New web services that help authors choose journals

The motivations for an author to choose a journal to submit to are complex and include factors relating to impact and prestige, service quality, and publication costs and policies. Authors require information about multiple characteristics of journals that may be difficult to obtain. This article compares and contrasts the new author‐oriented journal comparison tools and services that have emerged to assist researchers in this important step of the scholarly publishing process. Many of these tools combine factors to provide full web‐based manuscript submission decision tools; however, they all have limitations that reduce their usefulness.

[1]  Bryna Coonin,et al.  Publishing in Open Access Education Journals: The Authors’ Perspectives , 2010 .

[2]  Carol Tenopir,et al.  What Motivates Authors of Scholarly Articles? The Importance of Journal Attributes and Potential Audience on Publication Choice , 2016, Publ..

[3]  Bo-Christer Björk,et al.  Benchmarking scientific journals from the submitting author's viewpoint , 2006, Learn. Publ..

[4]  J. Perkel.  Rate that journal , 2015, Nature.

[5]  Fernando González-Ladrón-de-Guevara,et al.  Crowdsourcing Fundamentals: Definition and Typology , 2015 .

[6]  Bo-Christer Björk,et al.  A Method for Comparing Scholarly Journals as Service Providers to Authors , 2009 .

[7]  S. Salinas,et al.  Where Should I Send It? Optimizing the Submission Decision Process , 2015, PloS one.

[8]  E. Love.  Scholarly Publishing , 2009, European Review.

[9]  Jelte M. Wicherts,et al.  Peer Review Quality and Transparency of the Peer-Review Process in Open Access and Subscription Journals , 2016, PloS one.

[10]  Michael Mabe,et al.  Dr Jekyll and Dr Hyde: author-reader asymmetries in scholarly publishing , 2002, Aslib Proc..

[11]  Ian Rowlands.  Scholarly communication in the digital environment: chemistry and chemical engineering , 2004 .

[12]  Carol Tenopir,et al.  How scholars implement trust in their reading, citing and publishing activities: Geographical differences , 2014 .

[13]  Suzie Allard,et al.  Perceived value of scholarly articles , 2011, Learn. Publ..

[14]  Michael Mabe,et al.  What Journal Authors Want: Ten Years of Results from Elsevier's Author Feedback Programme , 2011 .

[15]  Naveen Donthu,et al.  How to Foster and Sustain Engagement in Virtual Communities , 2011 .

[16]  Ning Kang,et al.  Elsevier Journal Finder: Recommending Journals for your Paper , 2015, RecSys.

[17]  Renata Tagliacozzo,et al.  Matching authors and readers of scientific papers , 1974, Inf. Storage Retr..

[18]  Li Zhao,et al.  Turning good research into good publications , 2013 .

[19]  Ian Rowlands,et al.  Scholarly communication in the digital environment: The 2005 survey of journal author behaviour and attitudes , 2005, Aslib Proc..

[20]  Alison Baverstock.  Is peer review still the content industry's upper house? , 2016, Learn. Publ..