Anna Severin

Anna Severin
Swiss National Science Foundation · Strategy Support Division

About

21
Publications
4,779
Reads
How we measure 'reads'
A 'read' is counted each time someone views a publication summary (such as the title, abstract, and list of authors), clicks on a figure, or views or downloads the full-text. Learn more
531
Citations
Introduction
I am a doctoral researcher based at the Strategy Support Department of the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) in Bern, Switzerland. My current PhD related work at the SNSF revolves around the intersection of Open Access (OA) publishing and scientific quality control in scholarly publishing, with a focus on OA research policy and scientometrics, predatory publishing and quality of peer reviews.

Publications

Publications (21)
Preprint
Full-text available
Background. Despite growing awareness of predatory publishing and research on its market characteristics, the defining attributes of fraudulent journals remain controversial. We aimed to develop a better understanding of quality criteria for scholarly journals by analysing journals and publishers indexed in blacklists of predatory journals and whit...
Article
The full text can be found at https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00038-019-01284-3
Article
Full-text available
Objectives To examine whether the gender of applicants and peer reviewers and other factors influence peer review of grant proposals submitted to a national funding agency. Setting Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF). Design Cross-sectional analysis of peer review reports submitted from 2009 to 2016 using linear mixed effects regression mode...
Article
Leading scholars and publishers from ten countries have agreed a definition of predatory publishing that can protect scholarship. It took 12 hours of discussion, 18 questions and 3 rounds to reach. Leading scholars and publishers from ten countries have agreed a definition of predatory publishing that can protect scholarship. It took 12 hours of di...
Preprint
Full-text available
The journal impact factor (JIF) is often equated with journal quality and the quality of the peer review of the papers submitted to the journal. We examined the association between the content of peer review and JIF by analysing 10,000 peer review reports submitted to 1,644 medical and life sciences journals. Two researchers hand-coded a random sam...
Article
Objectives: To describe and compare the characteristics of scholars who reviewed for predatory or legitimate journals in terms of their sociodemographic characteristics and reviewing and publishing behaviour. Design: Linkage of random samples of predatory journals and legitimate journals of the Cabells Scholarly Analytics' journal lists with the...
Article
Full-text available
Peer review of manuscripts is labour‐intensive and time‐consuming. Individual reviewers might feel themselves overburdened with the amount of reviewing they are requested to do. Aiming to explore how stakeholder groups perceive reviewing burden and what they believe to be the causes of a potential overburdening of reviewers, we conducted focus grou...
Preprint
Full-text available
Peer review of manuscripts is labour-intensive and time-consuming. Individual reviewers often feel themselves overburdened with the amount of reviewing they are requested to do. Aiming to explore how stakeholder groups perceive reviewing burden and what they believe to be the causes of a potential overburdening of reviewers, we conducted focus grou...
Article
Full-text available
Background: Scopus is a leading bibliometric database. It contains a large part of the articles cited in peer-reviewed publications . The journals included in Scopus are periodically re-evaluated to ensure they meet indexing criteria and some journals might be discontinued for 'publication concerns'. Previously published articles may remain indexed...
Article
Full-text available
Stakeholders might have diverging or conflicting expectations about the functions that peer review should fulfil. We aimed to explore how stakeholder groups perceive peer review and what they expect from it. We conducted qualitative focus group workshops with early‐, mid‐, and senior career scholars, editors, and publishers. We recruited participan...
Article
Full-text available
Background: Scopus is a leading bibliometric database. It contains the largest number of articles cited in peer-reviewed publications . The journals included in Scopus are periodically re-evaluated to ensure they meet indexing criteria and some journals might be discontinued for publication concerns. These journals remain indexed and can be cited....
Preprint
Background: Depending upon their relationship with the process, stakeholders might have diverging or even conflicting expectations about the functions that peer review should fulfil. We aimed to explore how different stakeholder groups across academic disciplines perceive peer review and what they expect from it. Methods: We conducted qualitative f...
Preprint
Full-text available
Background Scopus is a leading bibliometric database. It contains the largest number of articles cited in peer-reviewed publications. The journals included in Scopus are periodically re-evaluated to ensure they meet indexing criteria and some journals might be discontinued for publication concerns. These journals remain indexed and can be cited. Th...
Article
Full-text available
Background: Many of the discussions surrounding Open Access (OA) revolve around how it affects publishing practices across different academic disciplines. It was a long-held view that it would be only a matter of time before all disciplines fully and relatively homogeneously implemented OA. Recent large-scale bibliometric studies show, however, tha...
Preprint
Full-text available
Background: While the characteristics of scholars who publish in predatory journals are relatively well-understood, nothing is known about the scholars who review for these journals. We aimed to answer the following questions: Can we observe patterns of reviewer characteristics for scholars who review for predatory journals and for legitimate journ...
Preprint
Background The Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF) supports fundamental and use-inspired research in all disciplines. Peer reviewers assess the proposals submitted to the SNSF. We examined whether the gender of applicants and reviewers and other factors influenced the summary scores awarded. Methods We analysed 38,250 reports on 12,294 grant a...
Article
Full-text available
Predatory journals are spurious scientific outlets that charge fees for editorial and publishing services that they do not provide. Their lack of quality assurance of published articles increases the risk that unreliable research is published and thus jeopardizes the integrity and credibility of research as a whole. There is increasing awareness of...
Article
Full-text available
Background: Many of the discussions surrounding Open Access (OA) revolve around how it affects publishing practices across different academic disciplines. It was a long-held view that it would be only a matter of time before all disciplines fully and relatively homogeneously implemented OA. Recent large-scale bibliometric studies show, however, tha...

Network

Cited By

Projects

Projects (2)
Project
Conduct focus group interviews into how important stakeholders experience quality standards of peer review in academic journals and what they perceive as "good quality" peer review.