Tag: Lois Jones

Lois Jones (pronouns: she/her) is Peer Review Director for the Journals Department at the American Psychological Association (APA), where she oversees the peer review strategy and operations for 90 journals. Lois is focused on ensuring a transparent and ethical peer review process for authors, while providing reviewers and editors with the exceptional support they need in the constantly changing landscape of scholarly publishing. She is a 2014 graduate of the MPS in Publishing from GWU, a 2017 Early Career Fellow for SSP, and a member of the inaugural editorial board for GW Journal of Ethics in Publishing. Lois will serve as Editor-in-Chief of the GW Journal of Ethics in Publishing, effective October 2022.

Congratulations on becoming Editor-in-Chief of the GW Journal of Ethics in Publishing—and thank you! You’ve served for the past two years on the inaugural Editorial Board. How has serving on the board informed your plans and strategies as the new Editor-in-Chief for the journal?

Thank you! I’m very excited to continue with the journal in this new capacity. At this point, the plan is to build on what we have set up by iterating our process and increasing content. Starting a journal during the pandemic was challenging, but we’re proud of what we’ve accomplished. We’ve gotten a lot of feedback from the student members about what they’d like to see next, which is another major priority. A huge part of this journal’s goal is to provide students with practical experience in editorial, peer review, publishing, and marketing.

I have three major areas of focus as I start my term: student experience, fine-tuning our existing process, and publishing more content.

While we were starting up, the outgoing Editor-in-Chief formed a series of student-led committees that formed the basis for different aspects of the journal: strategy and sustainability, marketing, editorial, and e-publishing. Those teams worked hard to get us where we are. They’ve recommended that all committees stay updated on what the other groups are working on. Early on, I think we didn’t want to burden everyone with too much information, so now we’ll work on finding a middle ground. We also want to figure out what worked best for students and increase opportunities for even more involvement.  

The second goal is to work on our process. I want to streamline our existing process and make sure that individually we’re all clear on what we’re doing in between meetings. This is a natural second step that comes after creating a new process but could be easily skipped. This is another great learning experience for students, so they get into the practice of reassessing workflows and documenting what they’ve created.

From the content standpoint, I want to start publishing more often, which is a typical goal of a newer journal, and ensure that we’re giving a platform for different ideas and career levels. I’m especially interested in ideas that push against the standard viewpoint or provide a deeper assessment of an existing issue. Fresh perspectives are incredibly important, which is another benefit of this being a student-led journal.

What have you appreciated of the impact of the journal for GW publishing students, in your interactions with them on the board, such as Aimar Galarza? What are some of your goals and expectations for students moving forward, as EIC?

I really appreciate their enthusiasm and fresh perspectives. During initial meetings, I would find that they’d question the basic assumptions of peer review and publishing, which made me reassess and either confirm or question my own approach. I’ve worked with a lot of newer graduates and early career professionals, and I find that their perspectives are a great way to never become complacent. Their ideas often push us forward in innovation and equity efforts. It’s hard to just accept things because “that’s how it’s always been” when you have smart people questioning you regularly.   

Aimar, Ashley Warren, and Gabrielle Bethancourt-Hughes were integral for keeping the core journal functions moving. Their persistent work was valuable in pushing the journal forward and communicating the ideas and decisions between teams.

There are, as you know, thousands upon thousands of journals—your organization, APA, has nearly one hundred journals—and there are also several well-respected scholarly journals covering the field of publishing. What do you see as the special role or niche of the GW Journal of Ethics in Publishing?

I see this as a great fit for several types of articles. We’re focused on getting good ideas out there, even if they’re not the typical type of article you’d see in a journal. I want people to write articles even if it hadn’t occurred to them to write about publishing before. There are numerous topics that might not seem original or interesting, but that would be fascinating to read about. This is also a great destination for articles by newer career professionals, because we have students and experienced professionals focused on helping authors and reviewers learn the process.

What are some of the challenges—and opportunities—for a student-managed journal, to produce a professional quality scholarly publication? For example, in publishing graduate students’ capstone projects along with research written on ethics in publishing by other members of the publishing community.

One of the primary opportunities is that most of the people working on this journal are newer to the field. Their primary interest might not even be in scholarly publishing, so they aren’t necessarily focused on journals long-term. That can be a challenge, but it’s also a great opportunity to view a journal from an entirely fresh perspective. Similarly, with newer career people managing the journal, each new group of students are in the process of learning how to run and manage a journal. That could be a challenge, but like I said before, it’s also a fantastic pressure to continue reassessing the process as you go.

An original goal of the journal identified by the outgoing editor, Randy Townsend, was to ensure long-term quality. One of the committees he established was Strategy and Sustainability. That student-led committee is responsible for figuring out how to ensure that the quality of the journal remains high while also having groups of students come and go. As the journal progresses, we will continue to add to the resources to support continued student engagement.

In terms of producing high-quality content, we have a mix of both student and experienced reviewers assessing each article. The reviews are then assessed by a member of the editorial board for suitability within the journal. As with all peer reviewed content, this mixture of assessment allows for several unbiased approaches to the submissions. Once accepted, the article is then edited and prepared for publication by dedicated students.

What are some of the lessons you’ve learned in your role at APA that will be helpful to you in leading the GW Journal of Ethics in Publishing?

Things are always evolving. Within science, research keeps building on itself and correcting misconceptions. I find it useful to see some parts of publishing as a snapshot in time or a reality for some publishers but not all. The industry is ever-changing, so there will always be new facets to examine and discuss. Previous assumptions might not hold true within five years or even two.  

I’ve helped build different projects and launch many new services and processes, while also managing a range of personalities and skillsets. My goal is to continue forming a good process for students and authors, while encouraging both groups to think broadly.

You were a student in the MPS in Publishing program. What are some of the reasons you decided to pursue the MPS in Publishing degree? Why did you choose GW specifically?

I’ve always been interested in publishing and a colleague at APA had graduated from the program. I began pursuing my degree prior to working publishing, so it was exciting to talk to others also interested in publishing. GW’s classes cover a wide range, including areas where I didn’t have as much interest or where I had no real skill, specifically design. Even those classes were useful in that they provided me with a foundational understanding of how complex the topic was and the basics.

What advice would you give to new or prospective students to the MPS in Publishing program? And why should students consider volunteering to work on managing the journal?

Take broad classes that you wouldn’t normally gravitate toward. I’m weak when it comes to design, but I enjoyed the class. It was educational to spend time in a subject that I’m not as comfortable with. The program also gives you an idea of what part of the industry you’re most interested in pursuing and educates you on the challenges in the different aspects of publishing. Digital publishing has been a massive topic in publishing for over twenty years and the death of print has been a worry for years and years. Getting the long-term perspective from the class readings, discussions, and professors’ experience is invaluable when trying to understand the past and future of publishing.

Working with this journal is a great crash course in journal work, from peer review principles to editing and then actually releasing the content in the world. This is a wonderful hands-on method of seeing the ethical principles and general process in action.

What have you found to be the long-term value of the MPS in Publishing degree; how has it impacted your career at APA? 

I appreciated that it gave me a glimpse into all the areas of publishing. I took classes in marketing, copyright, editing, and journal management. I don’t use all of the skills daily, but the basis of understanding the different areas has helped me understand the different roles I interact with. Almost universally, graduates I’ve worked with have referred to the copyright class the most. It’s a sticky topic and I still refer to the texts we used.