Skip to main content
Video
Create Clip
Add To List
Share

Addressing problems in peer review_Recording

Filter
NISO Plus 2023 was a virtual global event which happened around the world on February 14-16, 2023. Building on our track record of engagement and conversation, we brought the same quality of content from 2020-2022 to our 2023 gathering. Dozens of amazing speakers and keynotes from across the globe share their knowledge and expertise on important topics for the information community.
Peer review is caught at a critical moment. The ever-growing number of submissions to journals requires 2-3 reviewers per reviewed manuscript, and, frankly, it feels like the system is at breaking point. Review requests seem to be concentrated on older, white, western males - with whole continents under-represented in the process - and academics can barely afford the time these days to devote to 'free' labour when their own research positions are under scrutiny and uncertain. It's not unusual nowadays to hear of papers with significant delays to editorial decision simply because the editorial office can't find 2 or 3 qualified reviewers to agree to review it. Desk rejects are becoming more common, not because of content, but because reviewers can't be found.

So, what is the answer? Open review platforms, paying reviewers, payment in kind, wider reviewer pools, new forms of review? We'll be discussing all of these and more. Join us!
Kaveh Bazargan, Director of River Valley Technologies, will address the challenges of moving from the traditional "paper"-based publication model to one that embraces full openness, taking into account the UNESCO Recommendation on Open Science as well as the White House OSTP Memo on Federally Funded Research. Kaveh will also show examples of making publications interactive as well as accessible to as wide an audience as possible.
Over the past few months, everyone has had to become accustomed to meeting in virtual environments, as well as mastering other technologies that allow us to continue to work together collaboratively — within and outside our organizations. This roundtable discussion will address both the fun side of learning new ways of working together and the deeper issues of setting expectations, accommodating different requirements, and identifying the constraints that made clear where boundaries would be needed.
Increasingly, funders at state and local levels require accessibility in licensed information products and services. What does that mean for libraries and content providers? Are there guidelines that ensure compliance? What guarantees are there? What are the challenges in developing robust accessibility in a product or service? How can decision-makers ensure that a product is compliant before they sign the license? This roundtable discussion offers an opportunity to hear from users, experts, and practitioners about what is working (and what’s not). Confirmed roundtable participants include (among others) Rachel Comerford, Senior Director of Accessibility Outreach and Communications, Macmillan Learning; Violaine Iglesias, CEO, Cadmore Media; ​​Stephen Kemsley, User Experience Manager and Web Accessibility Specialist (IAAP certified), ProQuest, a division of Clarivate; and John Unsworth, University Librarian and Dean of Libraries, University of Virginia.
According to Wikipedia, the preprint is a “version of a scholarly or scientific paper that precedes publication in a peer-reviewed scholarly or scientific journal”. Preprint archives, such as arXiv and SSRN, rapidly achieved prominence in both the hard and social sciences as rapid access to new work became a priority. It’s wonderful to have those platforms, but what are best practices for libraries and other content providers in working with them? Should preprints be assigned DOIs? What relationship should exist between pre-prints and discovery services? What is the interoperability with link resolvers like? What are the implications for citation practices?