You are aware that Academic Journals is a vanity publication. Authors pay $550.00 to have papers published. Peer review is suspect.
Yes, and in retrospect, I should have acknowledged that. “Open Access" is the clue. Other peer-reviewed journals are costly. Is open access a good idea? I’ve discussed the idea here in a posting, And you thought you knew all about peer reviewed journals. And some of you chimed in.
Because this is an open access journal does not mean that these article represent bad science. It doesn’t mean that they are not properly peer reviewed. So what does Beall’s List of Predatory, Open-Access Publishers have to say:
Academic Journals: This bogus, Nigeria-based publisher has been around for years, and continues to increase its journal fleet of over one hundred titles from all areas of study. Seeking legitimacy, it falsely associates itself with authentic organizations and conferences.
But then look at the list of authors. Let’s see what some of them have to say.
Are you sure you want to call this a big deal?
No. But let’s get some feedback.
Dan, the problem here is not whether we are in favour of an open access system for science. The problem here is that this journal does not belong to the JCR, unlike the papers by Adler, Pellicori and a long etc and as a result, peer-review is not guaranteed at all. That said, we can discuss about the contents- after all we do it all the time with anything published on the Shroud, don’t we?- but please, don’t call it science.
I mean, don’t call it science YET.
“Academic Journals” heads the top of a very long list in “Beall’s … ” It seems very peculiar that these highly reputable authors should have agreed to have their work published in such a questionable publication. The issue is headed by an editorial summary written by Professor Fanti, a well-established highly reputable author on various Shroud topics. The content of the papers I have read appear to have at least the semblance of professionally written papers. Surely a better approach would have been for the various papers to have been presented at one of the many international Shroud Conferences, where their content could have been exposed to at least the minimum rigour of debate and discussion, if they could not be accepted by established peer-reviewed journals. It seems to have been a very poor lapse of judgement in having this collection of papers published in this way. The authors’ reputations may very well suffer from this serious lapse of judgment.
It seems to me if they get real peer review and publish on a website for free access, that is most desirable. Having peer-reviewed articles in pay-for sites limits the readership. I would think the Shroud world would actually like the opposite to happen.
Andy, Check out the Beall’s list URL in the original posting. Note that the intro above says that authors pay $550 to “Academic Journals” to get their work published. This is Vanity Publishing. Of what value is any so-called scientific paper, that has not had some kind of peer-review, not even exposure to a discussion/debate at some conference? The only thing that can be said for it, is that a reader becomes privy to one writer’s interpretation of his own work. The paper can’t be used to support any kind of debate to back up any claim, whether it’s pro- or anti-authenticity. Whatever truth the paper may in fact have, it is utterly lacking in any kind of utilitarian authority!
¡Hacer del “peer review” una RELIGIÓN!
Walter McCrone publicó su estudio “Red Ochre and Vermilion on Shroud Tapes?”en “Accounts of Chemical Research” y en “The Microscope Journal”………
Damon, Donahue, Gore.etc, etc, etc publicaron su estudio “Radiocarbon Dating of the Shroud of Turin” en la revista “Nature”…..
Timothy Jull publica su estudio ““Investigating a Dated Piece of the Shroud of Turin”en “Radiocarbon”….
Luigi Garlaschelli publica su estudio ““Life-size Reproduction of the Shroud of Turin and its Image” en “Journal of Imaging Science and Technology”
Varios miembros del STURP y otros científicos afines publicaron en “Applied Optics”, “Canadian Society of Forensic Sciences Journal”, “Advances in Chemistry”, “Journal of Biological Photography”, “X-Ray Spectrometry”,”Analytica Chimica Acta, ” Legal Medicine Annual”, etc. etc
En los últimos años muy notables investigadores han publicado en “Melanoidins”, “Thermochimica Acta”,”Journal of Imaging Science and Technology”, etc…
¿Sería algo DIFERENTE de haberse publicado esos trabajos en revistas de una menor “calidad” o en revistas “diocesanas”……?
MIS FELICITACIONES AL PROF. GIULIO FANTI.
RIGHT ON Carlos!
Comments are closed.