Journal Editor Stage

• In Event: Open Science 201: Research Life Cycle From Various Stakeholder Perspectives

Abstract

These panelists will talk from the perspective of journal editors, discussing how open science practices are relevant to academic publishing and to journal goals. Particular emphasis will be placed on discussing various ways to increase the journal’s commitment to open science and transparency, what challenges editors may face, and strategies we have found to be successful in increasing the transparency of the publication process and of manuscripts we publish and in increasing the number of open science practices in our journal.

Attendees will leave the session ready to increase their journal’s commitment to open science and transparency, choosing from a variety of practices that could be implemented immediately or in the near future.

A. Relevant Terms
We will define open science badges and TOP Guidelines.

B. Our Personal Experience
We have served as editors of Gifted Child Quarterly since 2016. In that time, we have made the following changes related to open science and transparency: (a) GCQ offers badges for open data, open materials, and pre-registration; (b) GCQ now meets at least Level 2 of all TOP Guidelines, including requiring open science disclosure statements on every article; (c) GCQ authors now can have their article be open access for a significantly reduced price from what it was prior to our editorship; (d) GCQ collects information on preprints during the submission process; (e) GCQ lists the dates of initial submission, final revision, and acceptance on all published articles; (f) GCQ accepts registered reports and also encourages replication studies via the brief reports submission format. We wrote an editorial about our commitment to transparency, openness, and research improvement (Adelson & Matthews, 2019).

C. Challenges/Barriers to Using Open Science
Getting authors to submit! We’d love to have more registered reports and for more articles to meet the badge criteria.
We’ve had some issues with working within the online manuscript submission and review system. It’s been clunky and was not designed for gathering the information needed for open science and transparency issues.
As editors of a society-owned journal, we have no influence on who the next editorial team will be or how open and committed they will be toward open science and transparency.

D. Tips of Trade
Get buy-in from Editorial Board members early in the process, then be bold – sometimes you have to go all-in, especially if you have a term-limited appointment within which to make positive changes occur.
Set goals and commitments – TOP Guidelines are a useful tool for demonstrating how your efforts fit within the broader open science movement.
Spread the word through conferences and social media.
Educate reviewers about any procedural differences as manuscripts with open science practices come in, and talk with interested colleagues to recruit a pool of open science-savvy reviewers for these manuscripts.

Adelson, J. L., & Matthews, M. S. (2019). Gifted Child Quarterly’s Commitment to Transparency, Openness, and Research Improvement. Gifted Child Quarterly, 63(2), 83–85. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986218824675

Authors

• Jill L. Adelson, Adelson Research & Consulting, LLC

• Michael S. Matthews, University of North Carolina - Charlotte