共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 109 毫秒
1.
Over 660 Chinese researchers were questioned about their scholarly use, citing, and publishing and how trust is exercised in these key activities. Research showed few signs of new forms of scholarly usage behaviour taking hold, despite multiple opportunities afforded by Science 2.0 developments. Thus, for determining trustworthiness for usage purposes, the most important activity was reading the abstract. In terms of citations, citing the seminal source was the most common activity. In contrast, citing non‐peer reviewed sources, such as the social media, was not thought acceptable. For publishing, relevance to the field was the most important factor when choosing a place to publish. Comparisons were made with a study of 3650 international researchers, which employed the same methods and questions. The main differences between Chinese and international researchers were that the former (a) rated abstracts more highly, (b) took into account impact factors more when citing and publishing and (c) were much more likely to be influenced by institutional directives when placing their articles. 相似文献
2.
David Nicholas Eti Herman David Clark Cherifa Boukacem-Zeghmouri Blanca Rodríguez-Bravo Abdullah Abrizah Anthony Watkinson David Sims Marzena 'Świgoń Jie Xu Galina Serbina Hamid R. Jamali Carol Tenopir Suzie Allard 《Learned Publishing》2023,36(2):128-140
After two-years of repeat interviewing early career sciences/social sciences researchers from around the world about their work life and scholarly communications in pandemic-times, the Harbingers-2 project is in a position to release quantitative data on the pandemic's overall impact. The data comes from around 50 questions asked in the third and final round of interviews with 147 early career researchers (ECRs), which had a codifiable element to them (such as yes, no, do not know). The 19 scholarly topics covered include: pandemic-related research; research funding; changes to the workplace/working from home; pandemic-incurred stress and anxiety; teaching; employment security; career progression; mentoring; assessment (including metrics); collaboration; searching/finding information; ethics; networking; informal communication; publishing; sharing; pre-prints; outreach; and scholarly transformations. The main findings are that in six broad aspects of ECRs' work-life and scholarly behaviour, more than 50% of ECRs were impacted by the pandemic, with remote teaching having the greatest impact. By way of comparison, in another six aspects there was little change, least of all when it came to sharing activities. Among the countries studied, Malaysia stood out as being the most impacted, and of the disciplines it was the medical sciences and the soft social sciences most impacted. 相似文献
3.
4.
David Nicholas Anthony Watkinson Abdullah Abrizah Blanca Rodríguez‐Bravo Cherifa Boukacem‐Zeghmouri Jie Xu Marzena
wigo&#x; Eti Herman 《Learned Publishing》2020,33(2):132-141
A study from the Harbingers research project provides a comprehensive assessment of the main features of the scholarly communications system as viewed by early career researchers (ECRs) in the final year of the study (2018). Aspects covered are: discovery and access, authorship practices, peer review, publishing strategies, open access publishing, open data, sharing, collaboration, social media, metrics, impact, reputation, libraries, publishers, and scholarly transformations. Nearly 120 science and social science researchers from seven countries were questioned about these 16 aspects. It was found that some scholarly features work well for ECRs, and in this category can be included: discovery and access, authorship practices, sharing, collaboration, and publishers. Reputation, publishing strategies, and impact are more problematical, and they, in turn, cause tensions regarding some other factors – social media, open access, and open data. Of the rest, libraries are largely invisible, and ECRs have conflicting views concerning ethical behaviour. Few envisage that transformational change will take place in the next 5 years. 相似文献
5.
Fytton Rowland 《Learned Publishing》2002,15(4):247-258
The recent literature about peer review of scholarly articles is reviewed, with particular emphasis on the cost of the peer-review process. Possible impacts of electronic scholarly publishing upon peer reviewing are discussed. Opinion among academics in their roles as authors, editors and referees seems likely to insist upon preservation of a pre-publication refereeing system in most disciplines. As the administration of any such system seems to have a cost of about $400 per published article, any scholarly publishing system will need to locate financial support to at least that extent, and a system of lump-sum payment by the authors' funders is best placed to cover this cost while providing universal free access to scholarly material. 相似文献
6.
Albert N. Greco 《Publishing Research Quarterly》1990,6(1):12-19
What must a college professor know and do in order to teach about the diverse and constantly changing publishing field? The author discusses some theoretical and practical ideas about teaching publishing, including (1) establishing an advisory board of industry leaders; (2) creating a comprehensive publishing curriculum that draws upon the academic resources of other departments and/or schools within a university; (3) recruiting, developing, and maintaining a faculty; (4) developing an effective internship and job placement program; (5) establishing and maintaining contacts with regional and national publishing trade associations; and (6) discussing the need for more scholarly studies on the eclectic international publishing industry. 相似文献
7.
[目的/意义] 在学术出版与传播机制日益复杂的背景下，学术出版素养成为研究人员不可或缺的技能。美国高校图书馆的学术出版素养教育有一定成功经验，能够为中国的学术出版素养教育提供指导。[方法/过程] 以美国排名前10位的高校图书馆和中国40所"双一流"高校图书馆为调查对象，对这些图书馆开展的学术出版素养教育实践进行调查，主要从教育形式与教育内容方面进行比较，分析中美学术出版素养教育的异同。[结果/结论] 对我国高校图书馆学术出版素养教育的启示是：深化教育合作，促进学术出版素养教育的不断完善；选择适当的教育形式，兼顾教育的系统性与针对性；针对学术出版需求，构建全方位的教育内容体系。 相似文献
8.
Thomas HP Gould 《Publishing Research Quarterly》2009,25(4):232-245
Print academic journals are dead. As we watch large metropolitan newspapers fail (as are many small town newspapers), the
same economic forces are driving online scholarly publishing. This phenomenon is more than print journals going online. The
options available with new low-cost online publishing software and the rise in the ability to use ratings from user generated
content suggest more near-term changes are likely. Many of the outcomes are unsettled: the economics of online publishing;
the standards for peer review, rank, and tenure; and the very nature of scholarly publishing itself. What is certain, however,
is that the economics of online academic publishing—modeled via Anderson’s Long Tail Theory—will make it possible to provide
greater access, more collaboration, and, ultimately, improved research and researchers. Universities acting as publishing
centers with their e-reserves will be expected to change their faculty evaluations, providing greater academic rewards for those who act as editors,
reviewers, and proofreaders within this new born-online and only-online world. 相似文献
9.
10.
Francis Dodds 《Learned Publishing》2018,31(2):163-168
Key points
- Concerns about a crisis in monograph publishing date back to at least the 1990s, and for traditional journal publishing at least a decade.
- Two key trends behind concerns over book and journal models are pressures on funding and the emergence of open access.
- Despite predictions of a revolution, the academic publishing sector has proved remarkably resilient in adapting to market changes.
- Whilst showing some support for ‘open science’, even early career researchers remain committed to traditional publishing models.
- The growth in scholarly collaboration networks and in sharing across traditional boundaries is the more likely disrupter of traditional publishing.
11.
Jean-Pierre V. M. Hérubel 《Learned Publishing》2023,36(2):164-170
Academic book and journal publishing constitutes the majority focus of university presses. Besides commercial scholarly publishers, academic scholars and researchers view the opportunities provided by university presses as important venues for the dissemination of their research. This discussion focuses on the disciplinary imperative to publish scholarship that is ever more fluid and specialized as academic disciplines continue to become further nuanced in their response to the increasing knowledge produced by humanities and social science inquiry. The focus is on university presses and not commercial scholarly presses, although constitute a significant locus of scholarly publishing. What are the general characteristics of academic specialization and university press publishing? Further, how is disciplinary fluidity, especially evolving specialization, reflected in university press book publishing nomenclature and how scholarship is tied to the intellectual preoccupations of academic specialization? Multi- and inter-disciplinarities further articulate disciplinary publishing, accelerating disciplinary fluidity. Examples from disciplinary and emerging configurations of disciplinary nomenclature utilized by university presses offers insight into specialization and publishing. Academic history publishing is used to illustrate newly emerging fluid disciplinary configurations. 相似文献
12.
Xiang REN 《Learned Publishing》2013,26(3):197-205
A growing number of online journals and academic platforms are adopting light peer review or ‘publish then filter’ models of scholarly communication. These approaches have the advantage of enabling instant exchanges of knowledge between academics and are part of a wider search for alternatives to traditional peer review and certification processes in scholarly publishing. However, establishing credibility and identifying the correct balance between communication and scholarly rigour remains an important challenge for digital communication platforms targeting academic communities. This paper looks at a highly influential, government‐backed, open publishing platform in China: Science Paper Online, which is using transparent post‐publication peer‐review processes to encourage innovation and address systemic problems in China's traditional academic publishing system. There can be little doubt that the Chinese academic publishing landscape differs in important ways from counterparts in the United States and Western Europe. However, this article suggests that developments in China also provide important lessons about the potential of digital technology and government policy to facilitate a large‐scale shift towards more open and networked models of scholarly communication. 相似文献
13.
For this talk, Marks was tasked with summarizing the important trends in scholarly publishing in 45 minutes. The speaker reflected on the rapid changes that have occurred in journal publishing, which followed more than 300 years of relatively slow progress. Marks discussed key technology trends such as data curation, Open Access (OA) mandates, and the changes occurring in the global landscape of scholarly communications and library budgets. Wolters Kluwer Health has been responding to these trends with new publishing experiments including a Platinum OA model in emerging markets. Marks discussed the ways that publishers and libraries need to alter their traditional practices and instill a focus on their customers and communities. 相似文献
14.
Bryna Coonin 《Journal of Business & Finance Librarianship》2013,18(3):193-212
Open access (OA) publishing is now accepted as an integral part of the emerging trends within scholarly communication. Business librarians, like their subject specialist colleagues in other disciplines, are increasingly called upon to interpret scholarly communication trends to their faculty. This study surveys 1,293 business faculty from American schools of business accredited by the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business. Issues explored include business faculty publishing practices within the discipline and how these affect academic advancement, obtaining articles for their own research, electronic publishing, self-archiving, and their perceptions about OA publishing generally. 相似文献
15.
David Nicholas Anthony Watkinson Cherifa Boukacem‐Zeghmouri Blanca Rodríguez‐Bravo Jie Xu Abdullah Abrizah Marzena Świgoń Eti Herman 《Learned Publishing》2017,30(2):157-166
Early career researchers (ECRs) are of great interest because they are the new (and biggest) wave of researchers. They merit long and detailed investigation, and towards this end, this overarching paper provides a summary of the first‐year findings of a 3‐year, longitudinal study of 116 science and social science ECRs who have published nearly 1,200 papers and come from 7 countries and 81 universities. ECRs were interviewed in their own languages face‐to‐face, by Skype, or telephone. The study focused on the attitudes and behaviours of ECRs with respect to scholarly communications and the extent to which they are adopting new and disruptive technologies, such as social media, online communities, and Open Science. The main findings include: publishing in high‐impact factor journals is the only reputational game in town; online scholarly communities, and ResearchGate in particular, are gaining ground; social media are beginning to have an impact, especially in the dissemination arena; outreach activities have become more important; libraries are becoming increasingly invisible to ECRs; Open Science is not gaining traction; and more transformational ideas are being expressed, especially in the US and UK. 相似文献
16.
学术出版活动是促进科学知识传播、共享科研成果及推动科学研究的主要形式,而发表科技论文是学术出版活动的主要内容。近年来,随着科学技术的发展,全球学术出版活动蓬勃发展,与学术出版活动密切相关的第三方服务也逐渐兴起。学术出版第三方服务为科研人员开展科学研究提供了便利,被国内外学术界广泛接受,但由于其服务范围模糊、界限不分明,往往存在个别学术不端现象。本文基于最新发布的《学术出版第三方服务的边界蓝皮书(2020)》,阐述了其中规定的正当服务及不正当服务,并从管理部门、第三方服务机构、期刊编辑部及科研人员角度提出了学术不端行为防范对策。学术出版活动各个环节要积极参与治理学术不端问题,推动科研诚信及创新性国家建设。 相似文献
17.
ABSTRACTAs information sources have expanded, there have been parallel changes in the way students and researchers find and use that information. The role of the library has shifted to embedding information literacy skills into the curriculum as a primary function. This presentation explored how librarians are becoming more involved with information literacy curriculum and how publishers can assist them, particularly regarding access to information and the scholarly publishing process. Since 2015, Rebecca Donlan at Florida Gulf Coast University (FGCU) and Stacy Stanislaw at Taylor & Francis Group have been collaborating on an information literacy program for FGCU students and faculty that focuses specifically on navigating the scholarly publishing landscape. Donlan and Stanislaw provided an overview of the project, its formation, implementation, and progress to date. 相似文献
18.
Scholarly publishing scams and predatory journals are emerging threats to academic integrity. During the last few years, the number of bogus journals has dramatically increased, defraud authors by promising fast review and prompt publishing. The current research investigates the contribution of Iranian researchers in predatory open-access journals in 2014. In this research, a total of 21,817 articles published by 265 journals from Beall’s list of predatory standalone journals were investigated. Although Beall’s weblog was taken offline on January 15, 2017, data was collected between January and March 2016 when his weblog was accessible. Results of the study revealed that Iranian researchers have contributed to 1449 papers from 265 journals, ranked this country as having the second largest contributor after India. Surprisingly, institutions with the highest share of publication in predatory journals are among the most reputable and well-known universities of the country. Un-vetted papers published in predatory journals can hurt individuals’ reputation and be a base for future low-quality research in Iran and other world countries. To avoid being victimized by questionable journals, researchers should be more familiar with scholarly publishing literacy skills to recognize and avoid publishing scams. 相似文献
19.
Don MacMillan 《The Journal of Academic Librarianship》2014,40(5):541-549
Drawing from the literatures of science, scholarly communication, and librarianship, this review paper describes what librarians need to know about how scientists manage and share their data. It is intended to help librarians become more engaged and integral partners in research and education. Scientific data repositories, journal data deposition policies, and the development of persistent linking between scholarly publications and data sets, have made data more accessible. However, deposition and sharing practices still vary among researchers, journal publishers, data repositories, information providers, and universities. Understanding the dynamic relationships between these stakeholders is critical to providing relevant support to researchers and students in the sciences. Librarians need to develop skills that bridge traditional liaison work with the increasingly data-driven demands of scientific research, so that we can support researchers with their data management needs and help users discover data across myriad collections and resources. 相似文献
20.
Shampa Paul 《International Information and Library Review》2012,44(4):194-201
The Information Age is characterized by new ways of information generation, managing, and dissemination because of the use of information and communication technology (ICT) (Moahi, 2003; Paul, 2007). Institutional Repositories (IRs) play a fundamental role in centralizing, preserving, and making accessible institution's intellectual capital and, at the same time, they form part of a global system of distributed and interoperable repositories that provide the foundation for a new disaggregated model of scholarly publishing (Johnson, 2002; Nagahban, 2010). A study of nine libraries in the National Capital Region of India was conducted to: identify benefits of IRs, learn the satisfaction level of users with respect to IR facilities, identify the incentives for publication in IRs, and identify the appropriate policies to be adopted by institutions for implementing IRs. The results of the responses from the 496 respondents indicate that: 1) Most Faculty members and Research scholars in this study indicated that they do not publish their research in IRs. 2) Opinions about benefits of IRs are user-specific. For instance, a substantially large percentage of those Faculty members and Research scholars in the study who do use IRs are Most satisfied with potential benefits of IR while a relatively higher percentage of Students fall in the Satisfied category. 3) The benefits of IRs ranked most highly, although this varied by the different user groups was wider readership. Students ranked this and "quality aspect" – the opportunity to improve the quality of one's work through the provision of feedback from other researchers. 4) A serious concern about publishing in IRs is the potential for plagiarism and overall lower control over one's work. A second concern is the potential loss of content in IRs, which are often not archived as well as scholarly journals are. The findings suggest that institutions need to give due attention to policies related to two aspects of publication, especially those related to quality and copyright issues and to the academic value of research output. Other policy-related topics include citation in other publication with due acknowledgement, inclusion in indexing systems for retrieval, interoperability with other IRs, and Permanent storage. 相似文献