Chapter 7 Publication Ethics and Open Access Publishing

 

Chapter 7 Publication Ethics and Open Access Publishing

© Dr. Alok Pawar

7.1     Introduction

In the rapidly evolving landscape of academic publishing, ethical considerations and the principles of open access have become integral components of scholarly communication. This chapter delves into the multifaceted realm of publication ethics and the growing significance of open access publishing. As the dissemination of knowledge reaches new heights, maintaining the highest ethical standards and promoting open access to research findings have become pivotal in fostering a transparent and inclusive scholarly community.

7.2     Publication ethics: definition

Publication ethics refers to the ethical principles and standards governing the conduct of individuals and organizations involved in the process of disseminating scholarly and scientific information. It encompasses guidelines and practices aimed at ensuring integrity, honesty, and transparency in all aspects of the research and publication process. Adherence to publication ethics helps maintain the credibility and reliability of academic publications, fostering trust within the scholarly community and the broader public.

7.2.1  Importance of Publication ethics

The importance of publication ethics in the field of academic and scientific research is paramount for several reasons:

1. Integrity and Credibility:
• Publication ethics ensures the integrity of the research process, from data collection to dissemination, fostering credibility in the scientific community.
2. Trustworthiness:
• Adherence to ethical standards builds trust among researchers, authors, reviewers, and readers. Trust is crucial for the advancement of knowledge and collaboration.
3. Scientific Progress:
• Upholding publication ethics contributes to the reliability of scientific findings. Trustworthy research forms the foundation for future studies and the advancement of knowledge.
4. Community Confidence:
• Researchers and institutions committed to ethical publication practices earn the confidence of the academic and broader communities, strengthening the impact of their work.
5. Reputation of Researchers and Institutions:
• Ethical behavior in research and publishing enhances the reputation of individual researchers and their affiliated institutions. A strong reputation attracts collaborators, funding, and opportunities for collaboration.
6. Global Collaboration:
• Ethical publishing practices facilitate global collaboration by ensuring that researchers from different backgrounds can trust and build upon each other's work.
7. Protection of Participants and Subjects:
• Publication ethics safeguards the welfare and rights of research participants, particularly in studies involving human subjects. This protection is essential for maintaining the ethical standards of research.
8. Peer Review Integrity:
• Ethical publication practices uphold the integrity of the peer review process, ensuring fair and unbiased evaluations of research manuscripts.
9. Quality Assurance:
• Adherence to publication ethics is a key component of quality assurance in research. It helps maintain the standards and rigor of scholarly work.
10. Avoiding Research Misconduct:
• Ethical guidelines prevent research misconduct, such as data fabrication, plagiarism, and other fraudulent practices. This ensures the accuracy and reliability of published research.
11. Open Access and Accessibility:
• Ethical open access practices promote the dissemination of knowledge to a wider audience, contributing to the democratization of information and fostering inclusivity.
12. Legal Compliance:
• Following publication ethics guidelines ensures legal compliance with regulations and norms governing research and scholarly communication.
13. Editorial Independence:
• Ethical publication practices support editorial independence, safeguarding the decision-making autonomy of editors and reviewers.
14. Global Standards:
• Adherence to publication ethics aligns research practices with global standards, promoting a shared commitment to ethical conduct among researchers worldwide.

 

7.3     Best Practices/Standards setting initiatives and guidelines: COPE, WAME, etc.

The landscape of academic publishing is guided by ethical principles and standards set forth by various initiatives and organizations. Two prominent entities dedicated to maintaining the highest standards in publication ethics are the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the World Association of Medical Editors (WAME). These organizations play a crucial role in establishing best practices and guidelines for researchers, editors, publishers, and other stakeholders involved in the scholarly communication process.

(1) Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE): CO​PE is a non-profit organization that provides resources and guidance to academic editors, publishers, and researchers to promote integrity and ethics in publication. Key aspects of COPE include:

1. Guidance and Resources:
• COPE offers comprehensive guidelines, flowcharts, and resources addressing various ethical issues in academic publishing.
• These resources cover topics such as authorship, peer review, plagiarism, and conflicts of interest.
2. Educational Support:
• COPE conducts educational events and workshops to raise awareness about publication ethics.
• Members have access to forums for discussion and guidance on specific ethical challenges.
3. Membership:
• Publishers, editors, and organizations can become COPE members, gaining access to a network of peers and resources.

(2) World Association of Medical Editors (WAME): WAME is an international association of medical journal editors that focuses on promoting editorial excellence and ethical standards in medical publishing. Key features of WAME include:

1. Ethical Standards:
• WAME provides guidelines on ethical considerations in medical publishing, emphasizing transparency, integrity, and responsible editorial practices.
2. Education and Training:
• WAME supports the education and training of editors and other stakeholders through workshops, webinars, and resources.
3. Collaboration:
• WAME collaborates with other organizations to enhance the global dissemination of medical knowledge while maintaining ethical standards.

Other Initiatives and Guidelines: Several other initiatives contribute to the establishment and dissemination of best practices in publication ethics. These may include:

1. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE):
• ICMJE provides recommendations for the conduct, reporting, editing, and publication of scholarly work in medical journals.
2. COPE's Core Practices:
• COPE's Core Practices are a set of guidelines covering various aspects of publication ethics, offering a framework for journals to implement ethical policies.
3. Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ):
• DOAJ provides a list of open access journals that adhere to high-quality publishing standards, including ethical considerations.
4. National and Institutional Guidelines:
• Many countries and institutions have their own guidelines and initiatives promoting ethical publishing practices.

These organizations and initiatives collectively contribute to the development and dissemination of ethical standards, fostering a culture of integrity and responsibility in the academic publishing community. Researchers and publishers are encouraged to familiarize themselves with these guidelines to ensure the highest ethical standards in their scholarly work.

 

7.4     Conflicts of interest

Conflicts of interest (COIs) in the context of academic publishing refer to situations in which the primary interests of an individual or entity could potentially influence their professional judgment, objectivity, or decision-making in research, writing, or the publication process. Conflicts of interest can arise in various forms and may involve financial, personal, or professional considerations that could compromise the integrity of scholarly work. Identifying and managing conflicts of interest is crucial to maintaining transparency and ethical standards in academic publishing. Key aspects of conflicts of interest include:

1. Financial Conflicts:
• Involvement with organizations, companies, or entities that may benefit financially from the research or publication can create financial conflicts of interest.
• Examples include funding, grants, stock ownership, or paid consultancies.
2. Personal Conflicts:
• Personal relationships, affiliations, or personal beliefs that may influence the objectivity of the research or publication can lead to personal conflicts of interest.
• Examples include familial relationships, personal friendships, or strong ideological affiliations.
3. Professional Conflicts:
• Professional relationships, positions, or commitments that could impact the impartiality of the research or publication can result in professional conflicts of interest.
• Examples include editor-author relationships, collaborations, or institutional affiliations.
4. Disclosure:
• Full and transparent disclosure of potential conflicts of interest is a fundamental ethical practice in academic publishing.
• Authors, reviewers, and editors are typically required to disclose any relevant conflicts at various stages of the publication process.
5. Management and Mitigation:
• Journals and institutions often have policies in place to manage and mitigate conflicts of interest.
• Strategies may include recusal from decision-making roles, independent review processes, or explicit acknowledgment in the published work.
6. Reviewer Conflicts:
• Reviewers are expected to disclose any conflicts of interest that could impact their ability to provide an unbiased and fair evaluation of a manuscript.
• Editors may consider these disclosures when selecting reviewers for a particular manuscript.
7. Editorial Board Conflicts:
• Members of editorial boards are expected to declare any conflicts of interest that may affect their editorial decisions.
• Editorial boards often establish procedures for managing conflicts, such as recusal from decision-making on specific manuscripts.
8. Peer Review Conflicts:
• Conflicts of interest can also arise in the peer review process if reviewers have personal, financial, or professional ties to the authors or their work.
• Managing these conflicts ensures an unbiased evaluation of the research.

Addressing conflicts of interest is essential for upholding the credibility and integrity of academic publications. Journals and institutions play a crucial role in implementing clear policies, promoting transparency, and ensuring that potential conflicts are appropriately disclosed and managed throughout the research and publication process. Researchers, authors, editors, and reviewers alike are responsible for actively identifying, disclosing, and managing conflicts to maintain the highest ethical standards in academic publishing.

Top of Form

 

7.5     Publication misconduct: definition, concept, problems that lead to unethical behaviour and vice versa, types

Publication misconduct refers to unethical behaviors and actions that violate the standards and principles of integrity, honesty, and transparency in academic publishing. These actions compromise the reliability and credibility of scholarly work and can have far-reaching consequences for the academic community. Understanding the concept of publication misconduct is essential for maintaining the integrity of the research and publication process. Key aspects of publication misconduct include:

7.5.1   Definition and Concept:

• Publication misconduct encompasses a range of unethical behaviors in the research and publication process, including but not limited to plagiarism, data fabrication, data falsification, duplicate publication, and authorship issues.
• It reflects a breach of the ethical norms and principles that govern the dissemination of knowledge in academic and scientific communities.

7.5.2  Problems Leading to Unethical Behavior:

• Various factors contribute to the emergence of publication misconduct, including the pressure to publish, competition for funding and career advancement, and a lack of awareness or understanding of ethical standards.
• The "publish or perish" culture and the desire for professional recognition can sometimes lead individuals to compromise on ethical principles.

7.5.3  Types of Publication Misconduct:

a. Plagiarism:

• Presenting someone else's work, ideas, or intellectual property as one's own without proper attribution.
• Can include copying text, images, data, or ideas without appropriate citation.

b. Data Fabrication:

• Inventing, altering, or falsifying research data to make the findings more favorable or to support a particular hypothesis.
• Compromises the accuracy and reliability of the research.

c. Data Falsification:

• Manipulating or selectively altering research data to achieve a desired outcome.
• May involve the selective omission of data points or the exaggeration of results.

d. Duplicate Publication (Redundant Publication):

• Submitting or publishing the same research work in multiple journals or conferences without proper disclosure.
• Undermines the originality and uniqueness of scientific contributions.

e. Authorship Issues:

• Misrepresentation of authorship contributions or affiliations.
• Failure to include individuals who made significant contributions or the inclusion of individuals who did not contribute.

f. Salami Slicing (Fragmentation):

• Dividing the results of a single study into multiple publications to inflate the number of publications.
• Can lead to the overrepresentation of the significance and impact of the research.

g. Ghost Authorship:

• Not disclosing individuals who made substantial contributions to the research, often due to contractual or other reasons.
• Undermines transparency and accountability in authorship.

7.5.4   Consequences of Publication Misconduct:

• Damage to the reputation of individuals and institutions involved.
• Undermining the trust and credibility of the academic and scientific community.
• Retraction of published articles.
• Legal consequences, including plagiarism lawsuits.
• Diminished confidence in the peer review process.

Understanding and addressing publication misconduct is critical for maintaining the ethical standards and trustworthiness of academic publications. Journals, institutions, and researchers collectively play a role in preventing, identifying, and addressing instances of misconduct to uphold the integrity of scholarly communication.

 

7.6     Violation of publication ethics, authorship and contributorship

Violations of publication ethics, particularly in the realms of authorship and contributorship, pose serious challenges to the integrity and trustworthiness of academic publications. Ensuring fairness, transparency, and adherence to ethical standards in these areas is essential for maintaining the credibility of scholarly work. Key considerations related to violations of publication ethics, authorship, and contributorship include:

1. Authorship Attribution:
• Violations may occur when authorship is improperly attributed, with individuals included or excluded without due consideration of their contributions.
• All authors must have made substantial contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the research.
2. Ghost Authorship:
• Ghost authorship involves concealing the true contributors of a work, typically due to contractual agreements or other undisclosed reasons.
• This practice undermines transparency and accountability in scholarly contributions.
3. Guest Authorship:
• Guest authorship occurs when individuals are listed as authors despite making minimal or no substantive contributions to the research.
• This can be an attempt to inflate the perceived significance of a study.
4. Corresponding Author Responsibilities:
• Violations may occur if corresponding authors fail to fulfill their responsibilities, such as managing communications with the journal, ensuring proper attribution of authorship, and addressing post-publication queries.
5. Contributorship Acknowledgment:
• A violation may occur when the actual contributions of individuals involved in the research are not properly acknowledged.
• Explicitly recognizing the contributions of non-author contributors is crucial for transparency.
6. Plagiarism in Authorship Statements:
• Instances of plagiarism may extend beyond the main content of a manuscript to include authorship statements.
• Verifying the authenticity and originality of authorship information is essential.
7. Dispute Resolution:
• Violations can lead to disputes among co-authors regarding authorship order, contributions, or acknowledgment.
• Journals and institutions should have mechanisms in place to address and resolve authorship disputes.
8. Institutional Oversight:
• Violations of publication ethics related to authorship and contributorship underscore the need for institutional oversight.
• Institutions should promote awareness, provide education, and establish clear guidelines on ethical authorship practices.
9. Journal Policies:
• Journals play a crucial role in preventing violations by implementing and enforcing clear policies on authorship, contributorship, and ethical standards.
• Editors have the responsibility to scrutinize authorship information and address concerns raised by contributors.
10. Transparency and Disclosure:
• Transparency in authorship and contributorship disclosures is fundamental to ethical publishing.
• Journals and researchers should be transparent about the contributions made by each author to the research.

Addressing violations of publication ethics in authorship and contributorship requires a collaborative effort involving researchers, institutions, and journals. Establishing and adhering to clear guidelines, promoting transparency, and fostering a culture of ethical collaboration are essential for upholding the integrity of scholarly communication.

 

7.7     Identification of publication misconduct, complaints and appeals

Identifying publication misconduct, providing avenues for lodging complaints, and establishing fair mechanisms for appeals are crucial aspects of maintaining the integrity and ethical standards of academic publishing. Vigilance in these areas helps ensure transparency, accountability, and the credibility of the scholarly record. Key considerations include:

1. Identification of Publication Misconduct:
• Peer Review Process:
• Rigorous peer review helps identify potential misconduct during the evaluation of manuscripts.
• Reviewers are encouraged to be vigilant for signs of plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, or other ethical breaches.
• Plagiarism Detection Tools:
• Journals often use plagiarism detection software to identify instances of text or data duplication.
• These tools help identify potential misconduct before publication.
2. Whistleblower Protections:
• Establishing mechanisms to protect whistleblowers who report suspected misconduct is crucial.
• Whistleblowers should be shielded from retaliation, ensuring a culture where ethical concerns can be raised without fear.
3. Journal Editorial Oversight:
• Editorial teams play a pivotal role in identifying and addressing publication misconduct.
• Editors should scrutinize manuscripts for ethical compliance, ensuring that authorship, data, and references meet ethical standards.
4. Institutional Review:
• Research institutions should conduct investigations into allegations of research misconduct.
• Cooperation between journals and institutions is essential for a thorough examination of alleged misconduct.
5. Authorship Verification:
• Journals may verify the authenticity of authorship claims by cross-referencing contributions with institutional records or contacting authors directly.
6. Complaints Handling:
• Journals should have clear and accessible procedures for handling complaints related to publication misconduct.
• Complaints may be related to issues such as authorship disputes, plagiarism, or data manipulation.
7. Anonymous Reporting:
• Providing anonymous channels for reporting misconduct encourages individuals to come forward without fear of reprisal.
• Journals may establish confidential reporting mechanisms to protect the identity of those filing complaints.
8. Editorial Board Involvement:
• Editorial boards may be involved in reviewing and addressing complaints.
• Board members contribute expertise and objectivity to the resolution process.
9. Appeals Process:
• Establishing an appeals process is essential for fairness and transparency.
• Authors who believe they have been unfairly treated should have the opportunity to appeal editorial decisions.
10. External Mediation:
• In cases where internal processes are insufficient, external mediation services or ombudspersons may be engaged to address disputes.
11. Retraction and Correction:
• Journals should have policies for retracting or correcting articles found to contain serious misconduct.
• Retraction statements should clearly communicate the reasons for the action.
12. Educational Initiatives:
• Educational programs on publication ethics and responsible conduct can help prevent misconduct and raise awareness among researchers, authors, and editors.

Ensuring a robust system for identifying and addressing publication misconduct requires collaboration between journals, institutions, and the broader academic community. By fostering a culture of ethical conduct, implementing effective oversight mechanisms, and providing clear procedures for complaints and appeals, the scholarly community can uphold the highest standards of integrity in academic publishing.

Top of Form

 

7.8     Predatory publishers and journal

The emergence of predatory publishers and journals poses a significant challenge to the integrity of academic publishing. Predatory practices exploit the scholarly communication process for financial gain, often at the expense of ethical standards, quality peer review, and the reputation of legitimate research. Recognizing and addressing predatory publishers and journals is crucial for safeguarding the credibility of scholarly work. Key considerations include:

1. Definition of Predatory Publishing:
• Deceptive Practices:
• Predatory publishers engage in deceptive practices, including soliciting manuscripts with false promises of rigorous peer review and expedited publication.
• They often lack transparency in editorial processes and fail to uphold ethical standards.
2. Characteristics of Predatory Journals:
• Lack of Rigorous Peer Review:
• Predatory journals often claim to provide peer review but may not conduct thorough or legitimate evaluations.
• Some may accept manuscripts without proper scrutiny.
• Unrealistic Promises:
• Predatory publishers may promise rapid publication, wide dissemination, or guaranteed acceptance to attract authors.
• These promises often compromise the quality of the review process.
3. Red Flags for Identifying Predatory Journals:
• Unsolicited Emails:
• Authors receiving unsolicited emails inviting them to submit manuscripts should exercise caution, as this is a common tactic of predatory publishers.
• Low or Nonexistent Publication Fees:
• Predatory journals may charge very low or no publication fees, relying on author payments as their primary source of revenue.
• Unverifiable Editorial Boards:
• Predatory journals may list scholars on their editorial boards without their knowledge or consent.
• Researchers should verify the legitimacy of editorial board members.
4. Impact on Researchers and Institutions:
• Compromised Reputation:
• Publishing in predatory journals can compromise the reputation of researchers and their affiliated institutions.
• Legitimate contributions may be overshadowed by association with low-quality publications.
• Waste of Resources:
• Researchers may invest time and resources in publishing with predatory journals, only to receive minimal academic recognition.
• Intellectual Property Concerns:
• Authors submitting to predatory journals risk intellectual property issues, as these journals may not adhere to proper copyright and licensing practices.
5. Efforts to Combat Predatory Publishing:
• Blacklists and Whitelists:
• Initiatives maintain lists of predatory publishers and journals to help researchers identify and avoid them.
• Conversely, whitelists highlight reputable journals and publishers.
• Collaboration Among Stakeholders:
• Collaboration between researchers, institutions, and publishers is essential to collectively combat predatory practices.
• Educational Initiatives:
• Raising awareness through educational programs helps researchers recognize and avoid predatory publishers.
6. Global Efforts and Initiatives:
• Think. Check. Submit.:
• An international campaign encouraging researchers to assess the credibility of journals before submitting manuscripts.
• Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ):
• DOAJ maintains a whitelist of reputable open access journals, promoting transparency and ethical publishing.
7. Publisher Verification Tools:
• SHERPA/RoMEO:
• An online resource that allows researchers to check publisher copyright and self-archiving policies.
• Helps verify the legitimacy of publishers.
• Cabell's Predatory Reports:
• A database identifying potential predatory journals, offering researchers a tool for due diligence.
8. Institutional Support:
• Institutions should provide support and guidance to researchers, fostering a culture that values high-quality, ethical publishing.
• Encouraging awareness and responsible publishing practices among faculty and students is crucial.

By staying informed, exercising due diligence, and collaborating with reputable publishers, researchers can contribute to the collective effort to combat predatory practices and ensure the credibility of scholarly publishing.

 

7.9     Open access publications and initiatives

Open access (OA) publications and initiatives have transformed the landscape of scholarly communication, promoting unrestricted access to research findings. Open access aims to break down barriers to information by making scholarly works freely available to the global community. This section explores the significance of open access and various initiatives supporting this movement:

1. Definition of Open Access:
• Open access refers to the free, immediate, online availability of scholarly articles, allowing users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, or link to the full texts of these articles.
2. Advantages of Open Access:
• Global Accessibility:
• Open access ensures that research is accessible to a global audience, including researchers, students, policymakers, and the general public.
• Increased Visibility and Impact:
• OA publications often experience higher citation rates, as unrestricted access facilitates broader dissemination and increased visibility.
• Public Engagement:
• Open access promotes public engagement with scholarly research, fostering a more informed and knowledgeable society.
3. Types of Open Access:
• Gold Open Access:
• Articles are immediately and freely available on the publisher's website upon publication.
• Green Open Access:
• Authors self-archive a version of their manuscript in a repository or on their personal website.
4. Open Access Initiatives:
• Public Library of Science (PLOS):
• A prominent open access publisher committed to making scientific and medical research freely accessible to the public.
• BioMed Central (BMC):
• A pioneer in open access publishing, BMC publishes a wide range of peer-reviewed journals across various disciplines.
5. Initiatives Fostering Open Access:
• Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ):
• A community-curated online directory that indexes and provides access to high-quality, open access, peer-reviewed journals.
• SPARC (Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition):
• An international alliance working to enable the open sharing of research outputs and educational materials.
6. Open Access Policies:
• Mandates and Policies:
• Some funders, institutions, and governments mandate or encourage researchers to make their publications openly accessible.
• Compliance with these policies contributes to the growth of open access.
7. Challenges and Considerations:
• Sustainability:
• Sustainable funding models for open access publishing remain a challenge.
• Authors may face publication fees, and institutions must explore financially viable approaches to support open access initiatives.
8. Hybrid Models:
• Hybrid Journals:
• Some traditional subscription journals offer authors the option to make their individual articles open access upon payment of an article processing charge (APC).
9. Creative Commons Licensing:
• Open access works often use Creative Commons licenses to specify the permissions and restrictions associated with the use of the content.
10. Collaboration and Advocacy:
• Collaborative efforts among researchers, institutions, publishers, and policymakers are crucial for advancing open access.
• Advocacy for open access principles helps drive positive changes in the scholarly publishing landscape.
11. Public Repositories:
• Institutional and subject-specific repositories provide a platform for researchers to self-archive preprints, postprints, and other scholarly outputs.

Embracing open access publications and initiatives is pivotal for democratizing access to knowledge, fostering collaboration, and accelerating the progress of research. As the open access movement continues to evolve, it remains a catalyst for positive changes in the dissemination of scholarly information.

 

7.10   SHERPA/RoMEO online resource to check publisher copyright & self-archiving policies

SHERPA/RoMEO (Rights MEtadata for Open archiving) is an online resource that provides researchers with valuable information regarding the copyright and self-archiving policies of academic publishers. Developed by the University of Nottingham, this tool assists authors in understanding the permissions granted by publishers regarding the archiving and sharing of their research outputs. Key features and functions of SHERPA/RoMEO include:

1. Database of Publisher Policies:
• SHERPA/RoMEO maintains a comprehensive database of publisher policies related to copyright and self-archiving.
• Researchers can search for specific publishers or journals to retrieve information about what version of their manuscript can be archived and under what conditions.
2. Color-Coded System:
• The tool uses a color-coded system to categorize publishers based on their policies.
• Colors indicate the level of archiving permissions, ranging from green (archiving allowed) to white (archiving permissions not clear).
3. Summary of Permissions:
• For each publisher or journal, SHERPA/RoMEO provides a summary of the archiving permissions granted.
• This includes details about archiving preprints, postprints, and publisher versions.
4. Understanding Archiving Versions:
• SHERPA/RoMEO helps authors understand which version of their manuscript (e.g., preprint, postprint, or publisher's version) they are allowed to deposit in institutional or subject repositories.
5. Linking to Full Policies:
• The tool provides direct links to the full policies of publishers, allowing authors to access detailed information about archiving rights and conditions.
6. Frequently Updated Database:
• The SHERPA/RoMEO database is regularly updated to reflect any changes in publisher policies.
• This ensures that researchers access the most current information when making decisions about archiving their work.
7. International Coverage:
• SHERPA/RoMEO covers a wide range of international publishers, making it a valuable resource for researchers around the world.
8. Integration with Other Tools:
• SHERPA/RoMEO is often integrated with other tools and platforms related to open access and self-archiving, providing a seamless experience for authors seeking information about publisher policies.
9. Support for Open Access Compliance:
• Researchers, institutions, and funding agencies use SHERPA/RoMEO to ensure compliance with open access mandates and policies.

By offering clear and accessible information about publisher copyright and self-archiving policies, SHERPA/RoMEO empowers researchers to make informed decisions about sharing and disseminating their scholarly work. It plays a crucial role in supporting the principles of open access and facilitating responsible self-archiving practices within the academic community.

Top of Form

 

7.11   Software tool to identify predatory publications developed by SPPU

7.12   Journal finder/ journal suggestion tools viz. JANE, Elsevier Journal Finder, Springer Journal Suggester, etc.

Journal finder and suggestion tools are valuable resources for researchers seeking appropriate journals for their manuscripts. As of my last knowledge update in January 2022, several tools, including the ones you mentioned, help researchers identify potential journals for their research. Here are some examples:

1. Journal/Author Name Estimator (JANE):
• Description: JANE is a free online tool that helps researchers find suitable journals for their manuscripts based on the title and abstract. It also suggests potential authors who have published similar work.
• Link: JANE
2. Elsevier Journal Finder:
• Description: Elsevier's Journal Finder assists authors in finding journals that match their research. Authors can input their abstract or keywords, and the tool suggests relevant Elsevier journals.
• Link: Elsevier Journal Finder
3. Springer Journal Suggester:
• Description: The Springer Journal Suggester helps authors identify appropriate Springer journals for their manuscripts. Users input their abstract or keywords, and the tool provides a list of suggested journals.
• Link: Springer Journal Suggester
4. IEEE Publication Recommender:
• Description: IEEE's tool assists authors in selecting suitable IEEE journals or conferences for their papers. Authors provide a title and abstract, and the tool suggests relevant venues.
• Link: IEEE Publication Recommender
5. EndNote Manuscript Matcher:
• Description: Part of the EndNote reference management software, Manuscript Matcher helps authors identify suitable journals for submission. Users input their abstract and manuscript details.
• Link: EndNote Manuscript Matcher
6. Cabells Scholarly Analytics - Journalytics:
• Description: Cabells provides a Journalytics tool that offers information on academic journals, including metrics and characteristics. It can be helpful for researchers considering where to submit their work.
• Link: Cabells Scholarly Analytics

Please note that the availability and features of these tools may change over time, and new tools may emerge. Additionally, different publishers and organizations may develop their own tools to assist researchers in finding suitable journals. Always check the specific tool's website for the most current information and features.

 

7.13   E-Resources for research: Google Scholar, Shodh Ganaga, Shodh Gangotri

Google Scholar is a well-known and widely used academic search engine that indexes scholarly articles across various disciplines. Shodh Ganga and Shodh Gangotri, on the other hand, are specific to Indian research repositories. Here's a brief overview of each:

1. Google Scholar:
• Description: Google Scholar is a freely accessible search engine that indexes scholarly literature, including articles, theses, books, conference papers, and patents. It provides a broad and interdisciplinary approach to accessing academic resources.
• Link: Google Scholar
2. Shodh Ganga:
• Description: Shodh Ganga is a digital repository of Indian Electronic Theses and Dissertations (ETDs). It is an initiative by the UGC (University Grants Commission) to promote the creation, access, and dissemination of Indian research theses.
• Link: Shodh Ganga
3. Shodh Gangotri:
• Description: Shodh Gangotri is another initiative by the UGC, focusing on research projects undertaken by researchers in Indian universities. It is a repository that provides information about ongoing and completed research work at the postgraduate and doctoral levels.
• Link: Shodh Gangotri

These resources can be valuable for researchers:

• Google Scholar is a global platform and widely used for accessing a diverse range of scholarly publications.
• Shodh Ganga provides access to a repository of theses and dissertations from Indian universities, offering a specific focus on Indian research.
• Shodh Gangotri focuses on research projects undertaken by scholars in Indian universities, providing insights into ongoing and completed research at the postgraduate and doctoral levels.

Keep in mind that the features and availability of these resources may have evolved since my last update, so it's advisable to check their respective websites for the latest information and functionalities.