A Histry of Epidemice in Britain from A.D. 664 to the Extinction of the Plagse

Traditionally, there have been two important media of academic publishing: scholarly journals and scholarly books. The first scholarly journal, the Journal des Sçavans, was founded by Denis de Sallo, appeared already in January 1665 in Paris, reappeared after the French Revolution as the Journal des Savants, and still exists as a leading journal in the humanities. Only a few weeks later, Henry Oldenbourg, the first secretary of the Royal Society of London, established a second scholarly journal, the Philosophical Transactions, with a focus on science. The purpose of these journals was to formalize the extensive correspondence between philosophers and scientists.1 In the 18th and the 19th century, more specialized journals gained in importance, most of which were published by learned societies. At the end of the 19th century, university presses too began to publish scholarly journals. Another traditional means of academic publishing are the various types of scholarly books, in particular monographs, edited volumes, reference works (specialist dictionaries, encyclopedias, and specialty reference manuals), and technical handbooks.2 A narrow definition of academic works would exclude textbooks and books for the broader public. Shavell (2010, 337–39) employs four criteria to determine whether a journal or book is academic in nature: (1) the authors and/or the publisher are usually academics; (2) the readers are mainly academics; (3) the content is academic in character; (4) only low royalties are paid, if any. As of today, scholarly journals are the preferred mode of academic publishing in particular in the sciences and some social sciences (e.g., economics), whereas scholarly books still play an important role in the arts, the humanities, and part of the social sciences. Whereas scholarly books are published by a large number of small national publishers in a multitude of languages, the most important scholarly journals are typically in English language and published by a few large commercial publishers. Until the mid-20th century, the most important journals were published by learned societies, before commercial publishers began to enter the academic publishing market in the 1960s and 1970s by launching new titles or acquiring existing ones. This development has led to a significant concentration of (commercial) publishers in the academic journal market.3 It is difficult to say for sure how many scholarly journals are available around the world. Some sources speak of more than 100,000, others of 87,000 or 73,000.4 In August 2018, Ulrich's Web Directory listed 33,119 active scholarly peer-reviewed English-language journals with about 3 million articles a year, complemented by an additional 9,372 journals in other languages. As an important subset, 11,655 journals with 2.2 million articles were included in the Clarivate Analytics' Journal Citation Reports (STM, 2018, 25–26). The Web of Science (WoS) database counted almost 12,500 journals in 2019 (see below, Section 2.2.1). With the mass expansion of academic education and the increasing size of faculty after World War II, publications in peer-reviewed, highly ranked journals have become an important precondition for academic careers in many disciplines, in particular in the sciences, economics, and partly in the other social sciences. In 1964, Eugene Garfield launched the Science Citation Index to calculate the impact factors of journals in science, medicine, and technology. This index was later followed by the Social Sciences Citation Index in 1973, the Arts & Humanities Citation Index in 1978 (Regazzi, 2015, 86–88), and the Emerging Sources Citation Index in 2015. These indices led to the development of the Journal Impact Factor (JIF), a metric that serves to rank a scholarly journal based on the number of citations to articles in that journal by articles in other indexed journals within a certain time period. During the same time, commercial publishers have increased their market shares to the detriment of non-for-profit publishers, such as learned societies and universities, becoming the dominant players in the market for scholarly journals. Today, the "big five" commercial academic publishers—Elsevier, Springer, Wiley, Taylor & Francis, and Sage—cover more than half of the market for scholarly journals. Since the 1980s, we have seen a sharp increase not just in the number of journals but in particular also in journal subscription prices, forcing many academic libraries to cancel serials subscriptions and to cut back on new monographs (the so-called serials crisis, cf. Eger & Scheufen, 2018, 23–29). These developments induced an increasing number of scholars, initially in the United States, to promote open access (OA) to scholarly articles as a replacement of or an addendum to the subscription model. After some individual initiatives in the late 1980s, the early 2000s saw the emergence of a global movement by scholars, librarians, and research sponsors, resulting in the "Budapest Open Access Initiative" (February 2002), the "Bethesda Statement on Open Access Publishing" (June 2003) and the "Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities" (October 2003).7 Two roads to OA can be distinguished8: First, gold OA refers to electronic journals with OA for all readers, often based on creative commons licenses. The publishers' costs are covered not by subscription fees but from other sources, such as article-processing charges (APCs)9 paid by authors, libraries, learned societies, or research sponsors, or subsidies from learned societies and other sources. Hybrid OA journals, whose numbers are rising fast, allow the authors to choose between paying an APC, thereby granting the reader OA, or not paying an APC and requiring the reader to pay for access to the article.10 A special branch of gold OA is mega-journals, the first one of which, PLOS One, was first published in 2006. In these journals, the peer review is restricted to examining only the soundness of the submitted articles but not their broader interest or impact. Also, mega-journals are not oriented towards a specific subject matter. The second road, green OA, refers to authors self-archiving pre-prints or post-prints of their papers on so-called OA repositories, potentially in addition to publication in traditional subscription-based journals. OpenDOAR listed 5,713 repositories in July 2021, of which 5,073 were classified as institutional repositories managed by universities, faculties, or other academic institutions, 364 as disciplinary (subject) repositories which aggregate research papers in specific disciplines (e.g., PubMed Central, arXiv, SSRN, and RepEc), 138 as aggregating repositories (including Academia and Scielo), and 139 as governmental repositories.11 Whereas institutional and disciplinary repositories generally respect the authors' or publishers' copyright, so-called Robin Hood or Pirate OA repositories do not. The most prominent example is Sci-Hub, founded in 2011 by Alexandra Elbakyan, a young scholar from Kazakhstan, which made over 60 million journal articles publicly available. Due to complaints by academic publishers, Sci-Hub had to switch domains several times.12 Recent years have seen the emergence of academic social networks such as Research Gate and Mendeley, as well as a stream of new forms of disseminating scientific content, including blogs, podcasts, and Facebook posts by prominent scholars. Regarding OA books, the Directory of Open Access Books (DOAB) in June 2021 listed 43,036 academic peer-reviewed books from 621 publishers.13 The number of academic journals, as listed in the WoS database, has been growing steadily over the past two decades, from around 5,000 in 2000 to almost 12,500 in 2019 (Figure 1).14 Source: Author's calculations based on data from Web of Science (2021) The academic journal market is dominated by a few large commercial publishers, with the "big five" accounting for more than half of the academic journals listed by the WoS in 2019: Elsevier (1,754 journals), Springer (1,406), Wiley Blackwell (1,242), Taylor & Francis (1,199), and Sage (642).15 However, due to a downturn by Elsevier that began around 2006, this dominance has declined from around 60% in 2000 to around 51.7% in 2019 (Figure 2). Source: Author's calculations based on data from Web of Science (2021) Coupled with the advent of the internet and the concurrent increasing digitization of academic works, which through the bundling of different journals and/or formats ("big deals") facilitated second-degree price discrimination, this dominance has led to a drastic increase in subscription prices since the early 1990s (Bergstrom, 2013; Eger & Scheufen, 2018; Ramello, 2010). The resulting serials crisis—with academic libraries having to cut their journal portfolio—gave rise to a new publishing regime that offers OA to journal content. The share of pure (i.e., non-hybrid) OA journals as listed by the Directory of Open Access Journals (2021) has been increasing steadily, from around 3% of all WoS-listed journals in 2000 to more than 10% in 2019 (Figure 3). Source: Author's calculations based on data from Web of Science (2021) and DOAJ (2021) Interestingly, pure OA journals also gained ground in terms of quality. Figure 4 shows boxplots of the impact factors16 of closed access (CA) versus OA journals over time. While CA journals enjoyed an impact factor advantage over OA journals for a long time—all location scales of the impact factor for CA journals being above the ones for OA journals—OA journals are nowadays of the same quality, notwithstanding considerable differences between disciplines (see the contribution by Eger et al. to this issue). In 2019, impact factor distributions of both OA and CA journals are at the same level. Thus, advancing both in quantity and in quality, OA journals are becoming ever more relevant. The literature has identified the following advantages of an OA regime for academic works: (1) OA publications are likely read and therefore (2) cited more widely,17 which in turn (3) raises the incentives for academic authors to publish their research results as citations increase their reputation. These observations led to a broad discussion in academia as to whether the copyright regime may impede the evolution towards a universal OA regime, with very different conclusions being drawn regarding the impact of OA from a social welfare perspective (Scheufen, 2015; Shavell, 2010). Source: Author's calculations based on data from Web of Science (2021) and DOAJ (2021) The growing relevance of academic OA publishing warrants a closer look at the development of pure OA journals as the gold road towards OA. Figure 5 shows the number of newly launched OA journals from 2002 to 2020. Following relatively slow growth from 2002 to 2014, with fewer than 500 new OA journals per year (except 2013), the number has exceeded 1,000 in every year since, peaking in 2017, when more than 2,000 new OA journals were added to the DOAJ database. Today, the DOAJ database counts more than 16,000 OA journals in many different fields of research, published in 80 languages by publishers from 126 countries.18 Source: Author's calculations based on data from DOAJ (2021) Notwithstanding this impressive development, the relevance of OA journals varies substantially across academic disciplines (Figure 6).19 The research field with the largest attributed number of OA journals is Social Sciences (3,817), followed by Health Sciences (2,785), Technology and Engineering (1,416), and Language and Literature (1,153). By contrast, the natural science fields of Mathematics & Statistics (341), Physics & Astronomy (274), and Chemistry (181) feature only few OA journals.20 Source: Author's calculations based on data from DOAJ (2021) Remarkable differences also exist regarding a variety of OA journal characteristics (Table 1).21 Most (52%) OA journals leave the copyright of published works with the author, whereas the traditional CA regime demands that the exploitation rights are transferred to the publisher. Moreover, only around 28% of all OA journals charge APCs—a remarkable finding, as the OA regime implies the transition from a "reader pays" to an "author pays" model. Other fees (e.g., a submission fee to cover the review process) are charged by only around 2% of all OA journals. Nevertheless, author fees may constitute a significant obstacle for authors to publish in an OA venue, especially for non-tenured researchers seeking to publish in highly ranked journals, which are most likely to charge APCs (Budzinski et al., 2020). This obstacle also applies in particular to many researchers from developing countries, whose institutions rarely cover such costs. Yet 18% of OA journals provide for the possibility to waive such author fees. OA publishing may indeed be considered a form of development aid, for two reasons: First, few institutions in the developing world have so far been able to subscribe to academic journals. The OA regime can thus promote scientific participation and thereby foster the global evolution of science as a "trial and error" process. Free or cheaper access to literature for researchers in the developing world tends to increase both their output (number of publications) and input (number of references) (Mueller-Langer et al., 2020). Second, an OA regime grants access to the latest results in science for groups who were previously excluded because they are not "club" members of a university library. This includes, e.g., corporate researchers, physicians, or farmers. Notwithstanding all the changes discussed above, scholarly journals remain the most important medium of communication in many disciplines. For more than 300 years, they have been fulfilling the four key functions of registration (attribution), certification of articles (peer review), dissemination (distribution, access), and preservation (scholarly memory and permanent archiving). In recent decades, a fifth function must be added: the evaluation of researchers and their institutions.22 The increasing importance of OA articles in scholarly journals has triggered some controversial discussions, in particular regarding the questions as to whether OA negatively affects the quality of journal articles, whether OA improves the dissemination of research results, and how OA affects the competition between academic publishers as well as the distribution between academics and non-academics, between poor and rich universities, and between poor and rich countries. We shall discuss each of these questions and some related points in more detail below. In times when "alternative facts" tend to trump sound research results, academia must provide the public with reliable information. The users of this information should be sufficiently certain that the results are based on proper methods, reflect the state of science in the specific field, and were obtained independently, e.g., of any political or commercial interests.23 For that reason, strict and continuous quality control of research results is a "conditio sine qua non" for academic publishing. Facilitating the communication of content from authors to readers, the academic journal market may be characterized as a two-sided market (Rochet & Tirole, 2003). While readers look for the most important research results in their fields by top authors, the latter are interested in the journal's reputation, in wide readership, and in citations. Thus, journals with high impact factors hold the greatest attraction to both sides. With this in mind, the crucial question arises what effect, if any, OA is likely to have on the quality of academic articles. Jeffrey Beall, a librarian at the University of Colorado in Denver, is very skeptical regarding the quality of OA articles, especially those that are financed by APCs: "By adding a financial component to the front end of the scholarly publishing process, the open-access movement will ultimately corrupt scholarly publishing and hurt the communication and sharing of novel knowledge" (Beall, 2013, 590). A weak form of "corruption" would to OA publishers' incentives to peer review and to more submitted papers in to increase from However, the commercial publishers' incentives to increase the number of articles to the detriment of the journal's quality at the the quality the APCs that the journal is able to as well as A form of "corruption" refers to the of some OA journal publishers have been to in particular young and who on publications for their or to allow authors to publish articles in OA journals, by articles with or peer academics on their the or of journals, and so In established a of publishers, which was in January in to not only from the publishers but also from OA who that the to to OA. this quality to be a one which exists only in some disciplines (e.g., economics), whereas in other disciplines, such as some OA journals are the ranked journals and there is of a quality researchers their and if academic institutions and research to the APCs for articles by journals, this is to A by is that OA may new and will new and of their will remain (Beall, 2013, 590). However, this is a of the process, of whether the was submitted to a traditional or an OA and many prominent which that articles are generally more likely to the review than and creative but ones. In their contribution to this special & in a two-sided that OA can be a feature of journals. The have seen an increasing both of data on any subject and of that serves to that data almost there has been a of articles in every For such articles, the peer for quality A can be made between pure the same data and the same are as in the and scientific which (1) different data but the same (2) the same data but new methods, or (3) new data and new A to a on (1) the of an or in previously published (2) the impact of the (3) the of and (4) the of to publish Whereas some years when data were on the of mainly of technical copyright and data are the of Regarding the first journals in have already been including an OA journal by University with a focus on Technology and and the Journal for in by Springer the years or a number of in several disciplines have that the results of many when published in highly ranked journals, not be many academics to speak of a The is to the quality of research by access to data so as to be able to results of and or the incentives to the in the first Another important question is whether digitization and the internet have facilitated the quality of of their scholarly and and of their the quality of academic researchers and of is based on which were to provide a metric for journals with each 2019, being a of the citations to all articles in a journal but not of the citations to the individual articles. In a few articles are cited and many articles are not cited at Moreover, an may also many citations for being and citations are 2018, For some journals the authors of submitted papers to related papers that were previously published in the same journal have this by the of several journals this focus on and their to their and the of to these and to with for the quality of research & in with a a to be a (STM, 2018, are induced to the but the The on research which from the on Science and Technology in 2014, is of the existing to research output and to research evaluation in the et al., the question whether the new and the and (OA) of academic publishing to and their Some authors the in OA publishing with a broader of readers and open For of the in the focus on a small number of highly ranked journals, for a all articles that a journal's criteria should be published and made financed by APCs or other This is the of mega-journals such as PLOS a who the 2000 in and & the between of publications in the top journals in and of in a of the top which over the the crucial question is how to articles at low especially in a OA the of available articles to choose journal of costs to some However, the of the as a of quality has been Thus, an important to academic publishing is to provide reliable on the quality of journal articles that are of the journal that published the the internet and for research evaluation also how research results are Regarding scholarly by other researchers, there is an discussion as to whether OA articles more or fewer citations than those with a to that is in the by & and by Eger et al. to this special Regarding by the broader the mainly is being complemented with which on or in the social reference such as and Mendeley, scholarly blogs, and In the transition from traditional subscription journals to OA, the crucial question is how to the between two the one high subscription fees may be with high journal publishers have to their to the or research the other low APCs may not for publishers to cover their and to a to publish journals. The is to competition to journal publishers to articles of quality at and and to the interested public. The of competition not on the and of OA publishing. there were only pure OA journals, publishers would for all authors had to cover the APCs from their the APCs would tend towards a that the publishers to However, in the publishers of pure OA journals, OA journals and CA journals with OA repositories, and APCs may be by or research these different to foster OA will have specific on the of are some (1) green OA is or an to as has been the in since January 2014, publishers of subscription journals difficult to increase their fees. This also the publishers of OA journals from increasing their In any a must be is too will the publishers' to publish the journal in the first if is too the on subscription fees will be A for gold OA by research the of the publishers of OA journals and thereby increase (2) the of new OA journals, this foster competition publishers of OA journals for Yet this the that many years to a and to Until the new journal will have on the fees of the journals. (3) of academic libraries can constitute a to the journal publishers, potentially the of example is the in which so far two between a of most academic libraries in on the one and Wiley and Springer as publishers of scholarly journals in all disciplines on the other is a controversial discussion whether such impede competition on the journal market to the detriment of small publishers or indeed In any such to promote the of traditional CA journals OA OA publishing may several and the from "reader pays" to "author pays" can for researchers, for in developing countries. As we have 18% of OA journals APC for such Second, or to foster OA, such as the above, may to the of researchers who to the detriment of those who do not. Moreover, publishers may be to papers from researchers from that author fees specific e.g., by authors an of gold and/or green OA may due to that from incentives such as the in science or especially for non-tenured researchers, gold OA may their careers in fields OA with and CA example for due to may be the e.g., in the field of In this a green OA publication may with a publication of a in a journal since the that a journal works that have been published In the transition to OA journals implies that authors or their pay for the of readers from all over the world to access the articles. This may be poor authors for rich the global that is available to academic articles is in which the transition to OA may the number of articles The is when many of the readers are of we can that whose faculty publish many articles also for a large share of the readership, in which any between authors and readers their as a of the transition to OA should be A number of and developments since the second half of the have the academic publishing market and triggered about the very of academic publishing. journals, which in most disciplines to be the most important medium of academic are by commercial publishers, with the top publishers more than of all journals. and the advent of the internet have these publishers to in "big with academic libraries, of which the libraries to access a wide of journals at a price per As a journal subscription prices and academic on academic journals have been increasing to the detriment of publishers and on books with these a number of national and initiatives triggered the development towards OA, a new of academic publishing. Today, a growing number of pure and OA journals are financed by subscription fees but by publication fees paid by the authors or their Moreover, institutional and disciplinary OA repositories have been established and the traditional of academic communication have been with social blogs, Another of digitization and the internet has been the facilitated and of research in many disciplines. The of this development is an increasing number of the results of be this would with copyright and and academic authors to in The discussion as to how these developments the quality control of academic journal articles, the evaluation of and their institutions, and the size and of financial means for academic publishing. This special to the discussion a of articles with some of including the evaluation of by indices & welfare of open access & the impact of OA & & access to research data & to OA in and the to OA in & We would to for The authors also open access by

Bourdieusian sociology of translation calls for relational and (self)reflexive analysis in translation studies (TS). This call urges researchers to objectify TS itself and themselves as objectifying subjects. TS scholars are invited to analyse TS as a field, scrutinise their own positions in the field, question their own scientific knowledge production processes critically, and thus discern how the organisation of the field, their positionings, and power relations within the field influence their practices. Heeding this call, this study aims to conduct relational and (self)reflexive analysis on (the absence of) translated articles in TS journals in Turkey and tries to trace the possible reasons why there are almost no translated “translation studies” articles in the journals although translation has played a pivotal role in the birth and development of TS field in Turkey. To this end, the archives of the TS journals on the DergiPark database were scanned first. It was observed that except for a few translated short stories and articles, there are almost no translated TS articles in the journals. As a TS scholar inhabiting the field for almost 10 years, my observations, experiences, and interactions with other TS scholars in the field suggest that copyrights, the assumption that TS scholars are polyglot and thus do not need translation, the fact that translated articles are not included in academic promotion criteria and intellectual bias considering translation secondary and derivative act are the possible reasons for this situation. Collective and critical reflexivity and various changes in the TS field In Turkey will be offered as potential solutions at the end of the study.

<h3>Context:</h3> To augment our research curriculum, our three family medicine residency programs participated in the American Board of Family Medicine (ABFM) Journal Club Pilot. We implemented the Medical Education Research Study Quality Instrument (MERSQI) to score journal articles and identify potential curriculum gaps. <h3>Objective:</h3> 1) summarize the body of literature included in the ABFM Journal Club Pilot by scoring each article for methodological quality; 2) identify research curriculum strengths and areas for growth <h3>Study Design:</h3> A bibliometric analysis was conducted to examine the methodologic quality of research studies included in the ABFM Journal Club Pilot. Additionally, we surveyed residents to document their confidence critically appraising journal articles. <h3>Dataset:</h3> MERSQI quality scores were calculated for 40 studies published in 25 journals selected by the ABFM. <h3>Intervention/Instrument:</h3> The 10-item MERSQI was used to assess methodological quality across six domains: study design, sampling (number of institutions and response rate), type of data, validity (internal structure, content, and relationships to other variables), data analysis (appropriateness and complexity), and outcomes. Previous studies document strong validity evidence for the MERSQI. The resident survey included 12 Likert scale items measuring confidence appraising different elements of journal club articles (e.g. interpreting confidence intervals, statistical power, etc.). <h3>Results:</h3> MERSQI scores ranged from 13 to 18, with the average being 16.31 (higher scores indicate higher quality). A majority of articles (80%) implemented a randomized control trial. Most articles (82%) with a survey had a response rate of 75% or above. Most studies were multi-institutional (90%) and presented objective measurements (87.2%) as opposed to self-assessment data alone (12.8%). At baseline before implementing the journal club pilot, a majority of residents indicated they had none or minimal experience evaluating journal articles (n=22, 52.4%). <h3>Conclusions:</h3> On average, ABFM journal club articles had relatively high MERSQI scores compared to other bibliometric analyses. The MERSQI was a useful tool to identify gaps in our journal club curriculum. This information may guide the selection of future journal articles and refine the curriculum moving forward.

Bibliometrics of the Top 100 Clinical Articles in Digestive Disease

In this year's sponsored but no holds barred lunch, host Wendy Bahnsen (substituting for colleague Nicole Gallo) offered a brief greeting, and Ramune Kubilius provided the traditional “year in review” synopsis of developments since the last Charleston Conference. Panelists then shared insights and led discussion on earnest attempts to meet users’ information needs and satisfy administrations’ budget and other expectations. No matter how information has become repackaged, two formats remain important in health sciences communication: books and journals (articles). Speakers focused on library experiments with these formats. Is PDA a solution? Bahnsen contributed highlights and findings from a survey by Rittenhouse on health sciences customers’ experience with the R2 PDA program. Yumin Jiang shared some impressions on the experience of her institution with a few e‐book PDA/DDA (patron‐driven or demand‐driven acquisition) packages. Suggestions were made about best practices in e‐book collection building with PDA programs. What conclusions can be reached from experimentation with and implementation of on‐demand article acquisitions? Emma O'Hagan shared insights and experience with journal article “on demand” and “pay per view” services at two institutions. Andrea Twiss‐Brooks fielded questions and moderated discussion with session participants about the services and programs described by panelists, ranging from discussion about specific programs and models to broader collection and service implications.

Bibliometric Analysis researches and analyses the quantitative data derived from scientific publications through the empirical evidence of scientific activity generated by collaborating authors through the final product of their research: the scientific article. In scientific society, the concept of impact factor is probably the most widely used in bibliometric construction. To assess the scientometrics of three high-impact factor periodontal journals and identify the contribution of India in these most productive journals over three years (Jan 2018 - Dec 2020) and to know the most influential topics researched. A retrospective observational study was conducted for the Journal of Clinical Periodontology, Journal of Periodontology, and Journal of Periodontal Research. All issues of 2018, 2019, and 2020 were electronically and hand searched for the following parameters: Number of papers, affiliated organizations, and countries, topics reported, and contribution of Indian authors. The data were organized and analyzed with descriptive statistics using SPSS software (version 21.0). In total 469 articles were published by Journal of Periodontology, followed by 454 articles in Journal of Clinical Periodontology and 287 articles in Journal of Periodontal Research. In all the three journals, China had the maximum contributions, succeeded by USA. India has published maximum number of articles in the Journal of Periodontal Research. When analysed, although less as compared to the western counterparts, an increasing trend in the publications is seen in case of India.

Publishing articles in scholarly journals is an unavoidable activity for academics. Some courses require postgraduate students to publish in a journal in order to pass their classes. Some Indonesian institutions require students to publish articles in a journal before graduation and journal publication has become one of the requirements for lecturers to be promoted into a higher-ranked job. Out of these obligations, there are many benefits of publishing articles in a journal. One of these is that our thoughts and expertise will be conveyed to the public. This will attract further benefits such as being invited to be the speaker on the topic about which we have written or being invited to collaborate on further research and publications.

It is enormously difficult for us to publish articles in international journals, all of which require English. Yet, without publishing English articles in international journals, our research contributions will never be recognized by the world. In order to be successful, we have to be highly ambitious, to read incredibly large amounts of English literature so as to understand nuanced expressions, perhaps to sacrifice education in order to focus on research while young, and to actively participate in international conferences and workshops, which are nothing but battlefields for us. Despite all our efforts, however, shrewd referees may find limitations and slight drawbacks in our articles, and recommend their rejection to the editors. In order to overcome such difficulties, this article attempts to give advice on the publication of English articles in journals based on the author's own experience.

The purpose of this study is to know the characteristics of authorship and articles in the Journal AGRISEP at University of Bengkulu in 2015-2019 by using a study of bibliometrics based on several indicators. This research uses a descriptive quantitative study. The object is articles in the AGRISEP Journal of University of bengkulu in 2015-2019 with a total of 91 articles. Data were analyzed by using frequency tabulations. The results of this research show that the characteristics of writing and articles in the Journal of University of Bengkulu AGRISEP in 2015-2019 is vary greatly. It shows that the authors were male (54.08%). Most of the authors work as Lecturers (50.43%.). University of bengkulu contributed the most articles with almost 41 articles. Article was written by 3 authors (52.75%). Most of the authors have Master educational background. Articles use Indonesian language (96.70%.). The highest author's productivity is Sriyoto. The length of articles contain in this journal was 11-15 pages (56.15%). Articles contain 3 keywords were 51.14%, and the abstract length is around 150-199 words (35.16%). The most type of literature is Journal with 373 citations (36.93%). Based on these characteristics, it can be seen that the articles have met the written guidelines and articles that have been determined as well as an overview of the development of the articles in the AGRISEP Journal of Bengkulu University in 2015-2019.

This article examines the relative frequency of contributions made by faculty members in public administration programs to the professional public administration journals. With the call for a leaner and more productive government sector (e.g., universities), the profession needs to know which programs are producing most of the cutting-edge knowledge, the research strengths of these programs, and where they publish. More specifically, the analysis draws on evidence from articles found in highly ranked journals to reflect on relative productivity using four categories of measures: which schools (a) publish the greatest number of articles in the journals, (b) publish the greatest number of single-authored equivalent articles in the journals, (c) publish the greatest number of articles in the "best" journals, and (d) publish the greatest number of single-authored equivalent articles in the best journals. Together, the findings offer a comprehensive view of public administration faculty productivity in central public administration journals.

The IPNS Progress Report 10th Anniversary Edition is being published in recognition of the first ten years of successful IPNS operation. To emphasize the significance of this milestone, we wanted this report to stand apart from the previous IPNS Progress Reports, and the best way to do this, we thought, was to make the design and organization of the report significantly different. In their articles, authors were asked to emphasize not only advances made since IPNS began operating but also the groundwork that was laid at its predecessor facilities - Argonne's ZING-P and ZING-P' prototype pulsed neutron sources and CP-5 reactor. Each article stands as a separate chapter in the report, since each represents a particular instrument or class of instruments, system, technique, or area of research. In some cases, contributions were similar to review articles in scientific journals, complete with extensive lists of references. Ten-year cumulative lists of members of IPNS committees and of scientists who have visited or done experiments at IPNS were assembled. A list of published and in press'' articles in journals, books, and conference proceedings, resulting from work done at IPNS during the past ten years, was compiled. And archival photographs of people and activities more » during the ten-year history of IPNS were located and were used liberally throughout the report. The titles of the chapters in this report are: accelerator; computer; radiation effects; powder; stress; single crystal; superconductivity; amorphous; small angle; reflection; quasielastic; inelastic; inelastic magnetic; deep inelastic; user program; the future; and publications. « less

Background: While it is commonly recognized that almost every work and research discipline utilize their own taxonomy, the language used within a specific discipline may also vary depending on numerous factors, including the desired effect of the information being communicated and the intended audience. Different audiences are reached through publication of information, including research results, in different types of publication outlets such as newspapers, newsletters, magazines, websites, and journals. Prior research has shown that students, both undergraduate and graduate, as well as faculty may have a difficult time locating information in different publication outlet types (e.g., magazines, newspapers, journals). The type of publication may affect the ease of understanding and also the confidence placed in the acquired information. A text analytics tool for classifying the source of research as a newsletter (used as a substitute for newspaper articles), a magazine, or an academic journal article has been developed to assist students, faculty, and researchers in identifying the likely source type of information and classifying their own writings with respect to these possible publication outlet types. Literature Review: Literature on information literacy is discussed as this forms the motivation for the reported research. Additionally, prior research on using text mining and text analytics is examined to better understand the methodology employed, including a review of the original Scale of Theoretical and Applied Research system, adapted for the current research. Research Questions: The primary research question is: Can a text mining and text analytics approach accurately determine the most probable publication source type with respect to being from a newsletter, magazine, or journal? Methodology: A text mining and text analytics algorithm, STAR’ (System for Text Analytics-based Ranking), was developed from a previously researched text mining tool, STAR (Scale of Theoretical and Applied Research), that was used to classify the research type of articles between theoretical and applied research. The new text mining method, STAR’, analyzes the language used in manuscripts to determine the type of publication. This method first mines all words from corresponding publication source types to determine a keyword corpus. The corpus is then used in a text analytics process to classify full newsletters, magazine articles, and journal articles with respect to their publication source. All newsletters, magazine articles, and journal articles are from the library and information sciences (LIS) domain. Results: The STAR’ text analytics method was evaluated as a proof of concept on a specific LIS organizational newsletter, as well as articles from a single LIS magazine and a single LIS journal. STAR’ was able to classify the newsletters, magazine articles, and journal articles with 100% accuracy. Random samples from another similar LIS newsletter and a different LIS journal were also evaluated to examine the robustness of the STAR’ method in the initial proof of concept. Following the positive results of the proof of concept, additional journal, magazine, and newsletter articles were used to evaluate the generalizability of STAR’. The second-round results were very positive for differentiating journals and newsletters from other publication types, but revealed potential issues for distinguishing magazine articles from other types of publications. Discussion: STAR’ demonstrates that the language used for transferring information within a specific discipline does differ significantly depending on the intended recipients of the research knowledge. Further work is needed to examine language usage specific to magazine articles. Conclusions: The STAR’ method may be used by students and faculty to identify the likely source of research or discipline-specific information. This may improve trust in the reliability of information due to different levels of rigor applied to different types of publications. Additionally, the STAR’ classifications may be used by students, faculty, or researchers to determine the most appropriate type of outlet and correspondingly the most appropriate type of audience for the reported information in their own manuscripts, thereby improving the chance for successful sharing of information to appropriate audiences who will deem the information to be reliable, through publication in the most relevant outlet type.

The Journal of the American Water Resources Association (JAWRA) publishes peer-reviewed journal articles from a wide range of disciplines (Wigington, 2015). Regardless of the disciplinary perspective, there are basic ways to strengthen journal articles. The initial idea for a journal article can arise in a number of ways. Typically, authors are seeking to publish the results of an experimental study, modeling study, or a literature review. A critical first step in converting a journal article idea into a tangible manuscript is to define the objectives and scope of the paper. At this early stage, it is also essential to identify who will be authors of the paper and the role each author will play in the preparation of the manuscript. At a minimum, all authors are expected to make intellectual contributions to the content of the article and to read and approve the final version of the journal article before it is submitted to a journal. Another important step is to identify the journal that is the best outlet for your paper. Journal article manuscripts are commonly returned to the authors without review if the paper does not match the scope of the journal. Wigington (2015) describes the nature of multidisciplinary articles published in JAWRA. Other factors to consider when selecting a journal include the journal's readership, stature, efficiency of the peer-review process, timeliness of publication, and cost. An excellent practice is to begin planning journal articles concurrently with the development of research studies. Although the ultimate audience for a journal article is the readership of a given journal, the initial audience is comprised of a journal's editors and peer reviewers. A major focus of peer reviewers’ evaluation is the quality of the journal article. In general, they are looking to see if the work presented is new and novel and if the research approach, analyses, results, and conclusions are valid. They assess if the text, tables, and figures present the work described in a clear and concise fashion. In addition, reviewers evaluate whether or not literature is appropriately cited and discussed. Well-written, well-organized journal articles make the review process a pleasure for editors and reviewers. Below I offer several practical steps that will strengthen journal articles and improve the likelihood of successful peer review. Cargill and O'Conner (2013) provide a more thorough discussion of how to prepare high quality journal articles and how to navigate the peer review process.

Review date: 1969 to 2003, 34 years.Background and context: Simulations are now in widespread use in medical education and medical personnel evaluation. Outcomes research on the use and effectiveness of simulation technology in medical education is scattered, inconsistent and varies widely in methodological rigor and substantive focus.Objectives: Review and synthesize existing evidence in educational science that addresses the question, ‘What are the features and uses of high-fidelity medical simulations that lead to most effective learning?’.Search strategy: The search covered five literature databases (ERIC, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Web of Science and Timelit) and employed 91 single search terms and concepts and their Boolean combinations. Hand searching, Internet searches and attention to the ‘grey literature’ were also used. The aim was to perform the most thorough literature search possible of peer-reviewed publications and reports in the unpublished literature that have been judged for academic quality.Inclusion and exclusion criteria: Four screening criteria were used to reduce the initial pool of 670 journal articles to a focused set of 109 studies: (a) elimination of review articles in favor of empirical studies; (b) use of a simulator as an educational assessment or intervention with learner outcomes measured quantitatively; (c) comparative research, either experimental or quasi-experimental; and (d) research that involves simulation as an educational intervention.Data extraction: Data were extracted systematically from the 109 eligible journal articles by independent coders. Each coder used a standardized data extraction protocol.Data synthesis: Qualitative data synthesis and tabular presentation of research methods and outcomes were used. Heterogeneity of research designs, educational interventions, outcome measures and timeframe precluded data synthesis using meta-analysis.Headline results: Coding accuracy for features of the journal articles is high. The extant quality of the published research is generally weak. The weight of the best available evidence suggests that high-fidelity medical simulations facilitate learning under the right conditions. These include the following:providing feedback—51 (47%) journal articles reported that educational feedback is the most important feature of simulation-based medical education;repetitive practice—43 (39%) journal articles identified repetitive practice as a key feature involving the use of high-fidelity simulations in medical education;curriculum integration—27 (25%) journal articles cited integration of simulation-based exercises into the standard medical school or postgraduate educational curriculum as an essential feature of their effective use;range of difficulty level—15 (14%) journal articles address the importance of the range of task difficulty level as an important variable in simulation-based medical education;multiple learning strategies—11 (10%) journal articles identified the adaptability of high-fidelity simulations to multiple learning strategies as an important factor in their educational effectiveness;capture clinical variation—11 (10%) journal articles cited simulators that capture a wide variety of clinical conditions as more useful than those with a narrow range;controlled environment—10 (9%) journal articles emphasized the importance of using high-fidelity simulations in a controlled environment where learners can make, detect and correct errors without adverse consequences;individualized learning—10 (9%) journal articles highlighted the importance of having reproducible, standardized educational experiences where learners are active participants, not passive bystanders;defined outcomes—seven (6%) journal articles cited the importance of having clearly stated goals with tangible outcome measures that will more likely lead to learners mastering skills;simulator validity—four (3%) journal articles provided evidence for the direct correlation of simulation validity with effective learning.Conclusions: While research in this field needs improvement in terms of rigor and quality, high-fidelity medical simulations are educationally effective and simulation-based education complements medical education in patient care settings.

many journals use the “AMA Citation Style” (American Medical Association Manual of Style, 9th edition), examples: (Book) Okuda M, Okuda D. Star Trek Chronology: The History of the Future. New York: Pocket Books; 1993. (Journal or Magazine Article — with volume numbers) Wilcox RV. Shifting roles and synthetic women in Star trek: the next generation. Stud Pop Culture. 1991;13:53–65. (Newspaper, Magazine or Journal Article — without volume numbers) Di Rado A. Trekking through college: classes explore modern society using the world of Star trek. Los Angeles Times. March 15, 1995:A3. (Encyclopedia Article) Sturgeon T. Science fiction. In: Lorimer LT, editorial director; Cummings C, ed-in-chief; Leish KW, managing ed. The Encyclopedia Americana. Vol 24. International ed. Danbury, Conn: Grolier Incorporated; 1995:390–392. (Book Article or Chapter) James NE. Two sides of paradise: the Eden myth according to Kirk and Spock. In: Palumbo D, ed. Spectrum of the Fantastic. Westport, Conn: Greenwood; 1988:219–223. (ERIC Document) Fuss-Reineck M. Sibling Communication in Star Trek: The Next Generation: Conflicts Between Brothers. Miami, Fla: Annual Meeting of the Speech Communication Association; 1993. ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED364932.KeywordsVolume NumberScience FictionEditorial DirectorMagazine ArticleStar TrekThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.