Manuscript edition in English

Posted on December 2nd, 2018 by Ana Pérez-Escoda

Author Ana Pérez-Escoda – Translation: Erika-Lucia Gonzalez-Carrion

One of the main objectives that every researcher should keep in mind when publishing his or her research is the visibility of it. There will be no point in being excellent in academic and scientific contributions if we are not able to reach the right audience. In a globalized world, of instant communications we must take advantage of the synergies that the information society offers us:

  • Alternative metrics that make the article visible on digital platforms.
  • Quality of the publication chosen, which guarantees an optimal starting context.
  • Key ideas, highlighting the value of the research.
  • Scientific social networks, which efficiently focus the attention of colleagues, doctoral students and research staff.

In addition to these factors, all of them to be taken into account for the publication of our research, there is another one of vital importance: The edition of the manuscript in English.

Image: Pixabay Source: Statista 

The importance of the language or languages ​​in which we publish will mark the possibilities of real readers for our research, the greater the number of potential readers, the greater the possibility of generating a significant impact on the scientific community. It is in this case where the number of millions of approximate speakers of the language or languages ​​in which we publish takes on special relevance.

If our article is published in Spanish, we are talking about a probabilistic but not real scope (since not all speakers of a language will be potential readers of our research) of about 420 million people, if we add an English version to this version, we are adding an approximate population of 1,500 people.

Therefore, in a global and connected ecosystem where knowledge is generated with a vocation of reach, the most the best, the linguistic aspect will undoubtedly result in this intention, offering a potential audience to our article that we would never have dreamed of. Therefore, at the value of communicating our article, we will add the value of communicating to much more people which is better, always seeking an English edition of our article.

It is important, not to forget to mention the essential that results in this point to guarantee a professional and academic version that reinforces the strategy of double language, contributing to a greater scope of our research and our reputation as researchers in the area of ​​knowledge worked. Neglecting the translation process would condemn our reputation with Anglo-Saxon readers. The neatness, the rigor, the requirement and the urgency with which the manuscript has been written should be translated in the same way as the English version, so resorting to a native who knows our field of research will be mandatory if we want to maintain the quality of our publication.

 

Advertisements
Posted in Sin categoría | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Simple review or blind peers

Posted on November 25th, 2018 by Luis M Romero-Rodríguez

Author Luis M Romero-Rodríguez – Translation: Erika-Lucia Gonzalez-Carrion

The main core of scientific journals lies fundamentally in its peer review process. No matter how much a publication has a first-level Scientific Council, editors of great relevance within a scientific community or the journal is from a renowned university or research center, the basis of its scientific character are precisely the quality of its reviewers, who with their expert opinions, evaluate and value the proposed research.

In the peer review -which does not necessarily mean that they are two or multiples of two, but rather as synonymous with “homologs”-, different modalities can be presented:

  • Single-blind: In which the authors do not know the identity of the reviewers, but the reviewers know the identity of the authors.
  • Double-blind: None of the parties (authors and reviewers) know the identity of the other.
  • Open: In this system both authors and reviewers know their identities and allows authors and reviewers to dialogue in the review process.
  • Collaborative: Also known as the “blockchain revision”, since it is a collaborative platform (forum type) in which the manuscript subject to review is exposed and in which the authors and reviewers can interact without intermediaries, without any knowing the identity of the other.
  • Third-Party: Some magazines usually request that the articles pass, prior to the presentation of the same, a review process by an external agent, generally a payment service, so that with the change and authorization report, it could be published.
  • Post-publication: More than a review process (which is understood to be prior to its publication), it is a system in which journals or platforms allow other experts to comment on the published article.
  • Cascading: It happens when a manuscript is rejected by a magazine, either because the subject is not adapted or because it is not of interest to its readers. In this case, the journal, with the prior authorization of the authors, sends the article to another journal, usually from the same publisher or consortium, together with the revisions made, to continue with the process.

Although most of the typologies mentioned are not usually common, especially in Social Sciences journals, the first two (single and double blind) are the ones that we will most certainly find.

Single-blind peer review

The single-blind peer review (peer review) is a system in which the authors do not know the identity of the reviewers, but the reviewers themselves of the authors. This typology, although not very common in Social Sciences journals, applies in other branches of knowledge. For example, the publisher Nature – one of the most prestigious in the world – uses it as a default option.

This type of review has not been subject to criticism, since it is understood that by affecting the anonymization of authors, reviewers can operate with biases – for better or for worse – or commit anti-ethical practices. However, it also has its defenders, who argue among its advantages:

  • Greater ability to identify, by the reviewers, conflicts of interest (especially needed in journals of medicine, pharmacy or economics, where there are many examples of advertisement practices in favor of brands).
  • Possibility to follow the previous works of the authors and identify “salami-slicing” (unethical practice of dividing investigations into phases to publish partial results).
  • Better ability to detect auto-plagiarism.

Double-blind peer review

Undoubtedly, this modality is the most frequent option in Social Sciences journals, as is the case of Comunicar Journal. As explained, the system of double blind peers is based on the fact that the authors do not know the identity of the reviewers, nor they do not know the identity of the authors.

This system is based mainly on anonymity as the vault key of ethical review practices. However, critics of this modality explain that nowadays, with open repositories, academic and scientific social networks, Google Scholar, among others, anonymity of authors can never be guaranteed.

Moreover, according to a 2008 study by the Publishing Research Consortium, cited by Professor Lluis Codina, 56% of those consulted were in favor of the double-blind system, while 25% were in favor of the simple blind, which leaves in evidence that it is a system that the authors prefer, although it is not the only type of peer reviews that exists or that has demonstrated its efficiency -see examples such as Nature-.

 

Posted in Sin categoría | Leave a comment

Online magazines, printed … global?

Posted on November 18th, 2018 by Ignacio-Aguaded

Author Ignacio-Aguaded – Translation: Erika-Lucia Gonzalez-Carrion

A debate that has been diluted in recent years is the controversy surrounding the privileged or exclusive channel of the diffusion of scientific research. Until no more than two decades ago, online or virtual magazines were discredited and many national scientific evaluation agencies did not value the contributions in these channels, or considered them second level, from a reasoning today unexplained that these media were of inferior rank in front of the printed edition that had remained unchanged from the very begginning of the conception of the scientific journals and even more, in the DNA of the publication and of the bookby itself, in the Grevista-digital-grammysfox.pngutenberg press.

Today we have gone almost to the other extreme. It is not easy to find librarians who say that their centers do not receive printed magazines if they have electronic editions, as if both were not compatible and even more, complementary and necessary. Many experts in librarianship bet for the double channel for prestigious journals and with history. It is ilogical to think that an OJS platform with all its virtualities (which are immense in version 3.0) can easily replace the printed editorial background of a magazine with category and many “printed” pages and stories.

It is evident that it is not about defending past archeology, but rather locating the value of the different channels for scientific diffusion. Online journals have acquired an immense potential for all the advantages of the Internet and for the applications that have been developed for their management, both in the revision and editing as well as in the editing processes. This is not incompatible with maintaining printed editions with a long editing history that expand their coverage and are library funds with immense value.

08-magazineThe future of the written edition is not written yet. Some negatives of librarianship already augur the end of the magazines, at least we already live a blurring of the role of the headers. Today, “magazines” are no longer consulted, but rather single articles in the “cloud” through their keywords. These macro-bases have not already erased the unitary sense of the publication? Scientific social networks also diffuse the work in isolation, blurring their initial headings and acquiring these only value based on the prestige of their citation.

It is evident that the scientific world is transforming itself in leaps and bounds, like almost the whole world. In this sense, scientific diffusion is also revolutionizing all the standards and the very concept of the scientific journal that is less and less like the classic printed book. This is an open and exciting debate … in the meantime we defend our future with our past and our present. Printed magazines, online magazines, global magazines…

Posted in Sin categoría | Leave a comment

The correct use of quotation marks in academic writing

Posted on October 30th, 2018 by Angel Torres Toukoumidis

Author Angel Torres Toukoumidis – Translation: Erika-Lucia Gonzalez-Carrion

Quotation marks are a punctuation mark that is commonly used in academic and scientific writing. In Spanish, 3 types of quotation marks are used, low or Latin quotation marks(« »), which stand out when prescribed as the first option when making a quotation, as well as being frequent in social sciences and humanities, while high or English quotes (“ ”) and single quotes(‘ ‘), are used in texts that are already previously quoted with low or Latin quotations, being adopted more frequently for citations in scientific texts.

Among the multiple objectives of using quotation marks is to insert textual statements avoiding thereby incurring into plagiarism, to fully comply with reference styles, to add unusual or recently coined terms and to incorporate words or phrases into another language.

Continue reading

Posted in Sin categoría | Leave a comment

Creative Commons. Licenses for the open diffusion of the science

Posted on October 27th, 2018 by Águeda Delgado-Ponce

Author Águeda Delgado-Ponce – Translation: Erika-Lucia Gonzalez-Carrion

When we talk about Creative Commons (CC) we refer to free licenses that offer everyone, from the individual creator to large companies as well as institutions, in a simple and standardized way, the possibility of granting certain permissions to the public to share and use their work. In this sense, Creative Commons licenses are directly related to the open access movement, facilitating free access without subjecting the author’s rights while benefiting the advancement of science.

However, to adapt to the particular needs of each user or licensee, they offer six different licenses, although all grant two basic rights: the right to reproduce the work and to distribute the work without charge. The terms of these licenses depend on four conditions:

Continue reading

Posted in Sin categoría | Leave a comment

The diffussion of competitive projects on scientific articles

Posted on July 18th, 2018 by rosagarciaruiz

Author rosagarciaruiz – Translation: Erika-Lucia Gonzalez-Carrion

Every researcher with curricular recognition in the academic field must participate in competitive research projects. This type of projects contributes to the professional trajectory of a researcher an extraordinary value, which indicates his commitment to quality science, his relevant role in the dynamics of work of a powerful research team, and the ability to provide new solutions to problems raised in their field of knowledge. It also implies the ability to have passed the first filter at the demanding level of the scientific community, in which the success rate is minimal, compared to the huge number of projects that fail to exceed the requirements demanded in these calls.

filtro

The second filter to overcome will be to publish the results in an impact journal, since the most important commitment of the researchers who win a competitive project is the transfer of results to society, and there is no a better way to do that than the publication of articles in prestigious scientific journals to publicize their work and achievements.

A competitive research project requires the collaboration of a team of researchers, as a synonym of scientific quality, which brings together groups and collaborative networks, and has been able to meet the most demanding requirements, standing out against other groups, competing to achieve, usually, financial resources to develop their work in the best possible conditions, in addition to the prestige that is to win a project in a call of these characteristics.

Continue reading

Posted in Sin categoría | Leave a comment

CiteScore: percentiles

Posted on July 9th, 2018 by Ignacio-Aguaded

Author Ignacio-Aguaded – Translation: Erika-Lucia Gonzalez-Carrion

CiteScore is a recent Scopus metric that measures the relation of citations per article published in the database of this important global indexer that contains 25,300 journals of all specialities. It offers, therefore, key information to the authors to be able to compare and evaluate scientific journals according to their impact factor, called here CiteScore, which is based on the division of the number of citations received among the number of articles published. CiteScore calculates the citations of all the documents of a specific year in all the documents published in the previous three years. That number is divided by the number of documents indexed in Scopus (www.scopus.com/sources) published in those same years. It is a very transparent index of citations because it offers links to both the articles published and the citations received.

citescore-01

Continue reading

Posted in Sin categoría | Leave a comment