Journal Publishing for Editors Attaining excellence in scholarly publishing

1. Journal Publishing for EditorsAttaining excellence in scholarly publishing Presented by: Amy Shapiro, Publisher, Elsevier San Diego, USA Location: Mexico Date: September 2012

2. Agenda • Introduction to Scholarly Publishing • Scholarly Publishing in Mexico • Improving the Quality of Scientific Journals • Bibliometrics

3. Introduction to Scholarly Publishing • What do publishers do? • How do publisher contributions help to improve the science and health communities? • Universal Access • Content Innovation

4. 2,000 STM Publishers 20,000 Peer-Reviewed Journals 1.4 million Peer-Reviewed Articles Scholarly Publishing Today Scientific, technical and medical communities around the world are united through STM publishing

5. Researchers • Health Practitioners • Faculty & Students • Pharma Companies • Librarians • Societies • Engineers • Professionals Who We Serve Publishers support the greater scientific and health communities Elsevier’s Global Publishing Network 7,000 editors 70,000 editorial board members 300,000+ referees 600,000+ authors

6. Organise editorial boards Launch new specialist journals Solicit and manage submissions Manage peer review Archive and promote Publish and disseminate Edit and prepare Production Journal Publishing Cycle 1,000 new editors per year 18 new journals per year 800,000+ article submissions per year 300,000 referees 1.6 million referee reports per year 9 million articles now available 40%-90% of articles rejected 10 million researchers 4,500+ institutions 180+ countries 480 million+ downloads per year 2.5 million print pages per year 7,000 editors 70,000 editorial board members 6.5 million author/publisher communications per year 220,000+ new articles produced per year 180 years of back issues scanned, processed and data-tagged

7. Methods of Publication Dissemination Traditional Print Journals AND Electronic Journal Platforms like Elsevier’s ScienceDirect improve online dissemination and access

8. Users can identify if they are a patient in need of medical information after searching for an article • Promoting Research Information Use • Abstract & Index Databases • Scientific Search Engines • Patient Use • Point of Care Decision Making

9. Universal Access • Universal Access • We exist to disseminate information • We will identify where remaining gaps exist and find viable mechanisms to close them • We will use a combination of different models to enable this access • We believe subscription and open access publishing can co-exist • Quality • Peer review provides essential quality controls and we remain committed to enabling it • We will invest to innovate in technologies that increase researchers’ productivity • Sustainability • Journal publishers invest heavily to deliver a well-functioning communications system upon which society depends • Access and dissemination mechanisms must ensure that these investments can be recovered. • System must also be sustainable for those who fund it therefore we aim to increase efficiency and value-for-money We support all mechanisms to achieve sustainable universal access to quality content

10. Where Are We Now?

11. We Are Working on Closing the Gap Percentage rating access to original research articles in journals ‘very easy’ or ‘fairly easy’ SMEs n=134 Large corporate n=74 All non-corporate n=765 University/College n=458

12. Universal Access Different scientific communities have different requirements. We’re experimenting in all areas of Universal Access to see what offers sustainable options while maintaining the quality provided by peer review.

13. Global Expansion of Scientific Research

14. Preservation & Archiving In addition to traditional print archives, publishers are partnering to create multiple distributed electronic archives for posterity 2nd official archive Publishers establish 3rd-party archives: Elsevier with the National Library of the Netherlands Publishers are developing similar arrangements with other organizations 1st official archive 2-year Pilot Study

15. Digital Content From “print science” to “electronic science” • Increase in types of research output: articles, data, code, video, audio, etc. • Readers’ habits for digesting information are evolving • New technologies to exchange information

16. From Print to Online Publication • Large scale increase (from a few to 23,000+ journals) • Electronic delivery is quicker and more efficient • Better discoverability, easier access (~600M hits on SD in 2010) • Experiments with increased navigation (hyperlinks in PDF) and richer content (video) 500M

17. Article of the Future: Mission To enhance the online article so that it allows researchers to optimally communicate scientific research in all (digital) dimensions: • Support authors by giving them the best possible place to disseminate their results and express their research • Increase value to readers by providing an environment that offers an optimal reading experience and makes it possible to build deep insights fast

18. Article of the Future: Approach and Timeline Approach: • Involved researchers through interviews, workshops, forums, surveys, etc. Over 800 people provided feedback • Focused on domain-specific enhancements - one size does not fit all! • The Article of the Future is a framework rather than a solution – we want continuous enhancement by specific applications, database links, and other features • Timeline: • 2009: started with Cell Press • 2010/2011: expanded to other fields, 13 prototypes on www.articleofthefuture.com • Jan 2012: first phase of ScienceDirect roll-out (left and middle panes)Affects all online HTML articles (1996+) retroactively • Mid 2012: second phase (right pane) • Ongoing: further domain-specific innovations

19. Article of the Future: Presentation, Content, and Context Three components of the Article of the Future concept: • Presentation: Offering an optimal online browsing and reading experience • Content: Support authors to share a wider range of research output – data, computer code, multimedia files, etc. • Context: Connecting the online article to trustworthy scientific resources to present valuable additional informationin the context of the article

20. Improving the Online Experience Task based browsing Easy Navigation PDF-Like text Links to external sources

21. SciVerse Applications Improve and customize the functionality of your ScienceDirect and Scopus accounts Visit www.applications.sciverse.com to browse the list of available applications

22. Recent Updates Special issue information displayed in right pane • Title of the special issue • Listing of special issue editors, and • Titles of the first five other articles in the special issue, including their author name(s), with an option to view more information about each article Figures can now be downloaded to PowerPoint slides • Functionality has now been introduced which enables the downloading of figures, including the reference details of the article, to PowerPoint slides. CrossMark widget introduced as of September • Papers will include a CrossMark widget on ScienceDirect to indicate to librarians and researchers that the content they bought or are reading is maintained by Elsevier and can therefore be trusted to be up to date. Readers can simply click on the CrossMark widget on a PDF or in HTML documents, and a status box will tell them if the document is current or if an update is available.

23. Questions?

24. Scholarly Publishing in Mexico • Article output • Citations • Regional rankings

25. Articles published in Mexico Scholarly Publishing in Mexico year Source: Scopus

26. Article Citations in Mexico Non-self Cites: 77,95% Source: Scimago SJR, powered by Scopus

27. Publication Figures in Mexico Source: Scopus

28. Publication spread over discipline (Mexico)

29. Regional Publication Growth Comparison Source: Scimago SJR, powered by Scopus

30. Citations per Article Comparison Source: Scimago SJR, powered by Scopus

31. Indications of correlation between use of e-content and research output 31

32. Questions?

33. Improving the Quality of Scientific Journals

34. How do Authors Choose a Journal? Key Factors: Which Category? Marginal Factors: Which Journal? Journal Hierarchy Impact Factor Reputation Editorial Standard Publication speed Access to Audience International Coverage Self Evaluation A&I Coverage Society Link Track Record Quality/Colour Illustrations Service Elements, e.g. author instructions, quality of proofs, reprints, etc Experience as Referee J J ? A J ? J ? J J B J J ? J J C J

35. What matters most to Authors? 2= 1 6 5 7 8 4 2= QUALITY & SPEED Data from 36,188 Authors; 0= unimportant 10= very important

36. Role of the Journal Editor • Public face of the journal • Sets editorial policies with consultation from publisher and editorial board • Final decision on papers (type and standards) • Manages the peer review process

37. The Refereeing Process • Independent refereeing of submitted manuscripts is critical to the scientific publishing process in validating the quality of a piece of work. • Referees provide • an objective assessment of a submission, and recommend whether a piece of work advances the field sufficiently to warrant publication • Referees • Consider relevance and novelty of the research • Check whether the relevant work is cited and discussed as appropriate • Check that the methodology is appropriate and properly described • Evaluate if the conclusions are supported by the results reported • Evaluate the statistical analyses • Ensure that the paper is unambiguous and comprehensible even if the English is not perfect The Referee recommends, the Editor decides

38. Role of the Publisher • Brand management • Acquisition of content • Monitor research trends • Monitor editorial office efficiency and efficacy • Business management • Production and online hosting • Sales and marketing

39. Advantages of an A&I database

40. Coverage in Scopus • Minimum criteria for coverage: • The title should have peer reviewed content • The title should be published on a regular basis (have a ISSN number that has been registered with the International ISSN Centre) • The content should be relevant and readable for an international audience (for example have English language abstracts and references in Roman script) • The title should have a publication ethics and publication malpractice statement

41. Influencing the Impact Metrics • Attract the best authors • Find the best referees • Have an efficient review process with short turnaround times • Commission invited/review articles • Claim “hot” areas in your discipline that are not currently “owned” by other journals by publishing a thematic issue on it

42. Influencing the impact metrics DO • Publish fewer papers • Publish more (invited) reviews • Publish more special/topical issues (invited authors) • Publish Invited works and special/topical issues earlier in year (longer citation window) DON’T • Require citations to your journal • Write editorials about your journal’s articlesjust to cite them

43. Scopus Journal Analyzer

44. Top-cited Papers Are there certain topics that seem to get cited a lot?

45. Non-cited papers Can you distinguish any trends in the articles that do not get cited?

46. Bibliometrics Primer • Impact Factor • SJR and SNIP • H-Index

47. The Impact Factor (IF) Impact Factor [Citations in a given year to articles published in the previous 2 years] • For example, the 2011 impact factor for a journal would be calculated as follows: • A = the number of times articles published in 2009 and 2010 were cited in indexed journals during 2011 • B = the number of "citable items" (usually articles, reviews, proceedings or notes; not editorials and letters-to-the-Editor) published in 2009 and 2010 • 2011 impact factor = A/B • e.g. 600 citations = 2 150 + 150 articles

48. IF Pros and Cons

49. Scimago Journal Ranking (SJR)

50. SJR Pros and Cons PROS • Differentiates between prestige of citations • Free (via Scopus) to subscribers and non –subscribers • Only peer reviewed articles count as cited or citing (transparent sources) CONS • More difficult to explain/understand than IF • Does not allow comparisons between disciplines • Does not differentiate “negative” citations