Team Pluralities Sits Down For a Chat

Writing about web page https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/index.php/exchanges/special-issues

A few thoughts stemming from today’s small editorial meeting

Today I hosted my first on campus meeting in well over two years. It’s great to be back on campus for once and to see actual real people in the flesh too [1]. Of course, as all my editors are scattered around the country [2] technically I could have hosted this meeting from my home office, as no one other than myself was here in person. Nevertheless, I will admit, it was a real treat to sit down at my office meeting table for once and conduct a meeting like the pre-COVID days. My home office is nice enough, but it certainly doesn’t have the same ambiance as my campus dwelling.

Today’s meeting was a chance for the associate editors working on the gestating pluralities of translation special issue to catch up along with exchanging advice and offering insight into the progression of their respective manuscripts. Thanks to special issue lead Melissa Pawelski, we were treated to a detailed exploration of reviewer feedback formatting. Given the linguistic scholarship in the meeting (not so much me) we also had a chat about the importance of shaping the affect of feedback through subtle changes in phraseology.

Initial reviewer feedback to authors from Exchanges has always been lightly mediated. This helps ensure clarity and priority of focus and task for authors is paramount. Additionally, through this operational approach we can help ensure any, inadvertently, abrasive statements from reviewers can be modestly ameliorated. ‘Reviewer 2’, we are looking at you here.[3]

It was certainly good to hear that usual issues with locating and recruiting reviewers aside [4], things seem to be progressing well on each of the manuscripts for the issue. We are perhaps still a way from being able to name a publication date - all the papers are currently going through the review phase – but I’m hopeful as we move towards the back end of 2022 a destination date might well come into view.

It was also good to have a chance to interact with some of my editors – it always is frankly – and connect a little more with them as people. Hopefully all the associate editors benefitted from the discussions, and for my own part I certainly came away feeling I’d learned one or two new things about my team too.

My thanks as always to all our reviewing community for their valued contributions to the journal!

---

Endnotes

[1] With apologies to my family who are also real, but I have rather seen a lot of them.

[2] And indeed the world, if we consider all of them

[3] There have likely been reviews I’ve written that I suspect I was clearly ‘reviewer 2’ for some authors – sorry!

[4] Pretty much Exchanges SOP for editors.

Gareth Johnson : 15 Jun 2022 14:32 |  Tags: Editorial Issues Languages Linguistics Meetings Processes Special Translation |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Podcast: Talking with Jon Braddy

Writing about web page https://anchor.fm/exchangesias/episodes/In-Conversation-with-Jon-Braddy-e1jstis

Yes, we're back with an all-new episode of the Exchanges Discourse podcast. It's been a bust few months thanks to bank holidays, the launch of the new issue and working on various special issue projects. Which has meant the podcast took a slightly back-seat for a couple of months. But the good news is, we're back and with a couple of author interviews to start us off again. Hopefully, there's a few more interesting episodes to follow - especially once we launch our next special issue of the journal. More on that in the coming month.

In the meantime, please enjoy my conversation with Jon about everything from the weather, through developing your writing with passion and the idea that publishing CAN and should be fun without diminishing the scholarship.

In Conversation with Jon Braddy (S03E06)

We talk with Jon Braddy, Florida Gulf Coast University, about his paper Utilizing the Octothorpe (#): Schizoanalytic cartographies recognized in War Games, which appeared in the most recent issue of the Exchanges journal (V9.2). Along the way, aside from contrasting the trans-Atlantic weather differences, we look at passion how it can serve to evolve your own academic voice within your writing. We also discuss some areas of mutual challenges for authors and editors of scholarly journals, and reflect on the value and process of peer-review.

The Exchanges Discourse podcast is available on Anchor.fm, Spotify and most major podcast platforms.

Our next episode was recorded this morning, so listen out for it next week.

Gareth Johnson : 14 Jun 2022 09:00 |  Tags: Academics Discourse Episode Exchanges New Podcast Writing |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Reviewer Roundup ‘22

Follow-up to Refreshing Exchanges' Reviewer Database from Exchanges Reflections: Interdisciplinary Editor Insights

Reviewers are a vital part of the Exchanges team - and making sure our records for each of them are up-to-date is just as vital.

Today I’m working on one of those tasks that’s been sitting in my to-do list for sometime: going through all the registered reviewer records to see which ones haven’t added any reviewer interests. Long-time readers will recall I did a similar task a few years ago, and the result was a wave of researchers upgrading their records, albeit alongside some who decided to request we remove their contact details – as is their right.

You would think tools which permit functionality like ‘display all reviewer users’ where ‘researcher interest is a null field’ would be the sort of thing baked into a journal management system like OJS. But, as with so much of the platform’s management information systems it’s not really been as well developed as say the core editorial workflow controls. The most recent update we applied to the platform did – I am pleased to report – provide some much-improved managerial tools that I’ve been pleased to make use of on more than one occasion. It is now possible for example to output a .CSV file containing the names of all users within a certain group. So, I guess from where I’m sitting, we’re halfway there[1].

However, in this file the reviewer interests information is not among the information which can be outputted. This is a shame as a simple Excel function would have enabled me to filter all 700+ registered reviewers down to just those lacking any listed research interests. Which means I had to go to speak to my technical guru in IT Services and crave a boon from them! Thankfully, this the lovely OJS Technical Lead was able to deploy a little back-office Python scripting to quickly draw out exactly the data I needed. Kudos, as on so many occasions, to them. It’s no reflection on them that this obvious functionality is lacking from a editorial user perspective. Maybe I can wish for it to appear in a future update…[2]

Following a little data clean-up - names with non-British characters seem to have been rendered oddly in the output file for one – all that remains now is to prepare my mailshot text and send it out (BCC of course) to all our reviewers via a mail merge. Based on the experience last time, I suspect we’ll have one of three reactions from those were contact:

(1) Email bounceback, indicated a defunct account

(2) A request for us to remove the account

(3) An update to the record made by the user[3]

Option 3 is my desired outcome of course, but I suspect I’ll be dealing with a fair bit of (1) and (2). Users can inactivate, or remove their reviewer registration themselves, but if they ask, I’ll happily adjust their account as requested. For those dead accounts though, I’ll need to go through and check they weren’t actively involved in any recent reviews before, with regrets, removing them from our reviewer’s list.

Hence, if you are one of our reviewers, and you get a message from me this week to update your account details – don’t feel singled out – you’re just one among many we’re asking to help us to help you – and direct the right kind of reviews in your direction!

---

Endnotes

[1] Livin’ on a prayer or not

[2] I shall not hold my breath on this one.

[3] If you want to jump the gun and update your details - you'll find instructions here: https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/index.php/exchanges/FAQ#reviewers

Gareth Johnson : 13 Jun 2022 10:59 |  Tags: Cleanup Data ITS Profiles Quality Reviewers Updates Users |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

PlumX, Exchanges and You

Writing about web page https://plumanalytics.com/

Since the start of 2022 the Plum Analytics module (AKA PlumX) has been installed on Exchanges. You might have noticed on each of the articles’ landing pages, below the native download statistics, a new little graphic. If you haven’t noticed – don’t worry, you’re not alone! I only discovered this week that a plug-in to my Chrome browser meant I’d not been seeing these metrics myself – luckily a bit of testing means I now know PlumX is actually working well.

If you’ve not come across the concept of altmetrics before, they’re loosly classed as alternatives to the traditional bibliometrics (e.g. impact factor and h-index) that many scholars are more familiar instead. They’re intended as, in part, an alternative perspective to these or perhaps compliment to these ‘hard’ metrics, and provide an insight into how and where people are talking about or interacting with publications. As PlumAnalytics, the creator of the app describe it ‘research output[s]…leave “footprints” to show the way back to who is interested in the research and why’.

Hence, for example you’ll find an altmetric app like PlumX tracks things such as social media interactions, online news media or online reference managers which relate to how an article is being used, discussed or referenced in a much more holistic sense than traditional bibliometric factors.

PlumX is one such altmetric system then, which offers authors new ways to see how people are engaging with their research. The widget we have is enabled across the Warwick University Press family of journals, so you should see it on our companion titles too. The PlumX tool draws on dozens of metrics mined from the open Web.

Hence, now you can learn a lot more about how a paper is interesting to other scholars than a simple download metric alone!

Gareth Johnson : 09 Jun 2022 13:21 |  Tags: Altmetrics Bibliometrics Citation Discussion Metrics |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Developing a Monograph Proposal

Writing about web page https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/cross_fac/ias/calendar/?calendarItem=8a1785d8804667f701808a917361052e

Don’t worry. Exchanges isn’t about to make a major pivot and set up shop as a full-blown academic publisher. No, the title in questions refers to a forthcoming panel discussion I’ve been asked to chair as part of the IAS’ Accolade programme (Thu 9^th June). In a similar vein to the one I chaired a few weeks ago on strategic article publishing, this session sees a small collection of scholars coming along and talking about their experiences – this time focussed on monograph publishing. Specifically, the session’s title alludes to developing a monograph proposal, but I suspect conversations will drift wider than this to encompass the whole publishing journey.

Hence, my hope is that the panel will be able to expose the high and low spots of their publication journeys. I think crucially this will be complemented by an exploration of the initial steps – answering the key question of ‘How do I start?’ for the audience. Naturally, as a journal publisher myself, I’m going to be especially interested in hearing about their interactions with editorial and production staff alike. These might not be the focus of discussions -more’s the pity – but I suspect there will be a few insights or even revelations along the way!

Of course, like the previous panel my hopes are for the majority of questions for the panel to be raised directly by the attendees. I am understandably though also in the process of developing a battery of discussion points to prompt some initial debate. It’s always been my experience in running panels like this that you normally need a couple of ice breaker questions, and perhaps a closing one, to shape the session. Beyond these, I find the audiences are usually willing to drive the direction of conversations themselves. That said, as an experienced panel facilitator, I’m also prepared for a lengthy stony silence from the audience too which is why I like to have around a dozen back-up questions to hand.

Suggestions for any potential questions or topics to put to the panel ahead of the event, are of course always welcomed via all our regular communications channels. Personally, I’m very much looking forward to participating in these discussions, so here’s to a vibrant exchange of insight!

Gareth Johnson : 26 May 2022 10:20 |  Tags: Accolade Monographs Publishing Workshop |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Trackbacks (1) |  Report a problem

Academic journals and you

Writing about web page https://www.researchgate.net/publication/360842687_Articles_Academic_Publishing_You

Today I did a repeat performance of last year's seminar for the undergraduates on the theme of academic journal publishing. As always I had the horrible feeling I was somehow pitching it simultaneously too high and too low for the audience, but as it turned out it seemed to go okay. A discrete audience mind you, which made the interactive portions a bit more challenging - but I guess we're near the year of the academic term for so many students I can hardly blame them for not wanting to turn up!

An excellent question on converting a dissertation into an article – which I think I’ll adapt for inclusion should I be asked to re-run this session next year. Maybe less on the journal world and more on the writing aspect I think might have been a good idea, so we’ll see if I can conflate a couple of slides and add in a new one on this topic instead.

Also a first for me - being asked a question on video by an attendee travelling at high speed train across Europe. Truly, we are living in the future! Should anyone be interested - I've made the slides available on my Research-Gate account.

Gareth Johnson : 25 May 2022 14:19 |  Tags: Journals Publishing Seminar Undergraduates |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Panel: Developing your Publication Strategy '22

Last week I hosted a couple of workshops for the IAS. The first (3^rd May) was the return of my popular Exchanges Ask me Anything session, wherein our early career fellows get to ask me, well, anything about the journal – and often the world of academic publishing at large too. They also get to watch me sip a cup of tea as I offer them time and space to think of their questions without me talking too. Seemed to go well, so far as one can tell in an online teaching environment. We’ll be running this again in the autumn I suspect for the next batch of ECFs we induct.

Thursday (5^th May) though was the more significant of the workshop sessions. This was my second iteration of the Developing your Publication Strategy, which regular readers will recall I originally hosted back in March 2021. As this had been such a successful session, I was asked last month if I’d be willing to offer it again: a request to which I quickly agreed.

I decided this time fantastic though the panel members were last year, that for this new panel I’d try and recruit some different voices. Different academics would bring with them fresh and unexpected perspectives, and I hoped would contribute to an engaging session for the delegates. As before, I reached out to a goodly number of contacts, many of whom were unavailable (if otherwise willing) to participate. I did though, thankfully, strike gold with three past Exchanges authors and I will confess, past podcast guests too: Dr Catherine Price (Nottingham), Dr Mark Readman (Bournemouth) and Prof Monica Mastrantonio (York). Thanks to the efforts of the EUTOPIA Consortium, I was also able to recruit Prof Marcus Pivato (Cergy Paris) to add into the mix as well.

I was delighted to say we had a packed 75 minutes during which my four panellists handled all manner of questions from the audience. From complex ruminations on creating an interdisciplinary portfolio, through to their thoughts on the current scholarly communications field and advice on how delegates might refine their own practices. While I had a battery of questions to hand to keep the conversation flowing, should the audience be a little restrained in offering their own, I had little need to return to these during the session. It certainly was a lively debate, and feedback from speakers and delegates alike on the day seemed most positive.

I am naturally deeply indebted to all of the speakers for their participation and gracious gift of time, as each of them really helped the session come alive in different ways. As panel chair it was interesting to observe how we touched on similar topics to the 2021 session, albeit debating them within a slightly different framing. Such is the joy of running a panel session – you never know quite what you’re going to learn.

I am also grateful to the audience, who played their part well. Not only were they thought provoking in their questioning, but they also contributed to a wonderful continuing thread of debate within the text chat. Certainly, one advantage of hybrid/online sessions over a f2f one is that you get this wonderful additional thread of debate available for all, rather than just the people you’re whispering sitting next to you. Prominent among the topics tackled here were perceptions of peer-review and anonymization, which exposed some very big divides and surprising disciplinary assumptions among panellists and audience alike.

The text chat also captured a range of resources and links, that I promised to collate for further interest [1]:

• Tool for choosing potential journals: https://jane.biosemantics.org/
• Biology Open-Access Repository: https://www.biorxiv.org
• MDPI’s Remarkable Growth: https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2020/08/10/guest-post-mdpis-remarkable-growth/
• Publoins & Peer-reviewers: https://authorservices.wiley.com/Reviewers/journal-reviewers/recognition-for-reviewers/publons.html

I very much enjoyed running this panel, which was illuminating for myself as well. Hopefully, we’ll see this panel session revisited in some format during 2023 once more – with yet another set of fine panellists!

---

[1] Beall’s ‘predatory’ trash journals list came up too, but given the considerable issues over this in recent years I’m not including it here.

Gareth Johnson : 09 May 2022 15:45 |  Tags: Accolade Eutopia Panel Publishing Strategy Workshop |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Announcing the Exchanges Reader Survey 2022

Writing about web page https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/index.php/exchanges/announcement/view/37

As revealed in the recent Volume 9(2), Exchangesis delighted to announce the launch of our first ever readers’ survey, tied in to the progress towards our tenth anniversary issue in late 2023.

Hence, the Editor-in-Chief, and Editorial Board, would like to strongly encourage our readership, and indeed anyone with an interest in the title, to offer some insights into what they most value and desire from the journal. The survey is, by necessity and efficacy, a brief and anonymous instrument which should take 2-3 minutes to complete at most.

To participate in the survey – please follow the link below:

• gle/JpdGjxU8EsYpCNxy6

Should you experience any issues - be they local security measures or simple accessibility - with being able to access or respond via this form, then please contact me directlyand I will provide an alternative format.

Thank you in advance for your comments as you will undoubtably help us in shaping our own direction of travel and aspirations for the nextten years of Exchanges!

The survey will run throughout the next month or so, closing on or around Friday 17thJune 2022.

Gareth Johnson : 05 May 2022 09:48 |  Tags: Feedback Journal Readers Survey |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Call for Papers: Authentic Interdisciplinarity

Writing about web page https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/index.php/exchanges/announcement/view/36

In case you missed it, we have a themed call for papers now open which ties in to our planned 10th Birthday Issue in October 2023.

we are seeking contributions which seek to celebrate, challenge or define ideas around authentic interdisciplinarity. Authors may wish to draw on their own research practices and activities or adopt a more holistic stance in engaging with the prior literature and activities within this broadly demarcated field. As is Exchanges’tradition, we will potentially consider any work which its authors choose to present which seeks to address the themes evident within this call.

Authors may also wish to draw upon methods or methodological practices within a variety of field. Alternatively, they may consider explore if there are discrete or disparate audiences for interdisciplinary rather than unitary disciplinary work in academia today. Additionally, pieces considering, rationalising or amplifying cross-disciplinary discourse concerning centring on the concepts of authentic interdisciplinarity would be warmly received.

Authors looking for further inspiration should read the full text of the call at:

https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/index.php/exchanges/announcement/view/36

Deadlines are:

• Peer-Reviewed Papers or Review Articles 30th November 2022
• Critical Reflections, Conversations (interviews) or Essays 30th June 2023

Gareth Johnson : 03 May 2022 09:14 |  Tags: Anniversary Call Interdisciplinarity Papers |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem

Volume 9 Issue 2 of Exchanges is NOW Available

Writing about web page https://doi.org/10.31273/eirj.v9i2

We are delighted to announce the publication of the Spring 2022 issue of Exchanges: The Interdisciplinary Research Journal. This is our 21^st issue overall, and as a regular issue of the title, contains a range of articles, critical reflections and conversations on a broad spectrum of topics. It is, like all our past issues, entirely open access and free to read at point of publication.

---

DOI: https://doi.org/10.31273/eirj.v9i2

PDF: https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/index.php/exchanges/issue/view/46/46

Page: https://exchanges.warwick.ac.uk/index.php/exchanges/issue/view/46

This is the twenty-first issue of Exchanges, published in April 2022. This issue contains a variety of articles from different corners of the disciplinary academic traditions, from authors around the globe. Article topics within include: schizoanalytic cartographies, post-urban life in the Alps, factual divergence and expert trust, challenging stereotypical representation of Italian women, environmental epiphanies, disability representation in the media; along with two extended conversations with noted scholars. The issue’s editorial by the Editor-in-Chief briefly introduces the issue and provides an overview of the articles published within it. It also highlights two opportunities for participation through a reader survey and an anniversary call for papers on ‘authentic interdisciplinary’, alongside the regular open call for contributions to future issues. Ways for readers and authors to engage with the journal in-between issues are also highlighted.

---

As always, my thanks to all the authors, reviewers and editors who helped make this issue possible. Hopefully, the next issue you’ll be seeing will be one of our especially exciting special issues. Watch this space for news, or sign up to be an Exchanges reader and get emails directly.

Gareth Johnson : 29 Apr 2022 10:00 |  Tags: Exchanges Issue Journal New Publication Research |  Comments (0) |  Close comments |  Report a problem