A&A 480, E3-E16 (2008)
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361:200809542
Editorial
The 2007 A&A author survey: answers and follow-up
C. Bertout1 and M. Walmsley21 Editor-in-Chief, Astronomy & Astrophysics
2 Letters Editor-in-Chief, Astronomy & Astrophysics
Aims.We conducted an extensive survey of Astronomy &
Astrophysics authors in April 2007 with the objective of assessing the
perception of the Journal in the community. We discuss the results of this poll
and present some changes in the editing and publishing of A&A that have been
adopted by the Editors and A&A Board of Directors as a consequence.
Methods.The
questions asked ranged from the degree to which authors are satisfied with the
performance of the scientific Editors to attitudes concerning the trend towards
online publishing of important sections of the journal. Other questions
concerned structured abstracts and the role of language editing.
Results.There were
1524 complete answers which we estimate to be roughly 20% of the community of
A&A authors. In general the respondents were satisfied with the work of the
Editors (82% satisfaction) and with the performance of the Editors in chief.
About 80% of respondents believe that the peer-review process is either very
useful or useful in improving the quality of articles, and only 1.4% find it
useless. More than 90% are satisfied with the work of the language Editors. A
more controversial theme is that of the structured abstract format which was
introduced on a trial basis two years ago, where 59% favor the traditional
unstructured format but a substantial minority (30%) prefers the new style.
Concerning A&A online sections, 86% of our respondents are in favor of the
policy of publishing two sections of the journal online, but paradoxically,
47% of the respondents think that there should be no additional online
sections, while 31% would welcome a fully electronic Journal.
Key words: Editorials
© ESO 2008
BibSonomy
CiteUlike
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook