At Wiley, we are supporting the aspirations of our research communities by “opening up” the research and publishing process to enhance the accessibility and transparency of research outputs. We also recognize that “Open Research” comes in many forms and degrees; some research communities support the sharing of preprints, some are keen on data sharing, and others embrace Registered Reports.
But “openness” is a relative term and a journal’s open research activity is shaped by their community. Too radical a leap for a journal may not appeal to their research community, but a measured step could make a journal a leader in its field.
We asked a number of Journal Publishing Managers in our Editorial Management department for their perspectives on the open research activities within their communities across five key areas: Open Access, Open Data, Open Practices, Open Collaboration, and Open Recognition and Reward. This enabled us to create a ‘temperature check’ on open research across subject areas. We found that within the fields of Psychology, Neuroscience, Genetics, Genomics, Ecology & Plant Sciences, Cellular & Molecular Biology, and Cancer Research many journals are currently embracing open research activities. But we recognize that the journey towards open research involves cultural change, and not all activities are appropriate for all disciplines.
To enable a more in-depth understanding of how researchers approach open research we have launched our Wiley Open Research Survey 2019 this month. It takes a detailed approach covering all aspects of open research and will only take around 20 minutes to complete. We’d greatly appreciate the views of our Editors and Societies from the point of view of active researchers. Respondents will be entered into a prize draw for a gift card if they choose to.
The survey link is hereand is available until June 10, 2019. Please do feel free to share further.
As a global leader in research and education, Wiley is committed to publishing content that advances knowledge, reflects diverse research areas and perspectives, and improves educational outcomes.
The peer review process as a lever for learning: how supportive and equity-focused peer review can help move science forward
Professor McLean shares her experiences as both a peer reviewer and author in the current publishing landscape and outlines her beliefs on how peer review can be changed for the better.
Securing qualified peer reviewers – top tips from Wiley editors and experts
At Wiley, we strive for the highest standards of peer review. However, we understand that securing reviewers can be a pain point for our editors – both in time and effort spent.
The future journal publishing experience and how we get there
In this white paper we share our vision for a future publishing experience and what that means for journals and editors and the way that we work together.
Finding the path of least resistance to disseminating retraction metadata - How best to signal retraction?
Scholarly research is a communal endeavor. Individual researchers are influenced by and build upon the work of other researchers, so the strides we have made in communication in the past hundred, fifty, and even ten years have allowed research to proliferate across the world in ways we could not have imagined a generation ago.
Preventing research impact bias by embracing transparency and inclusion in peer review
We explore here the relationship between peer review, research impact bias, and the advancement of a more inclusive and diverse future for research and publishing.
The British Ecological Society has completed a three year randomized controlled trial to explore the effects of single and double-anonymous peer review on various aspects of the peer review process.
How To Handle Post-Publication Critiques: Guidance for Editors
As an editor, you might encounter a post-publication critique of an article published in your journal. Adhering to COPE’s Core Practices, this blog guides you on handling post-publication critiques.
It’s Peer Review Week again and the theme for 2023 is peer review and the future of publishing. While there can be no doubt that further improvements to peer review will come in terms of how we talk about and describe peer review, and improvements in technology, systems and processes, it’s clear that a diversity of peer review models and approaches will remain.