How long is too long in contemporary peer review? Perspectives from authors publishing in conservation biology journals

Delays in peer reviewed publication may have consequences for both assessment of scientific prowess in academics as well as communication of important information to the knowledge receptor community. We present an analysis on the perspectives of authors publishing in conservation biology journals regarding their opinions on the importance of speed in peer-review as well as how to improve review times. Authors were invited to take part in an online questionnaire, of which the data was subjected to both qualitative (open coding, categorizing) and quantitative analyses (generalized linear models). We received 637 responses to a total of 6,547 e-mail invitations sent. Peer-review speed was generally perceived as slow, with authors experiencing a typical turnaround time of 14 weeks while their perceived optimal review time is six weeks. Male and younger respondents seem to have higher expectations of review speed than females and older respondents. Majority of participants attributed lengthy review times to the 'stress' on the peer-review system (i.e., reviewer and editor fatigue), while editor persistence and journal prestige were believed to speed up the review process. Negative consequences of lengthy review times appear to be greater for early career researchers and can also have impact on author morale (e.g. motivation or frustration). Competition among colleagues were also of concern to respondents. Incentivizing peer review was among the top suggested alterations to the system along with training graduate students in peer review, increased editorial persistence, and changes to the norms of peer-review such as opening the peer-review process to the public. It is clear that authors surveyed in this study view the peer-review system as under stress and we encourage scientists and publishers to push the envelope for new peer review models.

Theoretical Approximations Between Brazilian and Spanish Authors' Production in the Field of Knowledge Organization in the Production of Journals on Information Science in Brazil

This work identifies and analyzes literature about knowledge organization (KO), expressed in scientific journals communication of information science (IS). It performs an exploratory study on the Base de Dados Referencial de Artigos de Periodicos em Ciência da Informacio (BRAPCI, Reference Database of Journal Articles on Information Science) between the years 2000 and 2010. The descriptors relating to "knowledge organization" are used in order to recover and analyze the corresponding articles and to identify descriptors and concepts which integrate the semantic universe related to KO. Through the analysis of content, based on metrical studies, this article gathers and interprets data relating to documents and authors. Through this, it demonstrates the development of this field and its research fronts according to the observed characteristics, as well as noting the transformation indicative in the production of knowledge. The work describes the influences of the Spanish researchers on Brazilian literature in the fields of knowledge and information organization. As a result, it presents the most cited and productive authors, the theoretical currents which support them, and the most significant relationships of the Spanish-Brazilian authors network. Based on the constant key-words analysis in the cited articles, the co-existence of the French conception current and the incipient Spanish influence in Brazil is observed. Through this, it contributes to the comprehension of the thematic range relating to KO, stimulating both criticism and self-criticism, debate and knowledge creation, based on studies that have been developed and institutionalized in academic contexts in Spain and Brazil.

The Relationship between Authors and Main Thematic Categories in the Field of Knowledge Organization: A Bibliometric Approach

This is a study about the relationships between authors and the main thematic categories in the papers published in the last five International ISKO Conferences, held between 2002 and 2010. The aim is to map the domain as ISKO conferences are considered the most representative forum in the field. The published papers are considered to indicate the relationships between authors and themes. The Classification Scheme for Knowledge Organization Error! Bookmark not defined Literature (CSKOL) was used to categorize the papers. The theoretical and methodological foundations of the study can be found in the concept of domain analysis proposed by Hjorland. The analysis of the papers (n=146) led to the identification of the most productive authors, the networks representing the relationships between the authors as also the categories that constitute the primary areas of research.

Analysis of Bibliographic References by Textbook Authors in Nigerian Polytechnics

The study analyzed references listed by textbook authors from Nigerian polytechnics. The educational qualifications, subject background, and institutional affiliations of authors and publishers of textbooks were examined. Documentary research design was adopted for this study. A total of 102 books were examined using the availability sampling technique. Data gathered were analyzed using descriptive statistics. The study revealed that a significant majority of the textbooks were filled with citation errors. Findings revealed that a majority of the textbooks used the American Psychological association (APA) format of referencing. Further analysis revealed that a significant number of textbooks had no references at all. It was discovered that books by authors with lower qualifications are the most involved in the different types of citation errors. The study also revealed that few textbooks cited electronic information. The paper recommends that serious attention be given to bibliographical references by organizing workshops and seminars for authors.

Three-feature model to reproduce the topology of citation networks and the effects from authors' visibility on their h-index

Various factors are believed to govern the selection of references in citation networks, but a precise, quantitative determination of their importance has remained elusive. In this paper, we show that three factors can account for the referencing pattern of citation networks for two topics, namely "graphenes" and "complex networks", thus allowing one to reproduce the topological features of the networks built with papers being the nodes and the edges established by citations. The most relevant factor was content similarity, while the other two - in-degree (i.e. citation counts) and age of publication - had varying importance depending on the topic studied. This dependence indicates that additional factors could play a role. Indeed, by intuition one should expect the reputation (or visibility) of authors and/or institutions to affect the referencing pattern, and this is only indirectly considered via the in-degree that should correlate with such reputation. Because information on reputation is not readily available, we simulated its effect on artificial citation networks considering two communities with distinct fitness (visibility) parameters. One community was assumed to have twice the fitness value of the other, which amounts to a double probability for a paper being cited. While the h-index for authors in the community with larger fitness evolved with time with slightly higher values than for the control network (no fitness considered), a drastic effect was noted for the community with smaller fitness. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Rarely selected distractors in high stakes medical multiple-choice examinations and their recognition by item authors: A simulation and survey

Background Many medical exams use 5 options for multiple choice questions (MCQs), although the literature suggests that 3 options are optimal. Previous studies on this topic have often been based on non-medical examinations, so we sought to analyse rarely selected, 'non-functional' distractors (NF-D) in high stakes medical examinations, and their detection by item authors as well as psychometric changes resulting from a reduction in the number of options. Methods Based on Swiss Federal MCQ examinations from 2005-2007, the frequency of NF-D (selected by <1% or <5% of the candidates) was calculated. Distractors that were chosen the least or second least were identified and candidates who chose them were allocated to the remaining options using two extreme assumptions about their hypothetical behaviour: In case rarely selected distractors were eliminated, candidates could randomly choose another option - or purposively choose the correct answer, from which they had originally been distracted. In a second step, 37 experts were asked to mark the least plausible options. The consequences of a reduction from 4 to 3 or 2 distractors - based on item statistics or on the experts' ratings - with respect to difficulty, discrimination and reliability were modelled. Results About 70% of the 5-option-items had at least 1 NF-D selected by <1% of the candidates (97% for NF-Ds selected by <5%). Only a reduction to 2 distractors and assuming that candidates would switch to the correct answer in the absence of a 'non-functional' distractor led to relevant differences in reliability and difficulty (and to a lesser degree discrimination). The experts' ratings resulted in slightly greater changes compared to the statistical approach. Conclusions Based on item statistics and/or an expert panel's recommendation, the choice of a varying number of 3-4 (or partly 2) plausible distractors could be performed without marked deteriorations in psychometric characteristics.