Benchmarking Scientific Journals from the Submitting Author’s Viewpoint

Authors of scholarly papers to a large extent base the decision on where to submit their manuscripts on the prestige of journals, taking little account of other possible factors. Information concerning such factors is in fact often not available. This paper argues for the establishment of methods for benchmarking scientific journals, taking into account a wider range of journal performance parameters than is currently available. A model for how prospective authors determine the value of submitting to a particular journal is presented. The model includes eight factors that influence an author’s decision and 21 other underlying factors. The model is a qualitative one. The method proposes to benchmark groups of journals by application of the factors. Initial testing of the method has been undertaken in one discipline.

A Method for Comparing Scholarly Journals as Service Providers to Authors

When authors of scholarly articles decide where to submit their manuscripts for peer review and eventual publication, they often base their choice of journals on very incomplete information abouthow well the journals serve the authors’ purposes of informing about their research and advancing their academic careers. The purpose of this study was to develop and test a new method for benchmarking scientific journals, providing more information to prospective authors. The method estimates a number of journal parameters, including readership, scientific prestige, time from submission to publication, acceptance rate and service provided by the journal during the review and publication process. Data directly obtainable from the web, data that can be calculated from such data, data obtained from publishers and editors, and data obtained using surveys with authors are used in the method, which has been tested on three different sets of journals, each from a different discipline. We found a number of problems with the different data acquisition methods, which limit the extent to which the method can be used. Publishers and editors are reluctant to disclose important information they have at hand (i.e. journal circulation, web downloads, acceptance rate). The calculation of some important parameters (for instance average time from submission to publication, regional spread of authorship) can be done but requires quite a lot of work. It can be difficult to get reasonable response rates to surveys with authors. All in all we believe that the method we propose, taking a “service to authors” perspective as a basis for benchmarking scientific journals, is useful and can provide information that is valuable to prospective authors in selected scientific disciplines.

Where to Submit? Journal Choice by Construction Management Authors

Publishers of academic journals can be seen as service providers to authors, in addition to the traditional role of providers of research results to readers. The purpose of this study was to analyse how author choices of journal in construction management are affected by quality and service perceptions. Seven journals were identified and for each 2006 article, one author e-mail address was extracted. A web based questionnaire was sent to 397 authors and 35% responded. It was found that there were three journals regularly followed by at least half the respondents. Most of the other four journals have scopes broader than construction management and receive lower scores for characteristics such as impact on researchers. No open access journals were included, and authors in the field of construction management rarely post openly accessible copies of their manuscripts or publications on the web. Author ranking of journals for their next submission is found to be related to general criteria such as academic status, circulation figures and ISI indexation.

Authors reply to "On uniqueness, transfer and combination of acoustic sources in one-dimensional systems"

The use of electroacoustic analogies suggests that a source of acoustical energy (such as an engine, compressor, blower, turbine, loudspeaker, etc.) can be characterized by an acoustic source pressure ps and internal source impedance Zs, analogous to the open-circuit voltage and internal impedance of an electrical source. The present paper shows analytically that the source characteristics evaluated by means of the indirect methods are independent of the loads selected; that is, the evaluated values of ps and Zs are unique, and that the results of the different methods (including the direct method) are identical. In addition, general relations have been derived here for the transfer of source characteristics from one station to another station across one or more acoustical elements, and also for combining several sources into a single equivalent source. Finally, all the conclusions are extended to the case of a uniformly moving medium, incorporating the convective as well as dissipative effects of the mean flow.

Dislocation Propagation versus Dislocation Nucleation - Authors' Response

No abstract.