Table of Contents to all SCIRP Information (TOC)
SCIRP General Pages
- About SCIRP
- What is SCIRP?
- Where and How is SCIRP Registered?
- Why is SCIRP located in China?
- What is Open Access? (short text)
- How Open is SCIRP on the “Open Access Spectrum”?
- Publication Ethics Statement (short text)
- Organization of Boards
- SCIRP’s Preservation Strategy / Archiving
- Short to medium term preservation strategy
- Long term preservation strategy
- SCIRP Retraction Policy (short text)
- Author Reviews
- Editorial Board Member Reviews
- Complaints Procedure
- Advertising Policy
- Open Access
- Origins of Open Access
- Budapest Open Access Initiative
- Berlin Declaration on Open Access to Knowledge in the Sciences and Humanities
- Arguments in Favor of Open Access
- Selected Organizations, Projects, and Activities in Open Access
- Further Reading
- Information for Authors
- Submission Policy
- General Peer-Review Process
- Authors’ Rights (Continue to hold copyright. Select CC BY or CC BY-NC. Post to any repository. Use persistent DOI link.)
- SCIRP Publication Ethics Statement
- COPE: Code of Conduct and Flowcharts
- Conflict of Interest Statement
- SCIRP Retraction Policy
- Measures of Response
- Minor Errors
- More on FAQ
- SCIRP’s Peer-Review Program
- Special Issue Proposals
- Job Posting
Identical SCIRP Journal Pages
These are pages with only minor differences among journals. Example taken from AAST.
- For Authors (Authors’ Guidelines)
- Manuscript Preparation
- Review Process
- Publication Ethics Statement
- Article Processing Charges
- Special Issues Guideline
- “Journal” Subscription
(List of subscription prices for the print edition of all SCIRP journals)
- Publication Ethics Concerto Nr. 4 G-Dur: Sopran-Blockflöte, Streicher und Basso continuo. Klavierauszug mit Solostimme. (Originalmusik für Blockflöte)& OA Statement
- Frequently Asked Questions
(Based on these FAQ, but much extended are the FAQ on this Blog – see below)
- Contact Us
Differing SCIRP Journal Pages
These are pages with major differences among journals. Link to the journal in question to view the relavent pages. (Go to the journal and select the menu item or the button).
- Aims & Scope
- Editorial Board
- Open Special Issues (special issue accepting manuscripts)
- Published Special Issues
- Most popular papers in “Journal”
- “Journal” News (can also include journal general information)
SCIRP Blog Pages
Blog pages give further information about the publisher and detail publishing procedures. The blog is easier to handle than the more static fundamental pages on SCIRP’s web site. In addition, work sharing is easier to organize on the blog.
SCIRP’s General Articles
Junp here directly: http://blog.scirp.org/scirp-toc/#Operation
Articles here are from Category: SCIRP => General: http://blog.scirp.org/category/scirp/general
SCIRP’s Articles against External Accusation
Junp here directly: http://blog.scirp.org/scirp-toc/#Response
Articles here are from Category: SCIRP => Response: http://blog.scirp.org/category/scirp/response
- When you look at SCIRP’s page on Wikipedia please keep in mind Wikipedia articles are written by editors who have their own opinion of what is the truth. This is what they will define as the Neutral Point of View. The majority view of editors involved in writing the page (and the level of each editor in Wikipedia) determines the final selection and presentation of references. In order to get an impression of the full (and intense) discussion behind SCIRP’s page on Wikipedia you should also look at its Talk page and if you want to learn even more also its History page. The page was started on 2010-09-27 to stigmatize SCIRP – not to write a decent article about the publisher. Accordingly, the neutrality of the page was disputed on 2013-03-01. Read also:
- Evaluation of three Articles from 2009 to 2012 about SCIRP and Their Entry into Wikipedia
- Beall “Uncovered”: Jeffrey Beall: “I am an academic crime fighter”
- Accusation “Spam”: SCIRP Practicing Legal and Moderate Email Marketing
- “Born in the USA”: Scientific Research Publishing Inc. – A Company with Home in the USA!
Articles Responding to One or More Publications
- 04/2015 (Beall/Lantz)：Response to Accusations Related to a Controversial Article and Editorial Board Activities
- 12/2014 (Beall)：In Response to Accusations Related to a Controversial Article and the “Publishing Empire”
- 12/2014 (Allegretti)：Response to “A plague of Brazilian science: second class articles”
- 10/2014 (Beall): In Response to a Question about Advances in Anthropology (AA)
- 07/2014 (Beall): In Response to Accusations Related to a Controversial Researcher, Offices, Incorporation, and Tax
- 04/2014 (Walkden)：Response to a Blog Post “Open Access Linguistics: You’re Doing It Wrong”
- 05/2012 (Oransky): Evaluation of three Articles from 2009 to 2012 about SCIRP and Their Entry into Wikipedia
- 04/2012 (Beall): An Evaluation of Beall’s Paper “Five Scholarly Open Access Publishers” from 2012
- 01/2010 (Sanderson): Evaluation of three Articles from 2009 to 2012 about SCIRP and Their Entry into Wikipedia
- 12/2009 (Abrahams): Evaluation of three Articles from 2009 to 2012 about SCIRP and Their Entry into Wikipedia
The month and year given above show the time when the accusation was published. The author of the accusation is given in brakets.
Summary: SCIRP does not say all accusations would be unfounded, however, after a careful and precise analysis often not much is left over from the original accusations.
Look into the future: The more success and the bigger SCIRP gets, the more articles will probably be launched against it. We can not influence the number of accusations per year. We can only hope our operation is sufficiently robust so that we do not give those writers good reasons and arguments for their writings. One reason for accusations will always be an article that is supposed to be wrong, “junk science”, or similar. This sort of criticism has of course also hit our competitors. Read here what has been written by another publisher about controversial articles.