hi
From my perspective, an overlay is essentially the 'C' in PRC...overlays sit nicely in a world where the journal has been deconstructed into its consistent parts. P= publish as we see with preprint servers R = review as we see with many review communities C = curate the assemblage of materials
I think the 'sense' of 'C' (overlays) is starting to 'make more sense' (if you will) for folks as the P & R practices are becoming more popular.
adam
[log in to unmask]">Hi Jean-Claude, great suggestion. I have in fact spoken to several people from Episciences and the conversations were great, very informative. I am asking naive questions on purpose because I am just very curious what other's opinions on overlays are and if they have made an impact in your world. Do you read any overlay journals?
You might want to contact the people at episcience whichislisted in the Rousi-Laakso paper you referenced. https://www.episciences.org/ . They know a lot about this kind of publishing nd are doing high-quality publishing in this fashion.
Jean-Claude Guédon
On 2024-02-06 09:53, Shamsi Brinn wrote:
Hi everyone,
I have been eagerly reading the informative discussions around the Nelson Memo and a recent thread about SciElo and open access in low and middle income countries. I am learning a lot.
I wanted to open up a discussion about overlay journals. They appear to be a promising alternative model for peer-reviewed open access publishing, but they have not taken off. Have you heard of overlay journals? What do you think of them? What is blocking them from widespread use?at episcience
If you have not heard of them but are curious this interesting paper from Rousi and Laakso has a nice overview: https://doi.org/10.1177/09610006221125208
Thanks for your thoughts,-Shamsi
Access the OPENCAFE-L Home Page and Archives
Unsubscribe from the OPENCAFE-L List
Access the OPENCAFE-L Home Page and Archives
Unsubscribe from the OPENCAFE-L List