Top of the Exchanges Scholarly Pops 2020

Writing about web page https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/

Last year might already feel a long time ago, which given the events it witnessed, might not be a bad thing. However, we’re not quite done looking back over what 2020 had for us here at Exchanges. Hence, once again, we’re delighted to bring you the top 10 articles based on the number of times they were downloaded by readers over the past calendar year. It’s notable looking at the table below, that while articles with a greater deal of maturity show up as retaining their popularity, many of the top articles last year were taken from three volumes of Exchanges we published in 2020. It’s especially wonderful to see that our number one article comes from our celebrated special issue from last January!

Our thanks to all our authors, not only those who appear in this chart, and here’s hoping our various issues this year contain some pieces which similarly climb to the heights in the 2021 charts. For contrast, you might like to see what were the top articles in 2019 in my post from a year ago too.

Gareth Johnson : 19 Jan 2021 11:16 |  Tags: Articles Charts Downloaded Metrics Most Read Statistics Top |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

New Blog Post: In Conversation with Dr Filippo Cervelli & Dr Ben Schaper

Writing about web page https://anchor.fm/exchangesias/episodes/The-Cultural-Representations-of-Nerds--in-Conversation-with-Dr-Filippo-Cervelli--Dr-Ben-Schaper-eov96l

As we move into 2021, we return with new episodes of The Exchanges Discourse podcast. In our first episode this year I'm joined by two guests, in a session recorded just before Christmas. Please do listen and let me know what you think.

The Cultural Representations of Nerds – in Conversation with Dr Filippo Cervelli & Dr Ben Schaper

'In this episode recorded at the end of 2020 we are joined by Dr Schaper and Dr Cervelli two scholars who’ve been working for the journal for the past year on a special issue. Reflecting on their experiences of involvement with Exchanges, the pair also discuss the background and motivations for the issue. Finally, they also share some advice for first-time academic authors. The related event and issue will be appearing, later in 2021.'

Suggestions for future guests or episode themes, more than welcome.

Gareth Johnson : 14 Jan 2021 16:30 |  Tags: Cervelli Cultural Issue Nerds Podcast Representation Schaper Special |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Getting Published: PG Tips Workshop

I had the pleasure this week (Tue 12^th) to participate in my first teaching/seminar of the year. I had been invited, alongside my wonderful library colleague Julie Robinson, to participate in a 45 minute panel discussion for Warwick post-graduate students on the topic of ‘getting published’. Seasoned academic authors will likely realise 45 minutes is way too short a time to cover a great deal on this topic, but in the end, it seemed like we managed to pack a lot of content in what was a highly interactive and engaging session. So engaging, in fact, that we ran on for an extra 15 minutes or so due to popular demand.

Now, that’s the kind of session I like to deliver!

Thanks to David Richardson who hosted, we captured audience questions during the session. As a result, I thought it might be worth highlighting a few of the most salient ones and my responses as they refer to particularly apply to Exchanges.

---

Q: If I wanted to submit an article to Exchanges, would it be better to submit an abstract or the full paper already?

A: Very much the author’s personal choice. As a journal we don’t expect, unless part of a specific call requirement, authors to send us pre-submission abstracts or draft versions of their papers. Some choose to do so, and I’m always happy to provide some feedback and guidance at this stage, although I’ll hold off any fulsome critique until the final manuscript is submitted. Likewise, I’m always happy to schedule a video-call to talk through an author’s ideas for their paper, if they might find that helpful. On the whole though, the bulk of our submissions are the full paper manuscript, received without any prior conversation or engagement with the author: which is perfectly fine too.

Q: What are the most important elements that should be in abstract if the journal you are targeting is only allowing you to submit an abstract rather than the whole paper?

A: There’s a lot written online and by other authors on this subject, I personally like Rowena Murray or Helen Sword’s writing on this topic and would advocate seeking out their work. However, in brief, the abstract should be the article in miniature, containing the key ideas or arguments, along with a taste of the most significant finding or conclusion. What it should do is whet the appetite of the reader, from your prospective editor to the wider academic community, and draw them in to want to read (or accept for consideration) your paper. The abstract should also closely resonate with your paper’s text, with each abstract line approximating an introductory sentence within the article itself. This provides essential structure and signposting to guide the reader through your writing, methodology, methods, arguments, findings and conclusions in a structured and more readily comprehensible manner.

Q: Do you have any advice about how to choose the journal to publish in?

A: Aside from suggesting you consider a wonderful, friendly and highly early-career author focussed title like Exchanges I would suggest thinking about:
(1) Who are your audience and what titles are they reading?
(2) Where are your peers/supervisor publishing?
(3) Consider, but don’t be a slave to, journal metrics/impact factors etc – although be wary as ‘significant journals’ are more likely to reject your submission.
(4) Do you know or have contacts with any editors? Knowing someone will be receptive to discussing your submission can be a big help in choosing your destination.
(5) Especially for a first paper, consider seeking out early-career specialising journals. They may be more forgiving of initial errors, formatting oversights or typographical errors than some of the more core/mainstream titles.

Q: How different should a journal [article] drawn from thesis or dissertation work be?

A: This is a common and understandable issue for first time authors. An article manuscript needs to be its own discrete and contextual entity, with a slightly different authorial voice than you would likely use within your thesis/dissertation. Especially too, where you’re adapting a chapter, you need to ensure the piece can stand entirely on its own legs, supported naturally by appropriate citation. You might even need to consider simplifying the work, because there may be too many contrasting central ideas or themes in your original text to coherently present in your article. You should also consider adopting the style/voice of other pieces which appear in your chosen target journal or field, to enhance your chance of acceptance.

Q: How does one go about proposing a special issue to Exchanges or working with/for this journal as an editor?

A: As to the first part, I’d recommend listening to our recent podcast on exactly this topic. Then coming and having a chat with myself as editor-in-chief about the idea. One thing to bear in mind, we have a lead time of at least 12 months from initiation of special issue to publication, so this isn’t going to be something we can achieve overnight. There’ll also be some expectation of work from the proposer to bring the issue to publication too, part of which may well be involvement as an associate editor. We do issue periodic calls for associate editors, usually via our twitter account (@ExchangesIAS) and the journal's announcement pages - so you should follow and visit these periodically.

Q: What are the main outcomes after articles are peer-reviewed? Are articles rejected by journal editors when reviewers actually suggested major corrections?

A: At Exchanges we have four major post-review outcome: acceptance (rare!), revisions requested and then acceptance (most), additional reviews (occasional) or decline (aka reject). Hence, usually after peer-review there will be a period of revision and rewriting by the author, and in the case of where there are major (extensive) revisions requested by the editor, the piece may need to undergo a further round of peer-review, and minor corrections ahead of acceptance for publication. Different journals will handle these post-review steps slightly differently, indeed some take ‘major revisions’ to equate to reject and request the author work on them for a future resubmission. Read their author guidance to find out how it works for each specific journal/publisher.

Q: Is it better for your cv and career to publish with your supervisor or independently?

A: This varies enormously and is often affected by discipline. STEM authors are often members of team projects, and frequently only publish as one of a number of authors, with sole-authored works rare. Conversely, AHSS scholars often are lone or at most pairs of authors. That said, if you have a good working relationship with your supervisor, it can be a really great learning experience to co-author a paper with them. Just remember, just because they’re your supervisor, if you’re doing most of the writing, be prepared to insist on being the first named author on the work! You may find though, that co-authoring a paper with an established author like your supervisor might make it easier to publish in a ‘higher’ ranked journal…but there are not guarantees, and I’ve heard of many supervisors who are busy/get distracted and don’t come through on their contribution to an article: so approach, with caution!

---

These are only a handful of the topics we touched on in the session, hence if you have questions of your own about publishing, and especially in Exchanges, then please leave a comment or get in touch with me. I look forward to talking more about this fascinating, and essential, area of academic development.

Gareth Johnson : 14 Jan 2021 09:56 |  Tags: Advice Development Information Postgraduate Promotion Publishing Researcher Student Training |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Looking Backwards Before Moving Forward

Welcome to 2021, and the first of this year’s blog posts. As is somewhat traditional to be in a reflective mood at the beginning of a new year, I thought it would be useful to take a look back at preceding 12 months as they relate to the Exchanges journal and highlight some of the developments and occurrences we experienced and enjoyed.

January

The year began with a glorious triumph! In what was arguably our biggest innovation since we launched, we saw the publication of our very first special issue, entitled Cannibalism. Packed full of intriguing, challenging and thought-provoking articles, it also represented the culmination of over 12 months of effort behind the scenes by the Board and our associate editors. We produced a few promotional copies in print too, just to appreciate quite how ‘meaty’ an issue it was. These were intended to be used to publicise the journal at lectures, meetings and conferences during the year, although sadly global events would transpire against us.

February

The next month began on a continued high note, as associate editors gathered at the IAS’ offices to celebrate and reflect on the lessons drawn from preparing the special issue. It was clear from the discussions here there was more to unpick here than a casual conversation would reveal. So, ever the ethnographer at heart, I engaged in some semi-structed ‘exit’ interviews with the team. The hope was these interviews would help us better understand what the associate editors had learned, but also help clarify any of the unanticipated challenges they met along the way. In this way, we could reshape the training and support offered for future cohorts, while also allowing me to pass along my personal thanks to each member of the team. The outcomes from these interviews would also inform a planned conference paper in April, although as the next month arrived, it became clearer that our plans for 2020 were going to need to be significantly restructured.

March

As we moved into the third month of the year, it had rapidly become clear to me and the journal team, as it had to people around the world, that ‘business as usual’ was about to take a back seat to more pressing concerns. However, there was some positive news at the start of March, for while we were bidding farewell to some of our associate editors, we also welcomed two new Board members from CY Cergy Paris Université in the persons of Dr Guilherme Sampaio and Dr Salvatore Monteleone. Nevertheless, with the onset of lockdown in the UK, things drastically changed for Exchanges as I bid a regretful farewell to my campus office and relocated to my home one for the duration. Sadly, my planned Article in an Afternoon workshop scheduled for the end of the month was a casualty of the enforced shift to remote-working. While I hope to revisit, rework or represent this workshop eventually, finding time to reconfigure it for online delivery was less of a priority than supporting our editors and contributors as their working environments shifted drastically.

April

As the unprecedented, distanced summer term began, there was a least one piece of normality among the uncertainty. The IAS welcomed its latest batch of early career fellows in an online event, within which Exchanges took its regular slot, albeit slightly hampered by technical issues. Thankfully, your editor-in-chief had planned ahead and prepared a pre-recorded video to introduce the journal in place of a live broadcast! Nevertheless, it was a happy event, among an unseasonably gloomy month. Normally, April sees the publication of the regular issue of the journal, but it became readily apparent that we were lacking in sufficient publication-ready content for the issue, and so the decision was taken to push to the issue back to later in the year. Not a choice taken lightly, but an understandable one as we heard about the impacts from Covid and the varied global responses were impacting on scholars’ life experiences and working habits. However, for the journal there was a positive note to end the month on as a new associate editor, Melissa Pawelski joined the editorial team.

May

Behind the scenes fevered preparations continued towards the new issue of the journal. Reviewers and authors alike were encouraged by the editorial team, although ever sympathetic to the diverse and challenging environments each contributor now found themselves operating within. However, the space provided by the delayed publication and the diminished physical interaction with scholars finally saw me drive forward on a long considered but as yet unrealised project of creating a companion podcast series for the journal. The Exchanges Discourse therefore launched in early May with two inaugural episodes. As might be expected, these were themed around an introduction to the journal and our mission, and then an overview of the types of material the journal would normally consider for publication. I was delighted how the podcast and initial episodes were very warmly received by the IAS and our contributor community. As a result, awe pressed forward with developing the format and content for planned future episodes, something which continues to this day. Although, the efforts on The Exchanges Discourse may serve to explain why there were slightly fewer blog posts produced here last year!

June

As summer arrived, we finally rolled out the delayed but much anticipated latest issue of Exchanges (Vol.7 No.3). While the Covid-related delay to its production had been frustrating for the editorial team, and some of the authors too, we were naturally delighted by how enthusiastically the issue was received across the readership. After the extra effort of for the first time of coordinating an issue’s production entirely at a distance, the whole team took a moment to celebrate a job well done. Trying to avoid falling into the trap of so many ‘pandemic themed calls’, the issue also incorporated a new call for manuscript submissions on the broader and hopefully more uplifting theme of challenge and opportunity. Alongside the new issue, we also rolled out our third podcast episode, on the timely theme of Having your Manuscript Declined, & How to Avoid It: a topic evergreen in my mind and editorial labours.

July

The early summer continued to be a rich time for new episodes of The Exchanges Discourse, as we published two more this month. The first out of the gate was our premier guest interview episode, which saw Pierre Botcherby in discussion about the development of the Then & Now: Art Student Experiences journal special issue. As a new style, and one which increased the diversity of voices on the podcast by 50%, we were thrilled by the successful creation and release of the episode. This release was followed up by the first of our reflective podcast episodes, where we took a look back at the most recently published issue of the journal, highlighting the articles within it. July was also a month where the first of a series of regular video conference calls with the Editorial Board took place, to offer support and advice, as well as discuss forthcoming developments with the journal. Alongside providing some peer-to-peer support with the difficult working conditions within which we all found ourselves.

August

Normally a quiet month for the journal, with many of the team and contributors taking a well-earned break. As a result, perhaps the most significant event in August took place almost unnoticed by our contributing and reader communities, but for the editorial team was a most welcome occurrence. A long-planned update to the underlying OJS platform on which Exchanges runs was introduced, which added some much-desired new functionalities alongside squishing the odd glitch here and there. That the introduction of the new version of the platform passed by quietly in the background is a testimony to the hard work and professionalism of the Library Scholarly Communications team in preparing for and executing the upgrade.

September

Another editorial team meeting was held during September, to pick up the various threads of development and support needed across the Board. Chief among these were reviewing our progress against plan on each of our various special issues under development. Originally, September was to see the publication of our Cli-Fi special issue, but the Covid curse meant the Board and issue leads mutually agreed to push this back by four months to early 2021. Nevertheless, editors, reviewers and authors alike continued to work on this, and other contributions, behind the scenes, as we moved towards the start of the new academic session.

October

After a pause the previous month for myself to catch up on regular editorial work, the new academic year brought with it two new episodes of the podcast. The first provided a potted guide on the considerations and best approach to initiating a special issue of the journal, inspired by conversations with our various issue leads. The second was another of our increasingly popular guest episodes, with Ioana Vrabiescu in conversation with myself about her publishing experiences and providing some advice to first time authors. Meanwhile, October saw us welcome another new cohort of early career fellows to the IAS, with this time Exchanges much more successfully being able to engage with them during their induction event. This induction event was followed the next week by an ‘Ask me anything’ session (AMA) hosted by myself for the fellows, giving them the opportunity to enquire about Exchanges and how we relate to their researcher development experience. It was a highly successful new format and a highly energised session, and hence will be one we’ll be repeating in future Accolade slots for Exchanges related content, even once we’re all back together physically once again.

What was a busy, busy month for myself and the journal was capped by the publication of Vol. 8 No.1 of Exchanges, to much relief on the part of the editorial team, and much delight on behalf of the readership and contributors. The issue included our new thematic call for papers A.I. Panic or Panacea? It was to be a theme which generated a flurry of discussions and emails from potential authors, so I’m hopeful we’ll be seeing some excellent papers relating to it.

November

There was though, no time to rest on our laurels as we headed into the final months of the year. For November, the undoubtable headline event saw me speaking about the journal and the outcomes from our associate editors programme at the prestigious international Munin Conference on Scholarly Communication in Norway. Sadly, the pandemic meant that rather than a trip to the most northerly university in the world, I spoke from my home office. Conversely though, the conference experience generated more than a little new interest in Exchanges and our work, which was a very exciting outcome. You can watch my entire talk online, if you missed the opportunity of attending the conference.

During November we also took the time to produce two further episodes of The Exchanges Discourse. The first, was a reflective look back at the recently published issue. The second by contrast introduced another new format for the podcast, with our first foray into having authors present an oral version of their article’s abstract. If this wasn’t enough activity for one month, we also hosted the final Editorial Board online meeting of the year, bringing together my team together from across at least 4 different time-zones and several thousand miles. A tip of my hat especially for my Australian colleagues for joining us at what was a late hour of the day for them.

December

Publicly the year ended what was probably a relatively quietly note. Although behind the scenes there was a lot of work going on towards the volumes of the journal planned for 2021. Training was held for two incoming associate editors, Josh Patel and Pierre Botcherby for one. It was also a month where I seemed to be very busy interviewing academics about their publishing experiences for the Exchanges Discourse podcast, with two new episodes coming out just before the Christmas break featuring Dr Julia Gauly and another with Isabelle Heyerick. Clearly, looking at the healthy listener figures for these episodes, they were either highly engaging, or scholars found themselves with more time to listen as the year ended. It was notable the statistics for all episodes of podcast went up during December, so perhaps a little of both reasons. A further episode was also recorded, but with the encroaching Christmas shut-down period, it was held back from release until early 2021. For me though, the last event of the year was a discussion with some scholars in the Netherlands about an open access project of potential interest to the journal. A fine way to cap off a strange and unexpectedly eventful working year on a note of authentic positivity.

---

So, that was Exchanges’ 2020 – and what’s ahead for 2021? More special issues being published, more regular issues too that’s for certain, as are more podcast episodes. I’m hopeful we’ll be opening the books to recruit some new editors and associate editors in the coming months, alongside contributing to a few conferences, workshops and forums in a professional capacity. We’ll also be quietly celebrating three years of the title under my stewardship, albeit at in a respectably socially-distanced manner, around Easter time. I do hope you’ll be at least joining us as a reader or may even be moved to contribute to a future issue. We are certainly looking forward to many, many new interactions with scholars old and new throughout the next year: via the blog, podcast, twitter, email or video-call. However, you approach us, know there’ll be a warm welcome!

Gareth Johnson : 06 Jan 2021 16:35 |  Tags: 2020 Challenges Highlights Publication Review Year |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Closing Down for 2020

Writing about web page https://anchor.fm/exchangesias/episodes/A-Conversation-withIsabelle-Heyerick-eo42dq

'Don’t be blinded by where you want to publish, look for people you want to publish with’

Well, it’s been a year, and what a year it’s been for us all. From the triumph back in January of our first special issue making it to publication, through the launch of the new podcast to speaking about Exchanges to the international community. A lot has happened.

You don’t need me to tell you 2020 has been a year like no other in living memory. It has changed how we work, but for the journal it has also reinforced the strengths of the links we have with contributing communities. From editors, to authors, reviewers and readers, I’ve probably enjoyed more direct interactions this year than I do when I’m actually sitting in my campus office. An office, I hope to see once more in the not too distant future, I may add.

We don’t know what the future holds, so I’m going to avoid any prognostication here, and perhaps introduce a mild sense of caution. I’m hopeful that 2021 will see the publication of two regular issues of the journal, alongside an unprecedented three (!) special issues – those are the plans as they stand right now. I know too that we hope to continue producing our Exchanges Discourse podcast, the latest episode of which went live this morning.

>Listen to: A Conversation with…Isabelle Heyerick

The next two episodes have already been recorded or scheduled for production early in the new year, so there’s plenty of content to come.

In the meantime, if you’ve read or in anyway contributed to the work of Exchanges this year, can I thank you from the bottom of my heart, and wish you a much, much better new year. Stay healthy, take care of yourselves, and I look froward to talking publishing with you very, very soon.

Gareth Johnson : 22 Dec 2020 12:20 |  Tags: 2020 2021 Podcast Review Year |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

New Podcast Episode: A Conversation with…Dr Julia Gauly

Writing about web page https://anchor.fm/exchangesias/episodes/A-Conversation-withDr-Julia-Gauly-enac6f

“Criticise other people as you would like be criticised… .That’s what I try to keep in mind…that’s a small sentence, which can make such a difference”

>Listen to: A Conversation with...Dr Julia Gauly

We reach episode 10 in the first season of The Exchanges Disocurse podcast series, with a delightful interview with Dr Julia Gauly. An early career fellow at the IAS and based at the Warwick Medical School, Julia’s work focuses on evaluating sexual health information provision and, especially as a route to enhancing accessibility and public health, the impacts from increased its availability via local pharmacies. Julia also takes the time to share her own learning journey with respect to publishing, along with providing some words of advice for first time and other early career authors.

Episode 11 is already recorded, a conversation this time with Dr Isabelle Heyerick and later today I'll be recording episode 12 which will focus on the 'cultural representations of nerds' forthcoming special issue in 2021. I'll be joined by the two leads for that special issue to chat about what it means, and also discuss the planned event tying into the issue.

Please do have a listen, and if you like what you hear share the love! If you'd like to get in touch with the podcast with an idea for an episode, or to propose a guest, then you'll find our contact details here.

Gareth Johnson : 03 Dec 2020 16:04 |  Tags: Episode Gauly Health Information Pharmacies Podcast Public Sexual |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

15th Munin Conference on Scholarly Publishing & Exchanges

Writing about web page https://site.uit.no/muninconf/program/

This week I’ve had the pleasure of virtually attending the Munin Conference on Scholarly Publishing, host at UiT University of the Artic, in beautiful Tromsø. While due to Covid-19 I sadly was unable to travel there, it was still two highly enjoyable and informative days focussing on a topic that rather fills my professional life. As all conference sessions were recorded you’ll be able to follow the link above and watch them to your heart’s content.

However, most excitingly I was one of the speakers at this year’s conference, on the topic The Twin Dilemma: Successfully Operating a Scholar-Led Journal to Enable Discourse and Empower Researcher Development. The habitual Doctor Who reference in the title aside, my talk focussed on the experiences we’ve had on Exchanges in terms of our work towards special issues, and the experiences of my associate editors as per the abstract:

The presentation will explore the configuration of a long-running and successful scholar-led, diamond open-access, interdisciplinary journal Exchanges, published by the University of Warwick, which combines knowledge dissemination with contributor developmental goals. Drawing on experiential data, the presentation provides ethnographic insights into the mutually beneficial outcomes derived from recruiting post-graduate researcher ‘associate editors’ to work on the title. It also problematises the balance between potentially exploitative, collaborative editorial production within the context of necessary academic immaterial labour required to operate an interdisciplinary scholar-led title.

I’ve had some very positive feedback and one or two post-talk conversations already which might be opening some new avenues for the journal to tentatively explore. Moreover, with an audience of 150 globally for the talk, I’m hopeful it might also engender a few new submissions of work to the journal too, which would of course be absolutely fantastic.

Fingers crossed circumstances and journal developments allow me to be physically in attendance for next year’s conference!

Gareth Johnson : 19 Nov 2020 13:58 |  Tags: Communication Conference Munin Norway Scholarly Tromso |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Call for Papers (themed): A.I. – Panic or Panacea

Writing about web page https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/index.php/exchanges/announcement/view/28

Download the full text of this call

The issue of intelligence lies at the heart of the scholarly lifeworld, although for much of history a topic focussed around a singular, human construct. Today though, algorithms, deep learning and artificial intelligence have emerged into the everyday world. From the seemingly trivial, to battling the pandemic or even fighting our future wars, applications of algorithmic intelligence are increasingly shaping critical decisions and policy helping meet emerging challenges. Should we be celebrating the transition to a more ‘automated’ workplace, freeing humankind from waged-labour exploitative drudgery or does it represent an existential threat to the livelihood of millions?

Some would argue humanity has cause to fear the unchecked rise of the machines in our society. For example, the recent examination debacle in the UK undoubtedly lays still sharp in the minds of many British students and their parents as an example of a misapplied technological aid. Other cautionary tales of unfettered algorithm use abound in fields as diverse as space imaging and earth observation, through to the evaluation of immigration applicants or ‘future crime’ prediction. Is the age of the 'Minority Report' a new era of safety to be trumpeted or a greater force for oppression and fear?

Conversely, many assert artificial intelligence, machine learning and algorithms offer humanity a brave new world of opportunity, advancement and potential achievement. Deployed in the service of humanity algorithmic intelligence could help us better plan for future building and habitation needs, predict cataclysmic acts of nature or even more efficiently discover curative treatments. Thus, the artificially intelligent enabled future may be a far brighter one than some currently anticipate. Where, if anywhere, does ‘the truth’ lay?

Manuscript Submissions

Hence, for the issue of Exchanges due for publication in Autumn 2021, we invite authors to submit original, exciting and insightful manuscripts for peer-reviewed publicationconsideration inspired by any aspect of this theme. We welcome papers written for a general academic audience exploring or reviewing the science, application and implementation of machine learning, artificial intelligence or algorithms within a broader societal setting. We also welcome submissions from the humanities, arts and social sciences dealing with the ethics, perceptions, interpretations and representations of these issues too.

First-time or early career authors may alternatively wish to consider submitting either a critical reflectionor conversational (interview) pieceinspired or informed by these themes. Such pieces would serve to provide much needed background to the topic for a general academic audience. Critical reflections and conversations only undergo editorial review ahead of publication and hence are especially suitable for first-time or early career authors.

> Our author and style guidelines are available.

Deadlines

All submitted manuscripts will undergo editorial review, with those seeking publication as a research article additionally undergoing formal peer-review. The online form should be used to make manuscript submissions.

> Peer-reviewed articles: 1st May 2021. | Conversations or critical reflections: 31st August 2021.

More information

For more information on Exchangesand our activities, visit the journal’s website. For questions relating to this call, future submissions or other matters relating to the title please contact Editor-in-Chief, Dr Gareth J Johnson.

Gareth Johnson : 03 Nov 2020 16:50 |  Tags: AI Algorithms Call Ethics Learning Machine Papers |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Exchanges Volume 8.1 Published

Writing about web page https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/index.php/exchanges/issue/view/30

The sixteenth issue of Exchanges: The Interdisciplinary Research Journalhas been published (29 Oct 2020) by Warwick's Institute of Advanced Study. Written and by and for early career researchers in all disciplines, this issue once again brings an assortment of articles, topics and authors to its broad readership, with strong resonances between the pieces of creativity and language acquisition. Articles this issue deal with areas including:

Gareth Johnson : 29 Oct 2020 16:43 |  Tags: 2020 Autumn Issue New Published |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Exchanges AMA 2020

Today we rolled out the annual Exchanges session for the IAS’ Accolade programme, although with being online this year it was slightly different. Last year we had a fantastic [1] gamified workshop on publishing traumas, and the year before that more of a chalk and talk session. This time, well, the opportunity to host a Reddit style AMA (ask me anything) session seemed ideal. It was discursive, well suited to the online format, allowed for written or spoken questions and best of all, I didn’t need to do too much preparation.

Well, that is aside from ensuring I’d pre-written answers for the three outline questions I’d posed in the event blurb, to ensure we had something with which to kick off discussions. My thanks to my esteemed colleague Dr Sarah Penny for hosting and acting as session chair. Also, my thanks to those research fellows who listened and questioned me for what became a surprisingly fun 30 minutes of chat about the journal and publishing in general [2]. I hope you all got something useful, interesting or at least vaguely entertaining out of the session!

So, reader of the editorial blog, you’re probably wondering what was asked. Well, and I’m slightly paraphrasing, here are the topics we touched upon today.

• ‘Are articles rejected by journal editors when reviewers actually suggested major corrections?’
• ‘Are you approaching people to take part in the podcast or are people approaching you?’
• ‘Do you have any advice for starting out reviewing in journals? [Especially] do you have any tips for overcoming imposter syndrome?’
• ‘Do you prefer outlines [abstracts] before the completed paper [is submitted]’
• ‘I’m interested in if [Exchanges] is interested in new methods to integrate data (rather than findings from research studies’
• ‘I’ve never published before, and it’s nerve wracking’. Can you offer any support to someone like me?’
• ‘What are the three best ways to really annoy an editor?’
• ‘What’s a/your journal impact factor?’
• ‘What’s the deadline for the upcoming issue?’
• ‘Why should I publish in Exchanges?’

As for the answers…ah, you really needed to be there. However, I might pick up on one or more of these themes in future posts and podcast episodes, so maybe I won’t leave you all entirely hanging. Safe to say one or two of the questions above could probably have filled the entire 30 minutes had I given them the full answer.

Will we run this session again? I’d be keen to, and I’m sure we might find time down the line for a later Accolade repeat. Or of course, a royal command performance elsewhere. As readers, and those who know me, are aware, I will talk about Exchanges and scholarly publishing until the cows come home, so I look forward to the next session – whenever or wherever it might be!

---

[1] Well, I loved it and really want to run that session again, albeit, slightly reconfigured.

[2] Not to forget the hirsute Dr Marcos Estrada, one of my two longest serving and most prolific members of the editorial board for his input today too.

Gareth Johnson : 08 Oct 2020 15:28 |  Tags: Accolade Anything Ask Fellows Ias Live Me Talk Training Workshop |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem