With an ever increasing number of scientific articles published on a daily basis, alongside a growing number of publishing outlets, it has become increasingly difficult to attract attention to Open Access journal newcomers. A Blog Article by Kamil Mizera and Witold Kieńć. Promoting journals across and beyond the scholarly world, such as among scientists, prospective authors, journalists and wider public, is a key to a successful launch of a journal. Content is king, many might say – but having the contents reach the scientists poses a challenge in the increasingly scattered scientific publishing landscape. If you want the contents of […]
Authors who publish their research in Open Access have at their fingertips an infinite platform for self-promotion: the Internet. Since their publications are automatically available online, anyone who can access the web has the possibility to read them – unlike in the traditional publishing model, whereby visibility and discoverability levels are much more restricted. However, the mere fact that an article or a monograph is available online does not mean that it will be noticed by all potential readers.
The validity of the Open Access model is constantly being debated when it comes to scientific publishing. Many researchers are still uncertain whether to publish in this model or not. What are then the benefits of publishing in Open Access? We should take a closer look at this question, especially now, when publishing in this model is becoming increasingly popular and accepted by the scientific community.
Open Access is inseparably linked with the evolution of the Internet, which generates new forms of interpersonal and marketing communication. Books published in an OA model are of course freely available, but only to those who can find them. One of the indeed greatest concerns for researchers who publish their work is to attract an audience, hence the importance of promoting scientific papers and books via the net.
One of the supposed conflicts in academic publishing is ensuring quality reviewed research in an environment of rapid scientific exchange. Traditional peer review, for instance, is a prime example of scientific quality: it allows for the dissemination of knowledge to pass through a filter of peers that self-regulates the suitability of a paper for publication. Despite not being perfect, it is currently accepted as the best system we’ve got, but one major stumbling block is the speed of publication – for anyone who has submitted a paper, the peer review process can be excruciatingly slow (to the point of competing […]