\documentclass{article}
\usepackage{fullpage}
\usepackage{parskip}
\usepackage{titlesec}
\usepackage{xcolor}
\usepackage[colorlinks = true,
            linkcolor = blue,
            urlcolor  = blue,
            citecolor = blue,
            anchorcolor = blue]{hyperref}
\usepackage[natbibapa]{apacite}
\usepackage{eso-pic}
\AddToShipoutPictureBG{\AtPageLowerLeft{\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{powered-by-Authorea-watermark.png}}}

\renewenvironment{abstract}
  {{\bfseries\noindent{\abstractname}\par\nobreak}\footnotesize}
  {\bigskip}

\titlespacing{\section}{0pt}{*3}{*1}
\titlespacing{\subsection}{0pt}{*2}{*0.5}
\titlespacing{\subsubsection}{0pt}{*1.5}{0pt}

\usepackage{authblk}

\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage[space]{grffile}
\usepackage{latexsym}
\usepackage{textcomp}
\usepackage{longtable}
\usepackage{tabulary}
\usepackage{booktabs,array,multirow}
\usepackage{amsfonts,amsmath,amssymb}
\providecommand\citet{\cite}
\providecommand\citep{\cite}
\providecommand\citealt{\cite}
% You can conditionalize code for latexml or normal latex using this.
\newif\iflatexml\latexmlfalse
\providecommand{\tightlist}{\setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}\setlength{\parskip}{0pt}}%

\AtBeginDocument{\DeclareGraphicsExtensions{.pdf,.PDF,.eps,.EPS,.png,.PNG,.tif,.TIF,.jpg,.JPG,.jpeg,.JPEG}}

\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage[english]{babel}



\begin{document}

\title{Alberto Pepe on Metrics \& Impact~(AMA)}


 \author{The Authorea Team}


\date{}

\begingroup
\let\center\flushleft
\let\endcenter\endflushleft
\maketitle
\endgroup




On September 15th, 2016 Authorea CEO and Cofounder, Alberto Pepe,
encouraged the Reddit science community to ask him anything. Below are a
few excerpts from the AMA on the topic of~\textbf{metrics and
impact}.~\href{https://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/52vtf7/im_alberto_pepe_the_guy_challenging_elsevier_im/?st=itn51yxd\&sh=782b8bb5}{Click
here for the full thread}.\\

Read~\href{https://www.authorea.com/users/96042/articles/130316/_show_article}{general
AMA excerpts here}~or specific discussions on the topic
of~\href{https://www.authorea.com/users/96042/articles/130306/_show_article}{quality
control in
publishing}~or~\href{https://www.authorea.com/users/96042/articles/130437/_show_article}{Authorea's
business model}.\\\selectlanguage{english}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.70\columnwidth]{figures/ask-me-anything/ask-me-anything}

\end{center}
\end{figure}



\href{https://www.reddit.com/user/Jenna_bird}{Jenna\_bird}~

\par\null

Hi Alberto,\\

\section*{}\label{section}

I think what you're doing is great; I would love to see a shift in how
academic literature is shared and I think we are long overdue for the
modernization that has already been readily accepted in other fields.\\

Unfortunately, I find that these academic journals all appear to suffer
from low impact factors currently. What would you say to a budding
scientist--who's career depends upon publishing in ``high quality''
journals--that would encourage them to publish in your journal?\\

Thanks!\\

\par\null

\begin{quote}
\href{https://www.reddit.com/user/Alberto_Pepe}{Alberto\_Pepe}\\

Co-Founder \textbar{} Authorea\\

Hi Jenna- I understand your concern: no matter how open and innovative
you may want to be, at the end of the day, as a scientist, you are
required to publish in ``high quality'' journals, because that is the
only way to get tenure, grants, and recognition in your community. I
think that in the next few years we will see new metrics and methods to
assess a scientist' contribution (metrics that go way beyond a journal's
impact factor and/or number of citations). But, while we wait for that
to happen, what can you do TODAY? Two things come to mind:\\

(1) deposit a pre-print or post-print of your article in an
institutional, disciplinary (or any other) repository that is indexed by
scholarly search engines. A pre-print is the version immediately prior
to what is published in a journal (and post-print immediately after).
Even if you lose your copyright on the published version, the pre-print
and post-print versions are YOURS. By depositing an open version of your
work, you are giving the entire world~\textbf{open access}~to your work
(and you and your work also become more visible!). If you write an
article on Authorea, all you have to do is make it public and it will be
a pre-print!\\

(2) if you have datasets and code associated with your work, publish
them with the paper. Publishing the data and code behind your
papers/images make your work more likely to be reproduced (and again,
they make you and your work more visible!). Most journals today do not
allow you to deposit data and code with your
paper.~\href{http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0104798}{Putting
a link to a dataset in your paper is not enough because those links die
with time}. There are tools like Figshare, Zenodo and Dataverse that
allow you to deposit data/code and get a DOI for it. In Authorea, you
can take even a step further and include the data and
code~\textbf{inside}~your paper. My dream is that the paper of the
future will make data and code~\textbf{first class citizens}.\\
\end{quote}

\par\null

\href{https://www.reddit.com/user/kerovon}{kerovon}\\

Grad Student \textbar{} Biomedical Engineering \textbar{} Regenerative
Medicine\\

\section*{}\label{auto-label-section-917072}

What are your thoughts on the role of impact factor? Does it have a good
use, or is it something that you feel should be ignored?\\

We have run into some question here, because we use impact factor as an
initial screen on submissions
in~\href{https://www.reddit.com/r/science}{/r/science}. We set a
threshold of 1.5, which allows most science through, while stopping some
of the worst quality journals. We have had to do this because we
frequently don't have mods available who are familiar enough with a
specific sub discipline to determine if a journal is legitimate or fake.
Is there a better way that we could apply a quick screen for legitimacy
on journal articles, similar to how impact factor works?\\

\begin{quote}
{Alberto\_Pepe}\\

Co-Founder \textbar{} Authorea\\

Hi kerovon, thanks for the question. The infamous Impact Factor is a
measure of the frequency with which the average article in a journal has
been cited in a particular period (e.g last 5 years). As such, it's an
important metric in the publishers' world. Nature, Cell, Science, all
have very high impact factors, and scholars are pushed to submit their
`best' research to these journals. In fact, having an article published
in one of these prestigious journals can make the difference between
getting tenure or not. This said, research published in a high impact
factor journal is not necessarily `better'. It is usually research that
appears groundbreaking and potentially has a broader reach, but not
always. Also, to make the paper fit the tight format of a high impact
journal, scholars are usually forced to cut down important details,
often making their science hard to reproduce. Conversely, an important
finding that was not published in a high-impact factor journal might be
overlooked, cited less and have smaller immediate reach on the community
(which is busy reading the high impact factor journals). My impression
is that open repositories (like the arXiv and Authorea) can allow a much
more democratic assessment of the importance of a research article,
without the need for the existence of an impact factor. The impact of
paper should not depend on the impact factor of the journal that decided
to publish it, but only on the quality and importance of the science it
contains.\\
\end{quote}

\selectlanguage{english}
\FloatBarrier
\end{CJK}\end{document}

