A very natural question is: what is RESEARCHERS.ONE? This question is addressed in detail in The RESEARCHERS.ONE Mission but it would be helpful to address a more specific question as it relates to what the platform can offer an individual author. The co-founders weigh in on this in the following YouTube video.
An even more specific question that's come up is whether RESEARCHERS.ONE is a journal or a pre-print repository. In short, it's both a journal and a pre-print repository and also neither. The co-founders address this question in the following YouTube video.
Simply click here to go to the registration page. Fill out the form and click “Create Account.” You will then receive an email confirmation with a link that will direct you to the site where you can log in to your account, finish creating your profile, and begin using the system. A YouTube video tutorial is available here.
Any registered user is free to submit their scholarly work for peer review and publication. Co-authors need not be registered users at the time of submission, but all will need to register before the paper can be published.
The submission process can be initiated either by clicking the 'Submit' button in the header of the site or by using the sidebar navigator that appears on the lefthand side of the browser when logged in. When submitting, you will be asked to enter meta data (author names, title, abstract, and keywords), upload the article file (in .pdf format) and any relevant supplementary files (e.g., data, software, etc), agree to the terms and conditions, pay the submission fee, and select your peer review option. User are also encouraged to use the provided LaTeX or Word templates described below. A YouTube video tutorial on the submission process is available here, and a follow-up video that describes the selection between traditional/private and public peer review is available here.
Users are encouraged to use the provided LaTeX or Word templates for their submissions. These include the RESEARCHERS.ONE logo to help you show your support along with a URL to make it easy for readers to navigate to your article's page and participate in the discussions, etc.
To use this template, first submit your article and select the public peer review option, go to your profile page, follow the link to your article, and copy the URL for that page. Now return to the copy of your article on your local machine, fill out the part in the .tex or .docx file with the correct link you copied, and then revise your submission (described below) by uploading the new file with the correct URL in the header. You can also change to the private peer review option at this time if you don't wish for the article to be publicly available.
From the sidebar navigator menu, click Articles →Articles Under Review and then select the article you'd like to edit from the list. Clicking the Edit button on the bottom right will open up the same sequence of steps completed in the initial submission process. From here, the submitting author can update metadata, the article file, the supplementary files, or the peer review option.
From the sidebar navigator menu, click Articles →Articles Under Review and then select the article you would like to publish from the list. Finally, click the Publish this Submission button on the bottom right.
The traditional peer review option is similar to the process followed by most standard journals, with one main difference. In traditional review, the work can be accessed privately by specific reviewers who are invited to provide feedback. Unlike the traditional approach, however, on RESEARCHERS.ONE it is the authors, not an editorial board, that choose whom to invite as reviewers. The rationale is that the author knows better than an editorial board who is qualified to provide valuable feedback. Also, since the reviewers’ feedback will not be used by an editor to make an accept/reject decision, there is no harm for this process being non-anonymous and transparent.
The public peer review option makes the article available publicly on the RESEARCHERS.ONE website so that anyone with access to the internet can read the work and any registered user can provide commentary and/or upload a review. Users will also have access to the comments and reports for other users. As for the traditional review option, since the reviewer feedback is used constructively by the authors to improve their work, and is not used to make an accept/reject decision, there is no harm to the peer review process being completely open and transparent.
Under either option, authors are free to use their discretion in how feedback is incorporated into their final published output. Authors are free to change the review status between traditional and public options as often as they would like, and also to put their work through as many rounds of review as they feel is necessary before publication. More on the RESEARCHERS.ONE philosophy of peer review can be found in The RESEARCHERS.ONE Mission.
The RESEARCHERS.ONE platform offers to options for users to seek feedback on their work. One is the private or traditional peer review option and the other is the public peer review options. Details about the specific options can be found in The RESEARCHERS.ONE Mission as well as on the "Public versus private peer review?" FAQ page.
Both of these options are novel---the public peer review option requires authors to advertise their own work in order to get feedback, and even the traditional private peer review options requires authors to request reviewers themselves--- so it is natural that authors would have questions about how to navigate this process. A YouTube video where the co-founders share their thoughts on this is here.
The technical details of how to submit a review will be discussed below, here are some comments on the philosophy of peer review under the RESEARCHERS.ONE model. Since there is no editorial board and no accept/reject decisions, reviewers should be guided by only one objective: to provide constructive feedback that will help the authors to improve their work. Of course, this does not mean all feedback must be positive; in fact, negative feedback in the form of constructive criticism is often the most valuable because it challenges the author to think harder and refine their arguments. More on the RESEARCHERS.ONE philosophy of peer review can be found in the RESEARCHERS.ONE mission.
Any registered user can post a comment about any article submitted or published at RESEARCHERS.ONE. For articles under public peer review, registered users also have the option to post a public review. To post a public peer review, users can click the Upload Review button at the top of the article page. For comments, a text box is provided below the article file, with an option to input short comments in a text box or upload a file with longer or more technical comments. See the Terms & Conditions for more on information on what kind of content is allowed to be posted as a comment or review.
Authors who opt for the traditional peer review option will select potential reviewers during the submission process. Those reviewers will be automatically contacted by RESEARCHERS.ONE about this request. Anyone who has been requested to review an article should first log in to their account and go to Reviews →Active Reviews on the left-hand sidebar. From here the article for which the review is requested should be accessible and the user can either agree or decline to provide a review. (If you have been requested to review an article but do not have an account, you will first have to register an account using the email address to which the request was sent.)
The author will be notified via email of the reviewer’s response (agree or decline). If the reviewer agrees, then the reviewer should provide any feedback to the authors as quickly as possible. Feedback can be written in the text box provided or uploaded in a separate file. When the review has been submitted the author will again be notified via email.
The precise terms and conditions can be found here. To summarize, aside from acknowledging that the content of the article is the authors’ original work, upon submission the authors grant RESEARCHERS.ONE the perpetual and non-exclusive right to distribute the article. If/when the corresponding author changes the status of the paper from “under review” to “published,” the authors agree to the terms and conditions laid out in one of the Creative Commons Attribution Licenses; the default is CC BY 4.0 but authors may choose to adopt a more restrictive license. Specifically, authors retain copyright of their work and the aforementioned license agreement establishes the rights of both the authors and anyone who accesses the work through RESEARCHERS.ONE.
The submission fee is used to offset some of the costs associated with creating, maintaining, and sustaining the RESEARCHERS.ONE web platform and publishing initiative. Though some maintenance fee is necessary to the operation and continued improvement of RESEARCHERS.ONE, it is our mission to keep this fee as low as possible. The submission fee of $10 entitles authors to obtain feedback through the peer review mechanism on the site. It also provides a central place for the fully open access published version of the work to be discussed in open forum through the comments feature. Because RESEARCHERS.ONE uses 100% of its funds to maintain and improve the platform, without any administrative overhead, our submission fee is a small fraction of those required for publication in traditional open access journals.
RESEARCHERS.ONE is a registered charity with 501(c)(3) status under the US Tax Code. Donations to RESEARCHERS.ONE are tax deductible and go a long way toward advancing the mission of open science and scholarship. If you would like to contribute to this cause, click the “Donate” button in the header and you will be directed to make a contribution through your PayPal account.