The quality of Open Access journals is an important issue in developing digital library collectio... more The quality of Open Access journals is an important issue in developing digital library collections. Traditional criteria, such as peer review, may not be able to identify the quality of peer- reviewed publications. Open peer review (OPR) has emerged as an innovation of open science. OPR is still at an early development stage with various models, from revealing identities of the author and the reviewer to publishing the entire peer review history of the accepted paper. This pilot study utilizes qualitative interviews to investigate researchers' perceptions and attitudes towards the emerging publishing model. Through semi-structured interviews with seven researchers, this pilot study reports on the thoughts and opinions of the interviewees towards OPR and proposes further studies on the potential of OPR in scientific publishing.
Journals that adopt open peer review (OPR), where review reports of published articles are public... more Journals that adopt open peer review (OPR), where review reports of published articles are publicly available, provide an opportunity to study both review content characteristics and quantitative aspects of the overall review process. This study investigates two areas relevant to the quality assessment of manuscript reviews. First, do journal policies for reviewers to identify themselves influence how reviewers evaluate the merits of a manuscript based on the relative frequency of hedging terms and research-related terms appearing in their reviews? Second, is there an association between the number of reviews/reviewers and the manuscript’s research impact once published as measured by citations? We selected reviews for articles published in 17 OPR journals from 2017 to 2018 to examine the incidence of reviewers’ uses of hedging terms and research-related terms. The results suggest that there was little difference in the relative use of hedging term usage regardless of whether review...
Reports on the preliminary results of an empirical study of postretraction citations of biomedica... more Reports on the preliminary results of an empirical study of postretraction citations of biomedical research literature. Retractions of biomedical publications have a serious impact on research enterprise and public health. Retractions to correct literature and alert readers are actions by the journals based on evidence of serious flaws or errors or upon the request of the authors. The process of retraction could take a few weeks or years after publication. The purpose of this study is to investigate how retracted peer-reviewed journal articles were cited post-retraction. Post-retraction citing articles are those published two years after the retraction year. The dataset includes 961 post-retraction citing articles that cited one or more of 77 retracted articles. The 77 retracted articles were also recommended by experts in a literature recommendation database (Faculty Opinions). The findings show that a higher percentage of the continued use of the retracted articles made no mention...
This study examined F1000Prime recommended research and review articles published in Cell, JAMA: ... more This study examined F1000Prime recommended research and review articles published in Cell, JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, The Lancet, and The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) in 2010. The analyses included (1) the classifications assigned to the articles; (2) differences in Web of Science (WoS) citation counts over 9 years between the articles with F1000Prime recommendations and the other articles of the same journal; (3) correlations between the F1000Prime rating scores and WoS citation counts; (4) scaled graphic comparisons of the two measures; (5) content analysis of the top 5 WoS cited and top 5 F1000Prime scored NEJM articles. The results show that most of the recommended articles were classified as New Finding, Clinical Trial, Conformation, Interesting Hypothesis, and Technical Advance. The top classifications differred between the medical journals (JAMA, The Lancet, and NEJM) and the biology journal (Cell); for the latter, both New Finding and In...
This study considered all articles published in six Public Library of Science (PLOS) journals in ... more This study considered all articles published in six Public Library of Science (PLOS) journals in 2012 and Web of Science citations for these articles as of May 2015. A total of 2,406 articles were analyzed to examine the relationships between Altmetric Attention Scores (AAS) and Web of Science citations. The AAS for an article, provided by Altmetric aggregates activities surrounding research outputs in social media (news outlet mentions, tweets, blogs, Wikipedia, etc.). Spearman correlation testing was done on all articles and articles with AAS. Further analysis compared the stratified datasets based on percentile ranks of AAS: top 50%, top 25%, top 10%, and top 1%. Comparisons across the six journals provided additional insights. The results show significant positive correlations between AAS and citations with varied strength for all articles and articles with AAS (or social media mentions), as well as for normalized AAS in the top 50%, top 25%, top 10%, and top 1% datasets. Four o...
Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 1999
... Peiling Wang 1,* ,; Marilyn Domas White 2. ... Email: Peiling Wang (peilingw@utk.edu) Marilyn... more ... Peiling Wang 1,* ,; Marilyn Domas White 2. ... Email: Peiling Wang (peilingw@utk.edu) Marilyn Domas White (whitemd@wam.umd.edu). *Correspondence: Peiling Wang, School of Information Sciences, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996. Publication History. ...
Purpose To understand how authors and reviewers are accepting and embracing Open Peer Review (OPR... more Purpose To understand how authors and reviewers are accepting and embracing Open Peer Review (OPR), one of the newest innovations in the Open Science movement. Design/methodology/approach This research collected and analyzed data from the Open Access journal PeerJ over its first three years (2013–2016). Web data were scraped, cleaned, and structured using several Web tools and programs. The structured data were imported into a relational database. Data analyses were conducted using analytical tools as well as programs developed by the researchers. Findings PeerJ, which supports optional OPR, has a broad international representation of authors and referees. Approximately 73.89% of articles provide full review histories. Of the articles with published review histories, 17.61% had identities of all reviewers and 52.57% had at least one signed reviewer. In total, 43.23% of all reviews were signed. The observed proportions of signed reviews have been relatively stable over the period sin...
The quality of Open Access journals is an important issue in developing digital library collectio... more The quality of Open Access journals is an important issue in developing digital library collections. Traditional criteria, such as peer review, may not be able to identify the quality of peer- reviewed publications. Open peer review (OPR) has emerged as an innovation of open science. OPR is still at an early development stage with various models, from revealing identities of the author and the reviewer to publishing the entire peer review history of the accepted paper. This pilot study utilizes qualitative interviews to investigate researchers' perceptions and attitudes towards the emerging publishing model. Through semi-structured interviews with seven researchers, this pilot study reports on the thoughts and opinions of the interviewees towards OPR and proposes further studies on the potential of OPR in scientific publishing.
Journals that adopt open peer review (OPR), where review reports of published articles are public... more Journals that adopt open peer review (OPR), where review reports of published articles are publicly available, provide an opportunity to study both review content characteristics and quantitative aspects of the overall review process. This study investigates two areas relevant to the quality assessment of manuscript reviews. First, do journal policies for reviewers to identify themselves influence how reviewers evaluate the merits of a manuscript based on the relative frequency of hedging terms and research-related terms appearing in their reviews? Second, is there an association between the number of reviews/reviewers and the manuscript’s research impact once published as measured by citations? We selected reviews for articles published in 17 OPR journals from 2017 to 2018 to examine the incidence of reviewers’ uses of hedging terms and research-related terms. The results suggest that there was little difference in the relative use of hedging term usage regardless of whether review...
Reports on the preliminary results of an empirical study of postretraction citations of biomedica... more Reports on the preliminary results of an empirical study of postretraction citations of biomedical research literature. Retractions of biomedical publications have a serious impact on research enterprise and public health. Retractions to correct literature and alert readers are actions by the journals based on evidence of serious flaws or errors or upon the request of the authors. The process of retraction could take a few weeks or years after publication. The purpose of this study is to investigate how retracted peer-reviewed journal articles were cited post-retraction. Post-retraction citing articles are those published two years after the retraction year. The dataset includes 961 post-retraction citing articles that cited one or more of 77 retracted articles. The 77 retracted articles were also recommended by experts in a literature recommendation database (Faculty Opinions). The findings show that a higher percentage of the continued use of the retracted articles made no mention...
This study examined F1000Prime recommended research and review articles published in Cell, JAMA: ... more This study examined F1000Prime recommended research and review articles published in Cell, JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, The Lancet, and The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) in 2010. The analyses included (1) the classifications assigned to the articles; (2) differences in Web of Science (WoS) citation counts over 9 years between the articles with F1000Prime recommendations and the other articles of the same journal; (3) correlations between the F1000Prime rating scores and WoS citation counts; (4) scaled graphic comparisons of the two measures; (5) content analysis of the top 5 WoS cited and top 5 F1000Prime scored NEJM articles. The results show that most of the recommended articles were classified as New Finding, Clinical Trial, Conformation, Interesting Hypothesis, and Technical Advance. The top classifications differred between the medical journals (JAMA, The Lancet, and NEJM) and the biology journal (Cell); for the latter, both New Finding and In...
This study considered all articles published in six Public Library of Science (PLOS) journals in ... more This study considered all articles published in six Public Library of Science (PLOS) journals in 2012 and Web of Science citations for these articles as of May 2015. A total of 2,406 articles were analyzed to examine the relationships between Altmetric Attention Scores (AAS) and Web of Science citations. The AAS for an article, provided by Altmetric aggregates activities surrounding research outputs in social media (news outlet mentions, tweets, blogs, Wikipedia, etc.). Spearman correlation testing was done on all articles and articles with AAS. Further analysis compared the stratified datasets based on percentile ranks of AAS: top 50%, top 25%, top 10%, and top 1%. Comparisons across the six journals provided additional insights. The results show significant positive correlations between AAS and citations with varied strength for all articles and articles with AAS (or social media mentions), as well as for normalized AAS in the top 50%, top 25%, top 10%, and top 1% datasets. Four o...
Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 1999
... Peiling Wang 1,* ,; Marilyn Domas White 2. ... Email: Peiling Wang (peilingw@utk.edu) Marilyn... more ... Peiling Wang 1,* ,; Marilyn Domas White 2. ... Email: Peiling Wang (peilingw@utk.edu) Marilyn Domas White (whitemd@wam.umd.edu). *Correspondence: Peiling Wang, School of Information Sciences, The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996. Publication History. ...
Purpose To understand how authors and reviewers are accepting and embracing Open Peer Review (OPR... more Purpose To understand how authors and reviewers are accepting and embracing Open Peer Review (OPR), one of the newest innovations in the Open Science movement. Design/methodology/approach This research collected and analyzed data from the Open Access journal PeerJ over its first three years (2013–2016). Web data were scraped, cleaned, and structured using several Web tools and programs. The structured data were imported into a relational database. Data analyses were conducted using analytical tools as well as programs developed by the researchers. Findings PeerJ, which supports optional OPR, has a broad international representation of authors and referees. Approximately 73.89% of articles provide full review histories. Of the articles with published review histories, 17.61% had identities of all reviewers and 52.57% had at least one signed reviewer. In total, 43.23% of all reviews were signed. The observed proportions of signed reviews have been relatively stable over the period sin...
Uploads
Papers by Peiling Wang