishers between March 2013 and February 2020. By December 2021, 95 papers had had an EoC, and 83 were retracted without an EoC. Median times from notification of concerns to EoC (10.4mo) or retraction without EoC (13.1mo) were similar. Among the 95 EoCs, 29 (30.5%) were followed by retraction after a median of 5.4mo, none was lifted, and 66 (69.5%) remained in place after a median of 18.1mo. Publishers with >10 notified publications issued EoCs for 0-81.8% of papers: for several publishers the proportions of notified papers for which EoCs were issued varied considerably between the 2 research groups. EoCs were issued for >30% of notified publications of randomized clinical trials and letters to the editor, and <20% of other types of research. These results demonstrate inconsistent application of EoCs between and within publishers, and prolonged times to issue and resolve EoCs.

Gender Representation on Editorial Boards of JAMA Network Journals

Objective: Underrepresentation of women on editorial boards of biomedical journals has occurred for decades. The JAMA Network Journals have substantial and broad impact on advances in the biomedical sciences. We sought to determine the current status of gender representation on editorial boards of the 12 JAMA Network Journals. Methods: The gender of each editorial board member of the 12 JAMA Network Journals was classified based on review of online sources. The percentage of women on each board (i.e., number of women relative to total members) was calculated and compared to gender equity and parity benchmarks. The gender equity benchmark for each journal was defined as the percentage of women physicians in the medical specialty reflecting the journal's content based on Association of American Medical Colleges data. The gender parity benchmark for all journals was defined as 50% women. Results: There was considerable variation in the representation of women on the editorial boards of the JAMA Network Journals relative to gender equity and parity benchmarks. Women were underrepresented on 50% (6 of 12) of boards relative to gender equity and 67% (8 of 12) of boards relative to gender parity. Conclusions: Women were found to be underrepresented on 50% or more of the editorial boards of the JAMA Network Journals. This finding reflects gender inequities in academic publishing and the broader biomedical enterprise, which limits advances in the biomedical sciences and health care. Those JAMA Network Journals that continue to underrepresent women on their editorial boards are urged to remediate this longstanding issue.

Academic publishing requires linguistically inclusive policies

Scientific knowledge is produced in multiple languages but is predominantly published in English. This practice creates a language barrier to generate and transfer scientific knowledge between communities with diverse linguistic backgrounds, hindering the ability of scholars and communities to address global challenges and achieve diversity and equity in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM). To overcome those barriers, publishers and journals should provide a fair system that supports non-native English speakers and disseminates knowledge across the globe. We surveyed policies of 736 journals in biological sciences to assess their linguistic inclusivity, identify predictors of inclusivity, and propose actions to overcome language barriers in academic publishing. Our assessment revealed a grim landscape where most journals were making minimal efforts to overcome language barriers. The impact factor of journals was negatively associated with adopting a number of inclusive policies whereas ownership by a scientific society tended to have a positive association. Contrary to our expectations, the proportion of both open access articles and editors based in non-English speaking countries did not have a major positive association with the adoption of linguistically inclusive policies. We proposed a set of actions to overcome language barriers in academic publishing, including the renegotiation of power dynamics between publishers and editorial boards.

The "UFO Taboo" Is What IR Theorists Make of It: "Sovereignty and the UFO" in Citational Perspective

In 2008, Alexander Wendt and Raymond Duvall published an article titled "Sovereignty and the UFO," which demonstrated how a UFO taboo in international relations theory upheld an anthropocentric model of sovereignty. At a distance of a decade and a half, this review evaluates the validity of the claim that a UFO taboo exists in international relations, and explores the citational practices that influence the prestige economy of the field. The article employs a methodology of interpretive scientometrics informed by methodological debates in political science and international, as well as theoretical debates in actor-network theory. After testing the claim of the UFO taboo in a comparative perspective, the article investigates the strategies of association (weak and strong) present in the citations of "Sovereignty and the UFO." In addition to a revaluation of core claims in an often-read but less-often-cited article in international relations theory, this article provides important insights into how citation works in the discipline of international relations.

Looking back, moving forward: 50 years of the American Journal of Community Psychology

The American Journal of Community Psychology (AJCP) was founded in 1973 and has since its inception has been the flagship journal for the Society of Community Research and Action. AJCP publishes leading scholarship in community psychology and social action research. This special issue celebrates the 50 years of scholarship in AJCP by curating and assembling previously published articles in virtual special issues (VSIs) with accompanying commentaries. Nine VSIs were compiled as part of this special issue. Each of these VSIs were organized around themes that are of critical importance to community psychology and each VSI summarizes what has been learned from their included articles and future directions for the field. In this paper, we introduce this special issue on this collection of VSIs, discussing how each of these VSIs endeavor to push the field forward.

Gender Disparity of First Authors in Review Article Publications Related to Schizophrenia

Schizophrenia is a severe psychotic condition that can be diagnosed when certain symptoms, such as disorganized speech, disorganized thoughts, or negative feelings, are present for at least six months in a person's life. Gender equity and representation in academic writing are significant issues that have received more attention recently. Understanding the gender discrepancies in authorship can help researchers studying schizophrenia overcome obstacles and potential biases. The purpose of this study was to determine the degree of gender discrepancy among initial authors of articles that focused on schizophrenia and to identify potential causes of such inequalities. A bibliometric analysis of articles related to schizophrenia published from 2019 to 2022 was conducted. The authors' genders were determined through available public records and professional affiliations. The analysis included assessing the proportion of male and female first authors and examining trends over time. A total of 982 articles were included in the analysis. The results revealed a significant gender disparity in first authorship, with a higher representation of male first authors (546, 55.6%) compared to female first authors (436, 44.4%). There is a significant increase in the percentage of female authors from 2019 to 2022 (i.e., from 25% to 48.5%). The number of female and male authors is predicted to remain at a constant from 2023 to 2027, with male authors at 175 and female authors at slightly above 150. The findings of this study underscore the need for continued efforts to address gender imbalances in academic publishing and promote gender equity in the field of schizophrenia research. Recognizing and rectifying these disparities can contribute to a more inclusive and diverse scientific community.

Viewing research assessment, the academic reward system, and academic publishing through the power/knowledge lens of Foucault

The academic research assessment system, the academic reward system, and the academic publishing system are interrelated mechanisms that facilitate the scholarly production of knowledge. This article considers these systems using a Foucauldian lens to examine the power/knowledge relationships found within and through these systems. A brief description of the various systems is introduced followed by examples of instances where Foucault's power, knowledge, discourse, and power/knowledge concepts are useful to provide a broader understanding of the norms and rules associated with each system, how these systems form a network of power relationships that reinforce and shape one another.

Letter writing assignment for exercise physiology students

Letters to the editor are an important part of democratic societies. In academic journals, letters serve as a form of postpublication review and thus permit continued discussion and debate of scientific ideas. However, letters and their importance are rarely taught to university students. Therefore, the aim of the present paper is to propose a lecture and an assignment that introduce the exercise physiology student to letters. The lecture includes an overview of the history of letters, the definition and purposes of letters, letter themes, examples of letters published in exercise physiology journals, and a search method for discovering letters. The student is then assigned a project comprised of two parts. Part 1 requires the student to independently discover a letter exchange in a scientific journal, including the original research article, the letter commenting on the article, and the reply to the letter. The student then writes a report that summarizes the exchange. The report includes an analysis of the letter's themes and the validity of the arguments made. Part 2 of the assignment requires the student to independently discover an article published in the past year that they believe requires comment. The student then writes a letter, commenting on the article. Students who write convincing letters can be encouraged to submit their letter to the journal. The assignment should help prepare the next generation of journal editors, reviewers, and readers for the task of preserving and participating in a practice that serves to refine knowledge.NEW & NOTEWORTHY Letters to the editor are a form of postpublication review and thus help to refine knowledge through discussion and debate, yet exercise physiology students are rarely introduced to letters in their formal education. Here, the author proposes a lecture and an assignment that the university educator can use to help students understand the importance of letters. In the assignment, the student, among other tasks, critiques an existing letter exchange and writes a letter for potential publication.

Factors Associated With Open Access Publishing Costs in Oncology Journals: Cross-sectional Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Open access (OA) publishing represents an exciting opportunity to facilitate the dissemination of scientific information to global audiences. However, OA publishing is often associated with significant article processing charges (APCs) for authors, which may thus serve as a barrier to publication.

OBJECTIVE

In this observational cohort study, we aimed to characterize the landscape of OA publishing in oncology and, further, identify characteristics of oncology journals that are predictive of APCs.

METHODS

We identified oncology journals using the SCImago Journal & Country Rank database. All journals with an OA publication option and APC data openly available were included. We searched journal websites and tabulated journal characteristics, including APC amount (in US dollars), OA model (hybrid vs full), 2-year impact factor (IF), H-index, number of citable documents, modality/treatment specific (if applicable), and continent of origin. All APCs were converted to US-dollar equivalents for final analyses. Selecting variables with significant associations in the univariable analysis, we generated a multiple regression model to identify journal characteristics independently associated with OA APC amount. An audit of a random 10% sample of the data was independently performed by 2 authors to ensure data accuracy, precision, and reproducibility.

RESULTS

Of 367 oncology journals screened, 251 met the final inclusion criteria. The median APC was US $2957 (IQR 1958-3450). The majority of journals (n=156, 62%) adopted the hybrid OA publication model and were based in Europe (n=119, 47%) or North America (n=87, 35%). The median (IQR) APC for all journals was US $2957 (1958-3540). Twenty-five (10%) journals had APCs greater than US $4000. There were 10 (4%) journals that offered OA publication with no publication charge. Univariable testing showed that journals with a greater number of citable documents (P<.001), higher 2-year IF (P<.001), higher H-index (P<.001), and those using the hybrid OA model (P<.001), or originating in Europe or North America (P<.001) tended to have higher APCs. In our multivariable model, the number of citable documents (β=US $367, SD US $133; P=.006), 2-year IF (US $1144, SD US $177; P<.001), hybrid OA publishing model (US $991, SD US $189; P<.001), and North American origin (US $838, SD US $186; P<.001) persisted as significant predictors of processing charges.

CONCLUSIONS

OA publication costs are greater in oncology journals that publish more citable articles, use the hybrid OA model, have a higher IF, and are based in North America or Europe. These findings may inform targeted action to help the oncology community fully appreciate the benefits of open science.

British Journal of Anaesthesia: a leading publication and a registered charity

The British Journal of Anaesthesia organisation is a registered charity comprised of two interlinked missions: provision of impactful publications and funding the generation and dissemination of research to the wider anaesthetic community. This centenary editorial highlights our charitable activity that covers funding of research infrastructure, meeting support and funding of a diverse portfolio of international research grants.

Open access and predatory publishing: a survey of the publishing practices of academic pharmacists and nurses in the United States

Objective

Academics are under great pressure to publish their research, the rewards for which are well known (tenure, promotion, grant funding, professional prestige). As open access publishing gains acceptance as a publishing option, researchers may choose a "predatory publisher." The purpose of this study is to investigate the motivations and rationale of pharmacy and nursing academics in the United States to publish in open access journals that may be considered "predatory."

Methods

A 26-item questionnaire was programmed in Qualtrics and distributed electronically to approximately 4,500 academic pharmacists and nurses, 347 of whom completed questionnaires (~8%). Pairwise correlations were performed followed by a logistic regression to evaluate statistical associations between participant characteristics and whether participants had ever paid an article processing fee (APF).

Results

Participants who had published more articles, were more familiar with predatory publishing, and who were more concerned about research metrics and tenure were more likely to have published in open access journals. Moderate to high institutional research intensity has an impact on the likelihood of publishing open access. The majority of participants who acknowledged they had published in a predatory journal took no action after realizing the journal was predatory and reported no negative impact on their career for having done so.

Conclusion

The results of this study provide data and insight into publication decisions made by pharmacy and nursing academics. Gaining a better understanding of who publishes in predatory journals and why can help address the problems associated with predatory publishing at the root.

Self-help for learned journals: Scientific societies and the commerce of publishing in the 1950s

In the decades after the Second World War, learned society publishers struggled to cope with the expanding output of scientific research and the increased involvement of commercial publishers in the business of publishing research journals. Could learned society journals survive economically in the postwar world, against this competition? Or was the emergence of a sales-based commercial model of publishing - in contrast to the traditional model of subsidized journal publishing - an opportunity to transform the often-fragile finances of learned societies? But there was also an existential threat: if commercial firms could successfully publish scientific journals, were learned society publishers no longer needed? This paper investigates how British learned society publishers adjusted to the new economic realities of the postwar world, through an investigation of the activities organized by the Royal Society of London and the Nuffield Foundation, culminating in the 1963 report Self-Help for Learned Journals. It reveals the postwar decades as the time when scientific research became something to be commodified and sold to libraries, rather than circulated as part of a scholarly mission. It will be essential reading for all those campaigning to transition academic publishing - including learned society publishing - away from the sales-based model once again.

Awareness Mentality and Strategic Behavior in Science

Acknowledgement of scientific achievements was and is essentially achieved through the citation of a publication. Increasingly, however, it is no longer just the publication itself that plays an important role, but also the degree of attention that a scientist achieves with this very publication. Thus, the importance of strategic behavior in science is progressing and an awareness mentality is spreading. In this paper, the causes and backgrounds of this development are discussed, identifying the use of reductionist, quantitative systems in science management and research funding, the loss of critical judgment and technocratic dominance, quantitative assessments used for decision making, altmetrics and the like as alternative views, the use of perception scores in reference databases and universities as well as ambitions of journals as main drivers. Besides, different forms of strategic behavior in science and the resulting consequences and impacts are being highlighted.

Timeliness and content of retraction notices for publications by a single research group

Publications of expressions of concern and retractions should be timely, accurate and comprehensive. We as sessed these characteristics for 292 publications by a research group about which we submitted concerns about publication integrity to 77 journals and 29 publishers between March 2013 and February 2020. By October 2020, 115 publications were corrected (3), had expressions of concern (18), or were retracted (94). The median (95% CI) time from submission of concerns to the first journal correction was 22.1 (18.2-26.9) months: this did not diminish by year of submission of concerns, varied between publishers, and was shorter for journals with higher impact factors. Eighty-four publications of original research were retracted. The median (range) proportion of concerns raised with the journal that were mentioned in the ensuing retraction notices was 9.5% (2-49). At least 75% of retraction notices included the suggested content for 7/9, 3/9 and 3/16 items in the Committee for Publication Ethics and Retraction Watch minimum and optimal recommended formats, respectively. Thus, assessment of concerns about publication integrity was delayed and incomplete. Adherence to recommended content of retraction notices was moderate at best. Strategies are needed to improve the efficiency, accuracy and transparency of processes for resolving concerns about publication integrity.

Academic publishing in disaster risk reduction: past, present, and future

Nowadays there are approximately 80 Anglophone journals that deal primarily with disaster risk reduction (DRR) and allied fields. This large array signals a sustained, if uneven, growth in DRR scholarship but also competition between the offerings of different publishers and institutions. The purpose of this article is first to summarise the development of academic publishing on DRR from its early beginnings to the present day. The paper then evaluates the current state of publishing in this field and discusses possible future trends. Next, it identifies some possible opportunities, challenges, expectations, and commitments for journal editors both within DRR and academia more broadly, including those that refer to changes in the use of terminology, the relentless increase in the number of papers submitted, the expansion and dangers of predatory journals, different peer review models, open access versus paywalls, citations and bibliography metrics, academic social networks, and copyright and distribution issues.

Boosting Immunity of the Registered Reports System in Psychology to the Pandemic

In psychology, a Registered Reports system is key to preventing questionable research practices. Under this system, manuscripts, including their detailed protocols (i.e., hypothesis, experimental design, sample size, and methods of statistical analysis), are reviewed prior to data collection. If a protocol manuscript is accepted, publication of the full manuscript including the results and discussion is guaranteed in principle regardless of whether the collected data support the registered hypothesis. However, this assurance of publication might be broken under the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic: Begrudging withdrawal of an accepted protocol manuscript due to a difficulty to meet the deadline by compelling reasons (e.g., pandemic) has occurred. The present paper reports the first author's real-life experience related to the collapse of the assurance of publication in the Registered Reports system and discusses the disbenefits of this collapse. Furthermore, we propose the implementation of a journal section specific to protocol manuscripts as a solution to the crisis of the Registered Reports system.

Journal policies and editors' opinions on peer review

Peer review practices differ substantially between journals and disciplines. This study presents the results of a survey of 322 editors of journals in ecology, economics, medicine, physics and psychology. We found that 49% of the journals surveyed checked all manuscripts for plagiarism, that 61% allowed authors to recommend both for and against specific reviewers, and that less than 6% used a form of open peer review. Most journals did not have an official policy on altering reports from reviewers, but 91% of editors identified at least one situation in which it was appropriate for an editor to alter a report. Editors were also asked for their views on five issues related to publication ethics. A majority expressed support for co-reviewing, reviewers requesting access to data, reviewers recommending citations to their work, editors publishing in their own journals, and replication studies. Our results provide a window into what is largely an opaque aspect of the scientific process. We hope the findings will inform the debate about the role and transparency of peer review in scholarly publishing.

BJPsych Open fifth anniversary editorial: history, accomplishments, trajectory and passion

BJPsych Open has come of age. This editorial celebrates the journal's fifth anniversary by reviewing the history of BJPsych Open, what we have accomplished, where we strive to go (our planned trajectory) and the passion of being an Editor-in-Chief.

Conflicts of interest policies for authors, peer reviewers, and editors of bioethics journals

BACKGROUND

In biomedical research, there have been numerous scandals highlighting conflicts of interest (COIs) leading to significant bias in judgment and questionable practices. Academic institutions, journals, and funding agencies have developed and enforced policies to mitigate issues related to COI, especially surrounding financial interests. After a case of editorial COI in a prominent bioethics journal, there is concern that the same level of oversight regarding COIs in the biomedical sciences may not apply to the field of bioethics. In this study, we examined the availability and comprehensiveness of COI policies for authors, peer reviewers, and editors of bioethics journals.

METHODS

After developing a codebook, we analyzed the content of online COI policies of 63 bioethics journals, along with policy information provided by journal editors that was not publicly available.

RESULTS

Just over half of the bioethics journals had COI policies for authors (57%), and only 25% for peer reviewers and 19% for editors. There was significant variation among policies regarding definitions, the types of COIs described, the management mechanisms, and the consequences for noncompliance. Definitions and descriptions centered on financial COIs, followed by personal and professional relationships. Almost all COI policies required disclosure of interests for authors as the primary management mechanism. Very few journals outlined consequences for noncompliance with COI policies or provided additional resources.

CONCLUSION

Compared to other studies of biomedical journals, a much lower percentage of bioethics journals have COI policies and these vary substantially in content. The bioethics publishing community needs to develop robust policies for authors, peer reviewers, and editors and these should be made publicly available to enhance academic and public trust in bioethics scholarship.

Attitudes toward text recycling in academic writing across disciplines

Text recycling, the reuse of material from one's own previously published writing in a new text without attribution, is a common academic writing practice that is not yet well understood. While some studies of text recycling in academic writing have been published, no previous study has focused on scholars' attitudes toward text recycling. This article presents results from a survey of over 300 journal editors and editorial board members from 86 top English-language journals in 16 different academic fields regarding text recycling in scholarly articles. Responses indicate that a large majority of academic gatekeepers believe text recycling is allowable in some circumstances; however, there is a lack of clear consensus about when text recycling is or is not appropriate. Opinions varied according to the source of the recycled material, its structural location and rhetorical purpose, and conditions of authorship conditions-as well as by the level of experience as a journal editor. Our study suggests the need for further research on text recycling utilizing focus groups and interviews.

A Question of Social Justice: How Policies of Profit Negate Engagement of Developing World Bioethicists and Undermine Global Bioethics

We identify the ways the policies of leading international bioethics journals limit the participation of researchers working in the resource-constrained settings of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in the development of the field of bioethics. Lack of access to essential scholarly resources makes it extremely difficult, if not impossible, for many LMIC bioethicists to learn from, meaningfully engage in, and further contribute to the global bioethics discourse. Underrepresentation of LMIC perspectives in leading journals sustains the hegemony of Western bioethics, limits the presentation of diverse moral visions of life, health, and medicine, and undermines aspirations to create a truly "global" bioethics. Limited attention to this problem indicates a lack of empathy and moral imagination on the part of bioethicists in high-income countries, raises questions about the ethics of bioethics, and highlights the urgent need to find ways to remedy this social injustice.

Academic nightmares: Predatory publishing

Academic researchers who seek to publish their work are confronted daily with a barrage of e-mails from aggressive marketing campaigns that solicit them to publish their research with a specialized, often newly launched, journal. Known as predatory journals, they often promise high editorial and publishing standards, yet their exploitive business models, poor quality control, and minimal overall transparency victimize those researchers with limited academic experience and pave the way for low-quality articles that threaten the foundation of evidence-based research. Understanding how to identify these predatory journals requires thorough due diligence on the part of the submitting authors, and a commitment by reputable publishers, institutions, and researchers to publicly identify these predators and eliminate them as a threat to the careers of young scientists seeking to disseminate their work in scholarly journals. Anat Sci Educ 10: 392-394. © 2016 American Association of Anatomists.

Systematic Review Checklist: A Standardized Technique for Assessing and Reporting Reviews of Life Cycle Assessment Data

Systematic review, including meta-analysis, is increasingly utilized in life cycle assessment (LCA). There are currently no widely recognized guidelines for designing, conducting, or reporting systematic reviews in LCA. Other disciplines such as medicine, ecology, and software engineering have both recognized the utility of systematic reviews and created standardized protocols for conducting and reporting systematic reviews. Based largely on the 2009 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, which updated the preferred format for reporting of such reviews in biomedical research, we provide an introduction to the topic and a checklist to guide the reporting of future LCA reviews in a standardized format. The standardized technique for assessing and reporting reviews of LCA (STARR-LCA) checklist is a starting point for improving the utility of systematic reviews in LCA.

The North-South information highway: case studies of publication access among health researchers in resource-poor countries

BACKGROUND

Less than 2% of scientific publications originate in low-income countries. Transfer of information from South to North and from South to South is grossly limited and hinders understanding of global health, while Northern-generated information fails to adequately address the needs of a Southern readership.

METHODS

A survey of a new generation of health researchers from nine low-income countries was conducted using a combination of email questionnaires and face-to-face interviews. Data were gathered on personal experiences, use and aspirations regarding access and contribution to published research.

RESULTS

A total of 23 individuals from 9 countries responded. Preference for journal use over textbooks was apparent, however a preference for print over online formats was described among African respondents compared to respondents from other areas. Almost all respondents (96%) described ambition to publish in international journals, but cited English language as a significant barrier.

CONCLUSION

The desire to contribute to and utilise contemporary scientific debate appears to be strong among study respondents. However, longstanding barriers remain in place and innovative thinking and new publishing models are required to overcome them.