[open-science] open access journal Journal of Hymenoptera Research

Tom Morris tfmorris at gmail.com
Thu Jan 31 21:04:51 UTC 2013


On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 11:03 AM, Puneet Kishor <punk.kish at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Jan 31, 2013, at 6:09 AM, Tom Morris <tfmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 1:00 AM, Donat Agosti <agosti at amnh.org> wrote:
>
>> Here is a summary that documents the first two years of the move of the
>> International Society of Hymenopterists' Journal of Hymenoptera Research
>> http://tinyurl.com/bhc6x6n from traditional publishing to advanced XML
>> based publishing making use of JATS derived taxonomy specific Taxpub NLM
>> DTD. ****
>>
>> It clearly shows that there is a strong growth shown by the almost
>> doubling of printed pages from the first to the second year. ****
>>
>> Whether this is a fluctuation or not will be shown in the future. It
>> would also be interesting to learn more about the underlying business model.
>>
>
> Is more pages a good thing or a bad thing?
>
> Not being a smartass, but really curious if that is a trick question.
>

It was a serious question.  It was prompted by a recent piece that I read
promoting Open Science which said that, in their opinion, the two biggest
hindrances to the advancement of science today were: 1) the paucity of open
access journals and 2) the lack of publicly available research data.  They
also had harsh words to say about the practices of not publishing negative
results and not publishing on attempts to replicate results.

However, the same article also decried the increase of volume of journal
articles which they attributed to a focus on bibliometrics. I think it's a
fair question what the correct quality/quantity tradeoff is.

Note, I'm not familiar with the OP's journal and wouldn't know a
Hymenoptera if it bit me in the tuchus, so don't have a personal opinion as
to whether more is better in this case.

Tom
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-science/attachments/20130131/e8f5767d/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the open-science mailing list