New features: Better reviewer communication, public article analytics and more!

It’s been an exciting first half of the year for Scholastica. We now have over 700 journal users and we’re continuing to roll out new features to keep improving our software in order to best serve journal editors, authors, and reviewers. Recently, we introduced some updates to both peer review and open access publishing, including:

  • Improvements to how editors and reviewers communicate with each other
  • Easier file downloading for editors
  • Faster journal website load times and public analytics for HTML articles

Read on for the full details!

Journals can set automatic review reminder email frequency

We know that efficient communication is key throughout peer review. The easier it is for editors to check in on reviewers’ progress without inundating them with emails and the easier it is for reviewers to quickly communicate their recommendations to editors the better. To that end, we’ve introduced two new features to improve editor and reviewer communication.

First, we’ve given journals greater control over automated reviewer reminder emails. Now, editors can decide how frequently they want reviewers to receive automatic reminders at each stage of the peer review process — before the reviewer has responded to an invitation, after response but before the review deadline, and once the deadline has passed and the review is late.

The admin editors of journals can now set email frequencies for the following review reminder categories by going to My Journals > Settings > Configuration Options:

  • Reminders to accept outstanding invitations
  • Reminders to submit accepted reviews
  • Reminders to submit late reviews

These options will enable editors to more closely control the cadence of their reviewer outreach before and after assignments are due. For example, if your journal does not want to send reviewers reminder emails to complete their reviews unless they are late then you can elect to not send any reminders to submit accepted reviews and choose to instead only send reminders for late assignments.

Reviewers can set file permissions for feedback form attachments

In addition to giving editors more control over reviewer reminders, we’ve also made it easier for reviewers to quickly designate whether files they are attaching to their review feedback form are intended just for the journal’s editors or for the editors and the manuscript’s authors. Reviewers now have the option to upload any accompanying files to either an editors only section or an editors and authors section. With this new feature, the intended audience of each reviewer attachment should be clear, helping to avoid back and forth between editors and reviewers as well as the potential of editors forgetting to share attachments intended for the author.

Editors can download all manuscript files at once

It’s also easier for editors to access the manuscript files that they need. We know that downloading manuscripts with multiple attachments can be cumbersome, so we’ve made it possible to download a manuscript and all of its accompanying files with one click, in addition to the ability to download individual files. Now, when editors go to a manuscript’s work area they will see a “download all files” link. Click the link and get everything you need!



Declaration of Rights and Principles to Transform Scholarly Communication

Declaration of Rights and Principles to Transform Scholarly Communication

  1. No copyright transfers.
  2. No restrictions on preprints.
  3. No waivers of OA Policy.
  4. No delays to sharing.
  5. No limitations on author reuse.
  6. No impediments to rights reversion.
  7. No curtailment of copyright exceptions.
  8. No barriers to data availability.
  9. No constraints on content mining.
  10. No closed metadata.
  11. No free labor.
  12. No long-term subscriptions.
  13. No permanent paywalls.
  14. No double payments.
  15. No hidden profits.
  16. No deals without OA offsets.
  17. No new paywalls for our work.
  18. No non-disclosure agreements.



JRTDD in Eprints

Respected colleagues,

I have great honor to inform you that Journal for ReAttach Therapy and Developmental Diversities is included in digital repository of Eprints.

What is Eprints?

EPrints has been leading innovation in the Open Access movement over the past 15 years. EPrints provides a set of mature ingest, preservation, dissemination and reporting services for your institution’s OA needs.
Created in 2000 as a direct outcome of the 1999 Santa Fe meeting that decided on the OAI-PMH protocol, EPrints software provides stable, pragmatic infrastructure on which institutions the world over have been utilising to enable their Open Access agendas.
As Open Source Software, EPrints’ greatest asset is the community of developers, librarians and users that feed into its progress and keep EPrints the innovative platform that we are so proud of.
In this occasion I would like to thank to my collegues Prof. Dr. Boro Jakimovski and Prof. Dr. Dejan Gjorgjevikj from faculty of FINKI at University Ss. Cyril and Methodius. They gave us technical support for this platform. We hope that through this platform the jounral will be much more visible and indexed.
JRTDD Editor-in-chief


By: Amy Rees, Customer Support Manager at Altmetric

What and why: does article performance data matter?

With an uptick in the number of journals being published, journals can now use article performance data to provide added value for researchers to encourage them to publish with their organisation and reward the choice to have so done. This additional value can manifest in different ways, both in raw numbers such as downloads, or more nuanced data such as discussions of an article in policy documents.

Collating different types of article performance data allows authors to see rich data associated with their publications. Authors can be rewarded for their community outreach and engagement, seeing payoff for the fruits of their labour.

The article performance data also provides a wider picture of how the research is being received and presented online. This allows authors to consider the questions: How are mainstream sources presenting their research? How are laypersons reacting to the research? How are governmental and non-governmental organisations using the research in the “real world”?

One facet of article performance data is the collection and presentation of altmetrics. Altmetrics, or alternative metrics, describe non-traditional attention to scholarly outputs. Altmetrics as an idea covers a wide range of types of attention: news stories, shares and mentions on social media, references from government policy documents or patents, and much more.

Designed to be complementary to traditional bibliometrics (citations between articles, for example), altmetrics can provide a much more immediate, richer picture of who is engaging with a piece of research, and how it was received.

Recognising author engagement efforts

Providing altmetrics to authors, an approach which has become increasingly commonplace amongst academic publishers, can help not only encourage them to disseminate the results from their research, but also to see the positive effects of doing so. Outreach and engagement by an author is a key factor in increasing the type of attention paid to a publication or the quantity of engagement. As authors take the time to blog, engage with readers on Twitter, do interviews with news programs, and address comments on public peer review forums, they are creating a conversation about their work that is not without considerable effort.

Beyond viewing the impact in the context of journal performance, this type of dissemination also allows for audiences outside of academia to develop their understanding of key issues that impact society. The effort authors put into making their research available and easy to understand is not without benefit to the academic community, whose funders often rely on public donations or whose institutions may seek to raise their profile in a specific field.

Undertaking this kind of broader engagement, and tracking its outcomes, is also increasingly used by individual researchers looking to demonstrate the influence of their work to potential funders, hiring committees, or as part of national research performance reviews.

Staying on top of the story

News coverage, now more than ever and whether true or false, dominates the public understanding of research. Popular science is discussed in major newspapers and dissected in opinion pieces. One journal article can be discussed in multiple news outlets within a short period of time, even with conflicting stories or perspectives. New research published in Science “The spread of true and false news online” indicates that false news stories are shared at a much higher rate than those based in truth. This means that “getting ahead of the story” is critical to authors and the communications teams that support them to ensure their research is being properly positioned.

If an author doesn’t have access to this news data they might not see a misinterpretation of their research and miss the opportunity to respond or clarify. Further, they might also miss the opportunity to engage with an interested community.

The aggregation of news stories, a type of altmetrics, lets the author keep track of how their research is being positioned and then they can work with the media/marketing team of a publisher to correct any issues or highlight particular feedback.

Likewise, public peer review such as Publons, the source used by Altmetric, allows researchers to see the peer reviews of their publication in an open format. This open data allows users to have a chance to respond to relevant criticism within their own field. Concerns about results, data collection, and other aspects of research can be addressed via public discussions. This encourages inter-group conversations about research and allows more direct feedback about the publication.

Expand data available to authors

Collating altmetrics data can be challenging and time consuming for authors. While a simple search online could highlight some of the news stories about a publication it masks the effort necessary to find a complete picture. Some stories may be available but, a user is constrained by the search engine they are using and what they consider “important results”.

Taking the time to truly understand the attention and engagement associated with a publication can lead authors to arduous searching of multiple platforms and sources. By providing altmetrics, journals are pulling together a snapshot of the online attention available and bringing it into a single place, saving authors time and hassle.

Altmetrics are also a great way to highlight sources that might not be available to authors otherwise. While some sources, such as Twitter and news, could be available to users, other sources are harder to find or simply unavailable to authors.

Finding mentions of a publication in policy documents is often a particular challenge for authors. Not all policy sources or organisations make their publications available in an easy to read format, such as PDF or via Word Document. They can be buried in website archives in older formats or simply hard to locate.

Further, there lies a practical issue with extracting policy references. Where does an author even start? Most governments publish thousands of different policy documents per year and it can hard to know even where to start.

As with policy documents, finding references to journal articles in syllabi is nearly impossible for an individual academic. While authors may be aware of where their articles are used in their own institution or maybe in part of their sector there are many other institutions that may be using their research for teaching. This data could be invisible to researchers who may not even realise the use and breadth of their research.

Highlight readership and academic engagement

While engagement with laypersons is a valuable understanding of dissemination, authors are likely interested in which other authors and academics are reading and considering their publications. Readership data, such as that provided by Mendeley, shows who has saved a paper in their academic library to read or use in a future publication. They also provide geographic as well as discipline data for the readers that have saved the paper. Authors can then see where researchers are saving their publications and which discipline. Additionally, Mendeley readership has been correlated, in some fields, to long-term citations.

Services such as F1000 – Faculty of 1000 – allow users to see which academics have recommended their paper. This data allows users to see that academics have not just saved the paper that they have read it and deemed it of value. Though saving a paper does denote at least interest and future engagement these types of recommendations show a direct engagement with the paper and a public endorsement of its content.

Complementary data

Article performance data should be viewed as interlocking and complementary data, with altmetrics working together with more traditional sources such as downloads, views, and citations. While traditional citations take longer to accrue they represent an important part of the story for understanding the performance of an article.

As with any other article performance data, a high volume of citations does not necessarily mean agreement or quality. For example, the now since retracted paper regarding Autism and MWWR written by Andrew Wakefield et al has more than a thousand citations.

Similarly, download counts and views provide another type of article performance data for authors to have a sense of the immediate response to the paper. While a high number of downloads and views don’t necessary denote agreement, it does display engagement and attention to the publication.


Providing altmetrics to authors is more than saying “You have X number of news stories and x number of Facebook posts”, though that can also be valuable attention itself. Altmetrics data allows journals to provide a more complete picture of the attention that has been paid to an author’s publication. From laypersons to science communicators to other academics and everyone in between, article performance data is a key source of valuable data for journals to provide to authors.

Article performance data is not only about addressing potential issues and positioning the research in the media, it is also about allowing authors to see the whole story. Providing a variety of different data allows authors to see areas, both disciplinary as well as geographic, that have shown interest in their publication and building connections to others who might be interested. In adding article performance data to the author package a journal is not only giving an author data, they are showing the value of a publication beyond its appearance in that journal.



How to define authorship

The prevailing standard for defining authorship in scientific publishing comes from the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). These standards are broadly applicable in journals across disciplines and are a great place to start when creating or iterating on your authorship policy. According to the ICMJE, an author is someone who meets all the following criteria:

  1. Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work
  2. Drafting the work or revising it critically for important intellectual content
  3. Final approval of the version to be published
  4. Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved

In short, each author should have made an important contribution that enabled the study to be completed, be aware of how the results were presented, and be willing to stand up for the final manuscript. Beyond your policy for inclusion, it is also best practice to indicate authorship practices that you consider unethical, such as

  • Guest/honorary authorship: inclusion of someone who did not contribute in order to capitalize on their name recognition or out of a sense of obligation
  • Ghost authorship: omission of a rightful author from the final list

To guide the corresponding author to carefully consider whether someone qualifies for authorship, consider asking him or her to indicate the contributions that each author has made to the paper. The recently defined CRediT taxonomy has been used by several journals as a way to clearly demonstrate each author’s role on a given paper.

Presenting the CRediT taxonomy criteria (or a version of them that is appropriate for your journal) front and center keeps your authors on the same page as you. Authorship is incredibly important to career advancement for researchers, so it is important for journals to take it seriously and apply fair and consistent standards to all published works.

Author order

In a handful of fields, authors are listed alphabetically. (These are the easy ones!) However, in many others, the order in which authors are listed has implications for the authors. The first author is generally considered to be the primary contributor, and the last author may be seen as providing general oversight and direction (as the head of the lab, for example). Authors in the middle have contributed sufficiently to be listed on the paper, but perhaps in more limited ways than the primary authors.

To prevent what can be a long, protracted dispute later, it is best to ensure that author order is correct when you first receive a manuscript. The ICMJE recommends getting confirmation from every author listed on the paper that they contributed to the work and agree with the order in which they appear on the author list. Even if this is not possible or practical, be sure to require the corresponding author to confirm that they have verified the final author order with all other authors.


Researchers, or anyone else who has contributed to a paper in a meaningful way, who fall short of the requirements for authorship should still be recognized for their work if possible. Often this takes the form of an “Acknowledgments” section. Although contributorship does not have the career implications that authorship does, it is still a public recognition of work that contributors will appreciate and can benefit from.

Some examples of contributorship include the following:

  • General oversight of a research group
  • Administrative or technical support
  • Writing and editing assistance
  • Assistance in conducting research or analyzing data, but without substantially affecting study design or interpretation (e.g., transcribing survey results)



12 Steps for Preparing Your Academic Writing for Submission to a Journal

Publishing your academic writing in a journal is crucial to advancing your career. Standards are high, and you usually only get one shot, so don’t waste it. Here’s how to make your paper the best it can be before submitting.

1. Read the journal

Just because a particular publication covers your field doesn’t necessarily mean that your article will be a good fit. Learn the aims of the particular publication, and then take it a step further by looking at the articles they choose to publish. If your article doesn’t seem like a good match, find a different publication to submit to or rewrite your article to make it more appropriate.

2. Find the article submission guidelines

You’ll find that different publications have different requirements, and if you don’t follow them, you risk having your academic writing thrown out before it’s even considered. It would be a shame not to be published just because you exceeded their word limit or submitted your document as the wrong file type. (This service can help reduce the size of a paper that is too long.)

3. Proofread, proofread, and then proofread again

It’s not enough just to run spellcheck or read through your work once. Getting a set of professional eyes on your work is ideal, since they’ll catch mistakes that you may not realize you made. If you’re interested in working with a professional proofreader, check outproofreading options here.

4. Review your bibliography

When proofreading, it can be easy to overlook this part of your paper, but it’s important to make sure it’s free of errors. Also, you want to ensure that all sources you cite in the text are included in the bibliography, and vice versa.

5. Verify you’ve included all the conventions of academic writing

Be sure to include a title, abstract, and keywords, and your paper should contain a clear statement of purpose in the introduction, lay out your hypotheses or the questions you are exploring, detail your methodology, provide a systematic analysis, and then discuss the results in the conclusion while acknowledging any limitations of the study.

6. Rework your title

It’s possible that the title you currently have is the best option, but more often than not, there’s a better one out there. You want the title to be accurate and descriptive. Look out for “filler” words and repetition. Take the time to brainstorm new ideas, and then get outside opinions to help you make a final selection.

7. Consult with colleagues in your field

The opinions of friends and family members are valuable, but this paper will be judged by someone who has in-depth knowledge of your area of study. Get an objective opinion before you submit your academic writing to a journal. Professors and other mentors are great resources for notes on how to improve your article. (Here is a list of consultants who can help as well.)

8. Get permission

Are you using any copyrighted material? Any piece of content you took from an outside source should be cited, and you need to obtain permission before submitting to a journal. Printing something as though you own it can come back to haunt your academic career in a big way. A plagiarism check is always a good idea.

9. Develop an effective cover letter

After spending all that time perfecting your academic writing, it can be tempting to throw together a cover letter quickly. This is a big mistake. You need this letter to be as compelling as possible because the editor may not get further than reading it. But that doesn’t mean it should be longwinded. Instead, keep it short and focused, just highlighting the key points. The goal is to entice them to read more. If you struggle writing cover letters,work with a consultant.

10. Look for supplemental material

Can you add more value to your academic writing? Are there tables, graphics, or other visual representations of the data that can help support your arguments? Some journals even accept multimedia, such as video or audio files, which they may include on their websites. It’s always a good idea to get suggestions regarding artwork, tables, graphs, and other illustrations that could add value to your writing.

11. Call the editor

Even better than reading the journal to find out what they are looking for is having an actual conversation with the decision makers on the other end. Your enthusiasm and knowledge about the topic can help encourage the editor to take a look at a paper that he or she may otherwise not have considered. It’s also an opportunity to find more ways you can adjust your academic writing to be a better fit for the journal. If speaking with the editor isn’t a possibility, at least consider speaking with experts in your field before submitting.

12. Present your paper at conferences

If you’re not sure where to submit, this can be a great path to finding a publication interested in your work. Instead of you seeking them out, they may come to you. Journal editors often attend conferences with the intent to find papers to publish.

If you’ve followed these twelve steps, you’ve done your best to prepare your academic writing for publication. Be aware that it can often take three to four months to hear back from journals, so don’t be discouraged if you aren’t contacted right away.

To see our full range of academic services, click here. We offer everything from translationto dissertation coaching to machine learning consulting.




EPrints for Open Access

EPrints has been leading innovation in the Open Access movement over the past 15 years. EPrints provides a set of mature ingest, preservation, dissemination and reporting services for your institution’s OA needs.

Created in 2000 as a direct outcome of the 1999 Santa Fe meeting that decided on the OAI-PMH protocol, EPrints software provides stable, pragmatic infrastructure on which institutions the world over have been utilising to enable their Open Access agendas.

As Open Source Software, EPrints’ greatest asset is the community of developers, librarians and users that feed into its progress and keep EPrints the innovative platform that we are so proud of.


More Information


What is Open Access?

Open Access is giving free, immediate, permanent online access to the full text of research articles for anyone, worldwide.  Society as a whole can benefit from an expanded and accelerated research cycle in which research can advance more effectively because researchers have immediate access to all the findings they need.

Who benefits from Open Access?

The visibility, usage and impact of researchers’ own findings increases with open access, as does their power to find, access and use the findings of others. Universities co-benefit from their researchers’ increased impact, which also increases the return on the investment of the funders of the research, such as governments, charitable foundations, and the tax-paying public.

For teachers, Open Access means no restrictions on providing articles for teaching purposes. Only the URL need be provided; Open Access takes care of the rest. Publishers likewise also benefit from the wider dissemination, greater visibility and higher journal citation impact factor of their articles.>/p>

The two roads of Open Access


The “green road” of OA self-archiving, where authors provide OA to their own published articles, by making their own eprints free for all.
the “golden road” of Open Access (OA) journal- publishing, where journals provide OA to their articles (either by charging the author-institution for refereeing/publishing outgoing articles instead of charging the user-institution for accessing incoming articles, or by simply making their online edition free for all).

The two roads to Open Access should not be confused or conflated; they are complementary. (EPrints is focussed largely on the green road, because it is the fastest and surest way to reach immediate 100% OA; but the green road might eventually lead to gold too.) OA self-archiving is not self-publishing; nor is it about online publishing without quality control (peer review); nor is it intended for writings for which the author wishes to be paid, such as books or magazine/newspaper articles. OA self-archiving is for peer-reviewed research, written solely for research impact rather than royalty revenue.

How to provide Open Access

An Institutional Repository (IR) is the best way to provide open access to research output.
Software such as EPrints provides a web-based OAI- compliant IR for free.

This open source software can be downloaded for free at

How can you implement Open Access?

Putting Open Access into Practice

Researchers, their institutions and their funders need to be informed of the benefits of providing Open Access and instructed on how quickly and simply it is done.

An Institutional Open Access Repository such as EPrints needs to be created (and registered in ROARMAP, so as to be seen and emulated by other institutions).

Seriously and carefully consider adopting and implementing an open access self-archiving mandate for systematically filling your repository with the target content (and registered, so as to be seen and emulated by other institutions).

Establish champions in your institution to advocate open access and become an active member of open access networks and communities to share and hear about good practices.

EPrints Software and Services

An Institutional Repository is the best way to provide open access to research output. Software such as EPrints provides a web-based OAI-compliant IR for free.

This open source software can be downloaded for free at

If you would prefer us to take care of your repository, including building, customisations, hosting and support, contact EPrints Services to discuss your needs.




(All) Research. Shared.

— your one stop research shop!

all research outputs from across all fields of research are welcome! Zenodo accepts any file format as well as both positive and negative results. We choose to promote peer-reviewed openly accessible research, and we curate the uploads posted on the front-page.

Citeable. Discoverable.

— be found!

Zenodo assigns all publicly available uploads a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) to make the upload easily and uniquely citeable. Zenodo further supports harvesting of all content via the OAI-PMH protocol.


— create your own repository

Zenodo allows you to create your own collection and accept or reject uploads submitted to it. Creating a space for your next workshop or project has never been easier. Plus, everything is citeable and discoverable!


— more than just a drop box!

Your research output is stored safely for the future in same cloud infrastructure as research data from CERN’sLarge Hadron Collider and using CERN’s battle-tested repository software Invenio, which is used by some of the world’s largest repositories such as INSPIRE HEP andCERN Document Server.


— tell your funding agency!

Zenodo is integrated into reporting lines for research funded by the European Commission via OpenAIRE. Just upload your research to Zenodo, and we will take care of the reporting for you. We plan to expand this feature with further funding agencies in the future, so stay tuned!

Flexible Licensing

— not everything is under Creative Commons

Zenodo encourages you to share your research as openly as possible to maximize use and re-use of your research results. However, we also acknowledge that one size does not fit all. Therefore, we allow for uploading under a variety of different licenses and access levels*.

Source: ZENODO


Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting

The Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting (OAI-PMH) is a low-barrier mechanism for repository interoperability. Data Providers are repositories that expose structured metadata via OAI-PMH. Service Providers then make OAI-PMH service requests to harvest that metadata. OAI-PMH is a set of six verbs or services that are invoked within HTTP.

OAI-PMH Community Resources


OAI-PMH Core Resources


Source: Open Archives Initiative


Index & Database Title Lists

Most databases provide a list of journals that are indexed. The following links connect to pages that provide title lists for indexes in a number of different fields, including indexes that are available through the WIU Libraries as well as other important subject indexes (such as the Citation Indexes from Thomson Reuters). These lists could be useful in finding journals in a given subject area. In particular, look at the journals that are given priority or listed as core journals in an index.