Abstract
How can a library publishing service with limited resources help editorial teams of peer-reviewed journals in their work? This paper focuses on the technical aspects of the peer review workflow that, if set up and adhered to properly, can contribute to improving the standard of the peer review process – and to some degree also the quality of peer review. The discussion is based on the work done at Septentrio Academic Publishing, the institutional service provider for open access publishing at UiT The Arctic University of Norway.
Highlights
Septentrio Academic Publishing is a service offered by the University Library of Tromsø to open access journals and series that are associated with UiT The Arctic University of Norway.[2]
One aim is that all peer-reviewed journals in Septentrio are indexed in the Directory of Open Access Journals, DOAJ
A handful of library employees are involved in running the publishing platform (Open Journal Systems from the Public Knowledge Project), providing technical support to the users, and giving advice to the
Summary
Septentrio Academic Publishing is a service offered by the University Library of Tromsø to open access journals and series that are associated (through editors or scope) with UiT The Arctic University of Norway.[2]. As of May 2020, Septentrio publishes ten peerreviewed journals in a variety of disciplines (eight of them in the DOAJ) and eight series that are not formally peer-reviewed. A handful of library employees are involved in running the publishing platform (Open Journal Systems from the Public Knowledge Project), providing technical support to the users, and giving advice to the. Support for Good Peer Review in OJS-based Journals editorial teams about best practice in various aspects of the publishing process, such as peer review. Our goal is to make the publishing process smoother, through appropriate workflows set up according to a journal’s needs on the journal platform and through relevant information provided to editors, reviewers and authors at crucial points. This paper focuses on the technical aspects of the peer review workflow that, if set up and adhered to properly, can contribute to improving the standard of the peer review process – and to some degree the quality of peer review
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
