In a nutshell

SciPost (https://scipost.org) is a top-quality next-generation Genuine Open Access publication portal managed by professional scientists. Its principles, ideals and implementation can be found at https://scipost.org/about and https://scipost.org/FAQ.

SciPost operates on an entirely not-for-profit basis, and charges neither subscription fees nor article processing charges; instead, its activities are financed through a cost-slashing consortial model. Details of the sponsorship scheme and how to join can be found at https://scipost.org/sponsors or by emailing admin@scipost.org.

Goals and intentions

SciPost was born out of the recognition that the currently available publishing infrastructure does not properly serve the interests of science, and that these are best served by scientists themselves.

The initiative aims to reform all aspects related to scientific publishing. In particular, SciPost's mission is  to:

  • Implement Genuine Open Access
  • Clean up the business model of scientific publishing
  • Reform refereeing methods and habits
  • Reform impact assessment methods and habits.

 

Project status
Review process
  • Review requested by
    Authors
  • Reviewer selected by
    Editor, service, or community, Self-nominated
  • Public interaction
    Yes
  • Author response
    Yes
  • Decision
    Binary decision
Review policy
  • Review coverage
    Complete paper
  • Reviewer identity known to
    Editor or service
  • Competing interests
    Checked
Social Networks
Video
Review features
  • Manuscript hosting
    Yes
  • Notes

    Our peer-witnessed refereeing procedure is described in detail on our author guidelines page.

    https://scipost.org/submissions/author_guidelines

     

     

  • Review of code or data
    Yes
  • Eligible reviewers/editors
    Editors are Fellows of our Editorial Colleges. Reviewers are invited among the community. Professional scientists are further able to volunteer reports and comments.
  • Tags or badges
    Yes
  • Explanation of cost
    We operate using a consortial sponsorship model.
Results
  • Number of scholarly outputs commented on
    100-1,000
mood_bad
  • No comments yet.
  • Add a comment