Preprints for the Journal of Systems Thinking (JoST) (ISSN 2767-3847)
Preprints for the Journal of Systems Thinking (JoST) (ISSN 2767-3847) open for review.
Review by academic peers is an essential part of the scholarly publishing and communication process. By sharing their expert opinion, researchers evaluate and improve the research of their peers. But traditional blinded peer review systems can suffer from a lack of transparency, recognition, and accountability.
The Journal of Systems Thinking is set to change this.
The Journal of Systems Thinking has chosen a novel open peer review system based on rapid posting of a preprint, open review, discussion and revision and then final publication in the Journal. The identity of the reviewers and their comments are visible at all times. This means that reviews have to be constructive, courteous, and well-written. Reviews are published with a Creative Commons Attribution License CC-BY (4.0) license and also receive a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) from CrossRef, similar to a formal research publication. This means that reviews are re-usable, citable, and permanent records of your reviewing activities, and therefore all of your review activities can be integrated with ORCID, Publons, and ImpactStory, helping to build your profile as a researcher.
You can learn more about open peer review on ScienceOpen here: https://about.scienceopen.com/peer-review-guidelines/
Reviews consist of two parts listed below.
General Factors Ratings
Please provide a rating from one star (poor) to five stars (excellent)
Is the publication of relevance for the academic community and does it provide important insights? Does the work represent a novel approach or new findings in comparison with other publications in the field?
Is the hypothesis clearly formulated? Is the argumentation stringent? Are the data sound, well-controlled and statistically significant? Is the interpretation balanced and supported by the data? Are appropriate and state-of-the-art methods used?
Do the authors reference the appropriate scholarly context? Do the authors provide or cite all information to follow their findings or argumentation? Do they cite all relevant publications in the field?
Is the language correct and easy to understand for an academic in the field? Are the figures well displayed and captions properly described? Is the article systematically and logically organized?
The Written Review Report
After assigning the manuscript rating (see above), reviewers may submit a written review (up to 10,000 characters). Reviews should stick to the aims and objectives set out above. Try to structure your review as a list of major points followed by minor points and conclude with an overall impression of the manuscript. Keep in mind that the audience for the review includes both authors and readers (see above).
Authors are free to invite suitable reviewers for their own manuscript – as long as they are in accordance with our Peer Review Policy. There are no limits on the number of invited reviews. Editors or other ScienceOpen members may invite additional peers to review your work. Unsolicited comments and reviews make up an important component of our public peer review system.
|ScienceOpen disciplines:||Communication networks, Social & Information networks, Quantitative & Systems biology, Information systems & theory, Bioinformatics & Computational biology, Social & Behavioral Sciences|
|Keywords:||systems, thinking, complexity, cognition, organization|