Download Paper From Springer High Quality

This white paper presents the findings from analysis of 60,567 articles, showing a clear advantage in reach and impact for articles published open access (OA) in hybrid journals compared to non-OA articles in the same journals. Explore the key findings and benefits broadly and by subject area.

The white paper brings together an international cohort of research data professionals to celebrate the real-world impact of the FAIR data principles, and consider what will be next for research data and open science.

Download Paper From Springer

Download 🔥 https://tinurll.com/2y4PaT 🔥

The white paper provides evidence of the value of the version of record (VOR) and immediate gold open access, bringing together both analysis of VOR usage, and feedback from readers and authors via an online questionnaire.

The white paper explores data from Springer Nature authors on the source of article processing charge (APC) funding, along with feedback from institutional interviews to facilitate a greater understanding of where funding for APCs originates and how these sources are being used.

Based one of the largest surveys of researchers about research data, this report finds widespread data sharing associated with published works and a desire from researchers that their data are discoverable.

The white paper proposes five measures that will help in making data sharing more efficient and ensure good data practice. Bringing together survey results from more than 11,000 researchers, we explore the challenges they face, as well as their attitudes and behaviours towards data sharing.

The white paper explores our experience and the growth of OA in the UK, examining the underpinning circumstances and contributing factors based on funder, institution, researcher, and publisher initiatives.

This is officially becoming a trend: Springer is pulling another 64 articles from 10 journals after finding evidence of faked peer reviews, bringing the total number of retractions from the phenomenon north of 230.

Given that there have been about 1,500 papers retracted overall since 2012, when we first reported on the phenomenon, faked reviews have been responsible for about 15% of all retractions in the past three years.

We have further strengthened our the checks in our editorial offices as a result of this. We are working to support our external editors to make them aware of the issues and ensure that thorough checks of peer reviewers are completed. Credentials from peer reviewers will be increasingly checked by our editorial office, which support our editors-in-chief, and some journals may request more information in the form of an institutional e-mail address and/or SCOPUS ID of the suggested reviewer.

The authors are not always to blame for faked emails. Recently, BMC cleared the authors of a retracted paper of responsibility for faking the emails that compromised the peer review of their paper. Last month, we learned that it was the editors at Hindawi journals who faked emails in more than 30 papers.

Thank you for your comment, Gary. I believe there may be a bit of a misunderstanding about the 15% quoted in the blog post. The 15% represents all of the 230 retractions because of peer review manipulation for the last three years, as a percentage of the total retractions reported by Retraction Watch. This includes journals from many publishers, not just those published by Springer. The 64 articles that we have retracted represent less than 0.05% of the more than 100,000 articles Springer published in 2014. Overall, over 1 million articles are published in academic journals each year.

In March 2023, the Archives of Sexual Behavior published a peer-reviewed paper, Rapid Onset Gender Dysphoria: Parent Reports on 1655 Possible Cases. As the title indicates, the paper examined 1,655 reports from parents who reported that their previously gender-normative teens developed transgender identities and described the context in which this occurred (typically, both social influence and pre-existing mental health problems were contributing factors). Springer has just announced that the paper is to be retracted.

Attempts to study the etiology of gender dysphoria have proven controversial. A vocal group of activists has worked in a coordinated fashion to persistently and consistently shut down research into the factors that may contribute to the development of gender dysphoria or any non-invasive approaches to ameliorate it. When SEGM learned that a group of researchers published a study exploring parental perspectives on their children's emergence of transgender identity, we chose to fund the open access fee to ensure that the paper would be widely disseminated.

We anticipated that intense debates would ensue: The notion that transgender identity in a number of adolescents may not be innate but may arise in response to social factors fundamentally threatens the premise of "gender-affirmative" hormonal and surgical interventions in youth. While activist pressures were predictable, we could not have predicted that the publisher, Springer Nature, would yield to the pressure campaign and retract the paper entirely. The official retraction is scheduled for Monday, June 12th.

The retraction was initiated after a group of activists and gender clinicians (including WPATH's current president Marci Bowers) wrote a letter of demand, asserting that the paper should be retracted because the authors did not obtain Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval for the study. There was also a demand to fire the Editor of the Archives of Sexual Behavior, Dr. Ken Zucker. An international community of over 2,000 researchers, clinicians, and others familiar with activist attempts to shut down academic debate defended the paper and the Editor. Ultimately, Springer cleared the editor of any wrongdoing, but decided to retract the paper.

In fact, the activist attempts to silence the discussion about the etiologies of gender dysphoria may have backfired. The attention that the paper's cancellation garnered has propelled it into the top-50 publications among over 400,000 scientific works tracked by Altmetric. To date, the Diaz and Bailey paper has been accessed more than 72,000 times. According to Springer, even after the retraction, the paper will remain available online, but it will be displayed along with the retraction notice.

Springer Nature is committed to using only paper from sustainable sources for our printed products. The paper policy guidance for suppliers explains what this means, how our suppliers can comply and what information we need from our suppliers to monitor compliance with the policy.

If your concern relates to editorial or publishing processes, or editorial integrity, you should first contact the Editor-in-Chief(s) responsible for the journal concerned and/or the Editor who handled the paper. Contact details and additional information can be found on the journal homepage. Alternatively concerns about editorial/integrity matters only can be reported to ethics.reporting@springernature.com

Springer Nature Open Access API - Provides metadata and full-text content where available for more than 649,000 online documents from Springer Nature open access xml, including BMC and SpringerOpen journals.

We are pleased to announce that PEPS has now received new Impact Factor (IF2022) of 3.9(3.934) -up from last year's 3.875- and 5year Impact Factor of 4.1(up from last year's 3.841). In addition, CiteScore has increased from 6.4 to 7.0. Together with other metrics, such as the number of downloads, this achievement shows the community appreciation towards the journal. We would like to thank everyone for contributing to this progress and for supporting us in our mission to play a major role for the future of geosciences. Also, we welcome your paper submission that contribute to the advancement of Earth and planetary science.

Progress in Earth and Planetary Science (PEPS), a peer-reviewed open access e-journal, was launched by the Japan Geoscience Union (JpGU) in 2014. This international journal is devoted to high-quality original articles, reviews and papers with full data attached in the research fields of space and planetary sciences, atmospheric and hydrospheric sciences, human geosciences, solid earth sciences, and biogeosciences. PEPS promotes excellent review articles and welcomes articles with electronic attachments including videos, animations, and large original data files. PEPS also encourages papers with full data attached: papers with full data attached are scientific articles that preserve the full detailed raw research data and metadata which were gathered in their preparation and make these data freely available to the research community for further analysis.

A transistor made from atomically thin materials mimics the way in which connections between neurons are strengthened by activity. Two perspectives reveal why physicists and neuroscientists share equal enthusiasm for this feat of engineering.

Note: Our editors will not comment on research content, restructure or format the document, or translate text from another language. If you require formatting or translation, please see our Manuscript Formatting and Academic Translation services.

We guarantee that if your language-edited paper is rejected by a journal because of the English alone, and we believe that you have made a good-faith effort to incorporate our changes, we will re-edit your paper once for free.

We cannot extend this guarantee to papers that have been rewritten after our revisions. Therefore, we recommend that you submit your paper for language editing as the final step before submitting it to a journal.

Our Certificate

We will provide a certificate confirming that your document was edited by native English speakers with expertise in your field of study.

From a publisher's perspective, the first option is not something to worry about, while the second & particularly third options look quite scary. Remember, what they really don't want is everyone saying "great, we can get this all from arXiv, cancel next year's subscription please". So an embargo period gets attached to the repository copies - many journals (most prominently PNAS) manage fine on a subscription basis while still making older papers freely accessible after a year or two, and so it's well-understood that allowing delayed access in one form or another will not ruin the subscription income. e24fc04721