SSOAR Logo
    • Deutsch
    • English
  • Deutsch 
    • Deutsch
    • English
  • Einloggen
SSOAR ▼
  • Home
  • Über SSOAR
  • Leitlinien
  • Veröffentlichen auf SSOAR
  • Kooperieren mit SSOAR
    • Kooperationsmodelle
    • Ablieferungswege und Formate
    • Projekte
  • Kooperationspartner
    • Informationen zu Kooperationspartnern
  • Informationen
    • Möglichkeiten für den Grünen Weg
    • Vergabe von Nutzungslizenzen
    • Informationsmaterial zum Download
  • Betriebskonzept
Browsen und suchen Dokument hinzufügen OAI-PMH-Schnittstelle
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Download PDF
Volltext herunterladen

(externe Quelle)

Zitationshinweis

Bitte beziehen Sie sich beim Zitieren dieses Dokumentes immer auf folgenden Persistent Identifier (PID):
https://doi.org/10.22394/2410-132X-2024-10-3-8-21

Export für Ihre Literaturverwaltung

Bibtex-Export
Endnote-Export

Statistiken anzeigen
Weiterempfehlen
  • Share via E-Mail E-Mail
  • Share via Facebook Facebook
  • Share via Bluesky Bluesky
  • Share via Reddit reddit
  • Share via Linkedin LinkedIn
  • Share via XING XING

Постпубликационное рецензирование: развитие научно-издательского процесса

Post-Publication Review: Evolution of the Scientific Publishing Workflow
[Zeitschriftenartikel]

Kochetkov, Dmitry M.

Abstract

For a considerable period of time, peer review has been regarded as the cornerstone of academic journals and scientific communication, ensuring the high quality and reliability of published materials. However, in the early decades of the 21st century, a growing number of scholars began to challenge ... mehr

For a considerable period of time, peer review has been regarded as the cornerstone of academic journals and scientific communication, ensuring the high quality and reliability of published materials. However, in the early decades of the 21st century, a growing number of scholars began to challenge the traditional peer review procedure, questioning its efficacy. This study aims to provide a fresh perspective on the peer review mechanism, with the objective of enhancing the implementation of scientific communication's functionalities. The research employs historical analysis techniques and modelling methods based on Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) to compare diverse review models in terms of their influence on scientific communication. BPMN is a conventional tool employed for modelling and describing business processes. The evolution of the peer review procedure is explored, encompassing an examination of the factors contributing to current and future transformations in the publishing realm. The author refers to the crisis of the conventional peer review system and the growing prevalence of preprints, serving as exemplars of these transformations. Finally, suggestions for the implementation of the post-publication review workflow in Russia are provided.... weniger

Thesaurusschlagwörter
Publikation; Zeitschrift; Wissenschaft; Peer Review; Russland

Klassifikation
Wissenschaftssoziologie, Wissenschaftsforschung, Technikforschung, Techniksoziologie

Freie Schlagwörter
academic journal; scholarly communication; BPMN notation

Sprache Dokument
Russisch

Publikationsjahr
2024

Seitenangabe
S. 8-21

Zeitschriftentitel
Ekonomika Nauki / Economics of Science, 10 (2024) 3

ISSN
2410-132X

Status
Veröffentlichungsversion; begutachtet

Lizenz
Creative Commons - Namensnennung, Nicht kommerz., Keine Bearbeitung 4.0


GESIS LogoDFG LogoOpen Access Logo
Home  |  Impressum  |  Betriebskonzept  |  Datenschutzerklärung
© 2007 - 2025 Social Science Open Access Repository (SSOAR).
Based on DSpace, Copyright (c) 2002-2022, DuraSpace. All rights reserved.
 

 


GESIS LogoDFG LogoOpen Access Logo
Home  |  Impressum  |  Betriebskonzept  |  Datenschutzerklärung
© 2007 - 2025 Social Science Open Access Repository (SSOAR).
Based on DSpace, Copyright (c) 2002-2022, DuraSpace. All rights reserved.