Blockchain-based Decentralized Distribution Management in E-Journals

The application of blockchain in the context of E-Journal distribution to journalists is aimed at making the management paper adequately distributed and not misused. The security system in the distribution or management paper process of an open journal system is currently considered to be very lacking because one can duplicate the journal in an open journal system easily. Furthermore, it can be transferred to anyone who is not responsible. The security system in the distribution of an open journal system and the management of the management paper process is currently considered to be very lacking because one can duplicate the journal in an open journal system easily. Furthermore, it can be transferred to anyone who is not responsible. With the implementation of this blockchain technology, there are 3 (three) benefits, namely (1) The distribution of E-Journal in the Open Journal System is more targeted, and there are no errors. (2) The reputation of the Open Journal System becomes better with a sense of trust. This research will be implemented in an E-Journal in an Open Journal System using blockchain technology. (3) The management paper processing in the open journal system runs according to the procedure so that in the management process the distribution of soft copies and hard copies of the journal is protected from hacker threats, and this blockchain is used to guarantee its security

Ranking mainstream economics journals: A note

This paper by applying Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) ranks Economics journals. In contrast with many other studies this paper ranks journals which are characterized as mainstream economic journals rather than interciplinary economic journals. By using one composite input and one composite output the paper ranks 180 journals. In addition for the first time three different quality ranking reports have been incorporated to the DEA modelling problem in order to classify the journals into four categories (‘A’ to ‘D’). The results reveal that the journals with the highest rankings in mainstream economics are Journal of Political Economy, Quarterly Journal of Economics, Journal of Economic Literature, Review of Economic Studies, American Economic Review, Econometrica, Review of Economics and Statistics, Journal of Economic Theory, Journal of Econometrics, Economic Journal, Journal of Monetary Economics, Journal of International Economics, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, International Economic Review, Journal of Development Economics, Journal of Economic Perspectives, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty and Journal of Public Economics.Rankings; Economics Journals; Data Envelopment Analysis

The first nine years of \u27accounting history\u27 : 1996 to 2004

This paper adds to the prior literature examining publishing patterns in the accounting history discipline by undertaking a content analysis of publications in the first nine years of the new series of the journal Accounting History. The paper commences by providing an historical background to the introduction of the new series of the journal and the journal\u27s editorial team. This is followed by an authorship analysis of the journal\u27s research publications. This analysis examines patterns of authorship (single and multi-authored papers), the journal\u27s most published authors, institutional and geographical affiliations of authors (including international collaboration and changes over the nine year period) and author gender.<br /

Towards journalometrical analysis of a scientific periodical: a case study

In this paper we use several approaches to analyse a scientific journal as a complex system and to make a possibly more complete description of its current state and evolution. Methods of complex networks theory, statistics, and queueing theory are used in this study. As a subject of the analysis we have chosen the journal ``Condensed Matter Physics'' (http://www.icmp.lviv.ua/journal/). In particular, based on the statistical data regarding the papers published in this journal since its foundation in 1993 up to now we have composed the co-authorship network and extracted its main quantitative characteristics. Further, we analyse the priorities of scientific trends reflected in the journal and its impact on the publications in other editions (the citation ratings). Moreover, to characterize an efficiency of the paper processing, we study the time dynamics of editorial processing in terms of queueing theory and human activity analysis

Submitting a paper to an academic peer-reviewed journal, where to start?

Writing your first paper for a peer-reviewed journal can be scary. You are putting your research, its findings and interpretations out to a wider and knowledgeable audience who may criticise any aspect of it. However, once you have made the mental step that you really want your work to be out in the open, and you are about to draft your paper, then you need to decide to which journal you like to submit. This short paper raises some of the issues novice authors would need to consider. We also outline the process of submitting a paper to an academic journal based on the collective experiences of the three authors. All of us have all published widely, acted as reviewers or referees for many different academic journals and are members of editorial boards

E-prints and Journal Articles in Astronomy: a Productive Co-existence

Are the e-prints (electronic preprints) from the arXiv repository being used instead of the journal articles? In this paper we show that the e-prints have not undermined the usage of journal papers in the astrophysics community. As soon as the journal article is published, the astronomical community prefers to read the journal article and the use of e-prints through the NASA Astrophysics Data System drops to zero. This suggests that the majority of astronomers have access to institutional subscriptions and that they choose to read the journal article when given the choice. Within the NASA Astrophysics Data System they are given this choice, because the e-print and the journal article are treated equally, since both are just one click away. In other words, the e-prints have not undermined journal use in the astrophysics community and thus currently do not pose a financial threat to the publishers. We present readership data for the arXiv category "astro-ph" and the 4 core journals in astronomy (Astrophysical Journal, Astronomical Journal, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society and Astronomy & Astrophysics). Furthermore, we show that the half-life (the point where the use of an article drops to half the use of a newly published article) for an e-print is shorter than for a journal paper. The ADS is funded by NASA Grant NNG06GG68G. arXiv receives funding from NSF award #0404553Comment: 8 pages, 4 figures, submitted to Learned Publishin

Mental pictures: citizen or consumer?

This is a PDF version of an article published in Journal of the Royal Society for the Promotion of Health© 2008. The final, definitive version of this paper has been published in Journal of the Royal Society for the Promotion of Health, 128, July by SAGE Publications, Ltd, All rights reserved.This journal article discusses media images relating to health care

Evaluating research - Peer review team assessment and journal-based bibliographic measures: New Zealand PBRF research output scores in 2006

This paper concerns the relationship between the assessment of the research of individual academics by peer or expert review teams with a variety of bibliometric schemes based on journal quality weights. Specifically, for a common group of economists from New Zealand departments of economics the relationship between Performance-Based Research Fund (PBRF) Research Output measures for those submitting new research portfolios in 2006 are compared with evaluations of journal based research over the 2000-2005 assessment period. This comparison identifies the journal weighting schemes that appear most similar to PBRF peer evaluations. The paper provides an indication of the ‘power or aggressiveness’ of PBRF evaluations in terms of the weighting given to quality. The implied views of PBRF peer review teams are also useful in assessing common assumptions made in evaluating journal based research