共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 31 毫秒
1.
Ahmed Maher Khafaga Shehata 《Learned Publishing》2019,32(4):304-311
The purpose of this paper is to report the findings of a study of scholarly communication behaviour among Arab scholars. The main objective of this study is to determine how Egyptian and Saudi Arabian social sciences and humanities scholars engage in scholarly communication practices. The study used a mixed‐methods approach. A questionnaire was answered by a sample of 104 participants, followed by interviews with 36 participants to gain insight into the scholarly communication behaviour of the Arab scholars. The analysis demonstrated that participants use different styles of scholarly communication approaches. Most of the participants do use informal (social media) channels to communicate their research findings (particularly ResearchGate and Facebook), although priority is given to formal over informal publication in peer reviewed journals. Responses showed that the promotional systems of both countries dictate publication choices of scholars, reducing the amount of collaboration by ranking co‐publications lower than sole publications and favouring printed journals over online‐only journals. 相似文献
2.
Eun-Young Julia Kim 《Publishing Research Quarterly》2018,34(4):554-567
This study reports how internationalization of academic knowledge is reflected in the language choice of Korean academic journals across disciplines and examines perceptions and practices of eighty two faculty from various disciplines at three Korean universities concerning publishing in English journals. The results indicate that natural science has the highest percentage of English-medium journals whereas those in humanities and social science predominantly use Korean as a medium of publication. Similar disciplinary patterns are observed in the responses to survey questions about frequency of publication as well as desire and preference for publishing papers in English. The biggest motivation for Korean scholars to publish in English was the desire to reach global scholarly communities. Implications of these findings are discussed. 相似文献
3.
This study examines aspects of scholarly journal publishing in the Nordic countries. On average half of Nordic journals publish online. In most Nordic countries, commercial publishers predominate; however, in Finland the majority are society publishers. The number of open access journals is low, in line with international figures. There is concern to maintain local languages in journal publishing. A majority of the journals publishing in local languages are within social science, humanities, and arts; the STM sector publishes in English. English‐language publications are favoured in research assessments, international recognition, and impact, while the visibility of local‐language scholarly journals in international databases is low. The Nordbib program supports Nordic scholarly journals and fosters co‐operation with publishing companies and learned societies over migration to e‐publishing; it also supports open access. The article discusses future challenges for journal publishing, pointing out the problems of small journal publishers and the need for co‐operation between stakeholders. 相似文献
4.
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
5.
6.
Serhat Kurt 《Learned Publishing》2018,31(2):141-147
This study examines the reasons why authors publish in ‘predatory’ OA journals. In total, 50 journals were randomly selected from Beall's list of ‘predatory’ journals. Different methods, including WHOIS tracking, were utilized to query basic information about the selected journals, including location and registrant. Then, 300 articles were randomly selected from within selected journals in various scientific fields. Authors of the selected articles were contacted and sent survey questions to complete. A grounded theory qualitative methods approach was used for data collection and analysis. The results demonstrated that most of these journals were located in the developing world, usually Asia or Africa, even when they claimed they were in the USA or UK. Furthermore, four themes emerged after authors’ survey responses were coded, categorized, and sub‐categorized. The themes were: social identity threat, unawareness, high pressure, and lack of research proficiency. Scholars in the developing world felt that reputable Western journals might be prejudiced against them and sometimes felt more comfortable publishing in journals from the developing world. Other scholars were unaware of the reputation of the journals in which they published and would not have selected them had they known. However, some scholars said they would still have published in the same journals if their institution recognised them. The pressure to ‘publish or perish’ was another factor influencing many scholars’ decisions to publish in these fast‐turnaround journals. In some cases, researchers did not have adequate guidance and felt they lacked the knowledge of research to submit to a more reputable journal. More needs to be done by institutions and reputable journals to make researchers aware of the problem of ‘predatory’ journals. 相似文献
7.
The Knight Higher Education Collaborative 《Learned Publishing》2002,15(3):205-216
Do the humanities and social sciences have the same publishing requirements as the sciences? What can be done to counter perceptions that acquisition funds have migrated away from publications in the fields of the humanities and social sciences to meet the escalating cost of electronic and print journals in the natural and applied sciences? With university presses, non-profit publishers, and the academy itself under strain, we examine the problems, discuss the continuing requirements of scholarship, the implications for funding strategies, and the role of technology, and give examples of new ventures that suggest possible solutions to the problems. We conclude that the primary values that scholars in the humanities and social sciences hold are not dramatically different from those of other academic disciplines and make recommendations for building a broader base of support for scholarship in these areas. 相似文献
8.
Not so different after all: Malaysian researchers' cross‐discipline view of quality and trustworthiness in citation practices 
下载免费PDF全文
下载免费PDF全文 Abdullah Abrizah David Nicholas Abdullah Noorhidawati M. K. Yanti Idaya Aspura Fathiah Badawi 《Learned Publishing》2016,29(3):165-172
This paper reports a survey on citation behaviour of Malaysian researchers. It is part of a wider study gauging quality and trustworthiness in scholarly communication in the emerging digital environment. The survey questionnaire was distributed between 1 October 2014 and 31 January 2015. A total of 391 respondents, from four research areas (humanities, life sciences, physical sciences, and social sciences) completed the questionnaire. The finding indicated that motivations for citing were complex and multi‐faceted, but in all four disciplines, researchers cite a work because they regard it as an authoritative and trustworthy source, which provides a context or building block to their own research. Although researchers have moved from a print‐based system to a digital one, it has not significantly changed the way they decide what to trust. Peer reviewed journals are still the most influential. Open access journals will be cited if they have been peer reviewed. Citing on the basis of high altmetrics and other social judgements, such as mentions, likes, and use, was not prevalent. Measures of establishing trust and authority do not seem to have changed profoundly in Malaysia. 相似文献
9.
学术期刊开放获取出版定量研究探析 总被引：3，自引：0，他引：3
当前学术期刊开放获取（OA）出版定量研究主要集中在增长趋势、影响力和被引优势、成本和效益以及学者的认知、态度和行为四个方面,主要用到文献计量、数学模型估计、问卷调查等方法进行研究。研究表明,OA出版是一种有益于科研领域、社会公共利益和学者个人的出版模式。其可持续发展面临着开放获取期刊（OAJ）供稿量不足、发文量低,OA模式不稳定,存续能力差,学者对其质量存在忧虑且缺乏经费等问题。在OA出版规模不断扩大、商业出版机构参与度高涨的趋势下,要加大对OA发表的费用资助和豁免力度,建立有效的经费补偿和分配机制,要扶持高质量OAJ的发展。未来的研究方向包括：非营利性OAJ运营、OA出版经费解决机制、影响力跟踪评价、社会效益评估、作者OA发表体验。表1。参考文献56。 相似文献
10.
This study examines the role of learned societies as publishers in Finland based on bibliographic information from two Finnish databases. We studied the share of learned societies' peer‐reviewed publication channels (serials with ISSNs and book publishers with distinct ISBN roots) and outputs (journal articles, conference articles, book articles, and monographs) in Finland. We also studied the share of learned societies' open access (OA) publications. In 2018, there were 402 peer‐reviewed publication channels in Finland. In 2011–2017, the number of peer‐reviewed publications from scholars working in Finnish universities and published in Finland was 17,724. Learned societies publish around 70% of these channels and publications, mostly in the fields of humanities and social sciences. Learned societies in Finland focus on journal publishing, whereas university presses and commercial publishers focus on book publishing. In 2016–2017, 38.4% of the learned societies' outputs were OA. This study concludes that Finnish learned societies play an integral part in national scholarly publishing. They play an especially important role in journal publishing, as commercial publishers produce only 2.6% of Finnish journals and book series, and only 1.4% of the journal articles from scholars working in Finnish universities. 相似文献
11.
12.
Predatory publishing has become a much‐discussed and highly visible phenomenon over the past few years. One widespread, but hardly tested, assumption is the idea that articles published in predatory journals deviate substantially from those published in traditional journals. In this paper, we address this assumption by utilizing corpus linguistic tools. We compare the ‘academic‐like’ nature of articles from two different journals in political science, one top‐ranking and one alleged predatory. Our findings indicate that there is significant linguistic variation between the two corpora along the dimensions that we test. The articles display notable differences in the types and usage of keywords in the two journals. We conclude that articles published in so‐called predatory journals do not conform to linguistic norms used in higher‐quality journals. These findings may demonstrate a lack of quality control in predatory journals but may also indicate a lack of awareness and use of such linguistic norms by their authors. We also suggest that there is a need for the education of authors in science writing as this may enable them to publish in higher‐ranked and quality‐assured outlets. 相似文献
13.
This paper reports on a study of social scientists’ information seeking and use of scholarly journals to support scholarly communication and information needs. The goals of the study are: to explore the characteristics of information needs for social scientists; to discuss the importance of scholarly journals to social scientists and their information seeking and access means; to identify article reading patterns of social scientists; and to make comparisons between scholarly journals use and reading patterns of social scientists and other scientists in Taiwan and the USA. The author used a questionnaire survey and interview methods to investigate the information seeking, use and reading of scholarly journals, and article deep reading patterns of social scientists. The target population was social science faculty members from National Cheng-chi University in Taiwan. The article explores the characteristics of information needs for social scientists and shows that scholarly journals are important information resources for university social science faculty. Social science faculty in Taiwan use scholarly journals in multiple languages, mainly English, Chinese, German, and Japanese, which is different from scientists in the United States. In addition, they use electronic journals more than print journals. The number of article readings by social science faculty members was approximately 195 readings per year and nearly 440 h were spent reading per year. In contrast to scientists in the United States, the social scientists in Taiwan read fewer readings, spent more time reading, and read older articles. In addition, the study identifies article reading patterns of social scientists and proposes a six-type taxonomy of article deep reading. The study reports the scholarly journal use and reading behavior model of social scientists and shows there are some differences in scholarly journal seeking and use by social science faculty in Taiwan and scientists in the United States. Further studies of scholarly journal and electronic journal use and reading by social scientists across countries, subject disciplines, and languages of journals are needed. 相似文献
14.
Bo‐Christer Bjrk 《Learned Publishing》2019,32(3):227-236
The number of open access (OA) journals and their share of all scholarly journals are usually estimated based on indexing in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). DOAJ's coverage of OA journals from different regions of the world is, however, far from complete, particularly of journals publishing in languages other than English. Using alternative data sources for identification and manual verification, 437 scholarly OA journals published in the five Nordic countries (Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden) were identified, and some key characteristics were studied. Of these, only 184 were indexed in DOAJ. A vast majority of the journals was published by scholarly societies or universities. Social sciences and humanities dominated as topics, and few journals charge authors. National or university‐specific OJS portals have played a major role in enabling OA publishing. Around a third of the Nordic scholarly journals are currently OA. 相似文献
15.
Kristin Antelman 《Learned Publishing》2006,19(2):85-95
Authors in different disciplines exhibit very different behaviours on the so‐called ‘green’ road to open access, i.e. self‐archiving. This study looks at the self‐archiving behaviour of authors publishing in leading journals in six social science disciplines. It tests the hypothesis that authors are self‐archiving according to the norms of their respective disciplines rather than following self‐archiving policies of publishers, and that, as a result, they are self‐archiving significant numbers of publisher PDF versions. It finds significant levels of self‐archiving, as well as significant self‐archiving of the publisher PDF version, in all the disciplines investigated. Publishers' self‐archiving policies have no influence on author self‐archiving practice. 相似文献
16.
Mary WALTHAM 《Learned Publishing》2010,23(2):136-143
The paper summarizes the findings of a pilot study for the National Humanities Alliance, including the methodology, research tools, analysis, and initial conclusions about the publishing business of eight association published humanities and social sciences journals in the context of a move to an open access (author/producer pays) publishing model. The eight disciplines represented by these journals are modern languages, history, religion, economics, sociology, anthropology, politics and statistics. Specific tools were developed for the study to enable like‐for‐like comparison of the journals. Detailed information on current trends in revenue, costs, and surplus is included. Significant differences between HSS and STM journals are reviewed. Open access to research articles on publication as the ‘gold’ author/producer‐pays approach would not be sustainable for this sample of HSS journals for reasons articulated in the report. Further studies using the tools and methodology developed are required to broaden and confirm these results. 相似文献
17.
David Nicholas Blanca Rodríguez‐Bravo Anthony Watkinson Cherifa Boukacem‐Zeghmouri Eti Herman Jie Xu Abdullah Abrizah Marzena Świgoń 《Learned Publishing》2017,30(3):205-217
This study presents findings from the first year of the Harbingers research project, a 3‐year longitudinal study of early career researchers (ECRs), which sought to ascertain current and changing habits in scholarly communication. The study recruited 116 science and social science ECRs from seven countries who were subject to in‐depth interviews, and this paper reports on findings regarding publishing and authorship practices and attitudes. A major objective was to determine whether ECRs are taking the myriad opportunities proffered by new digital innovations, developing within the context of open science, open access, and social media, to publish their research. The main finding is that these opportunities are generally not taken because ECRs are constrained by convention and the precarious employment environment they inhabit and know what is best for them, which is to publish (in high impact factor journals) or perish. 相似文献
18.
Frans Albarillo 《Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian》2013,32(2):77-90
This article examines social science language trends in scholarly communication by looking at JSTOR and Scopus bibliographic data between 1996 and 2012. The results reveal that these two databases contain nearly 90 percent English-language publications. According to our analysis, Scopus continues to add more non-English peer-reviewed content while JSTOR totals are declining. To frame this discussion, the data are considered with reference to larger scholarly communication trends in the sciences, social sciences, and humanities. This study will be relevant for librarians who are interested in non-English scholarly publishing and collection development. 相似文献
19.
[目的 /意义]探究各学科CSSCI来源期刊头部发文机构固化现象及固化程度,为研究科学发展结晶现象的影响提供参考。[方法 /过程]以CSSCI来源期刊发文机构为分析对象,从机构发文量、学科机构发文占比、机构平均发文量、头部发文机构净流动率等方面,对CSSCI来源期刊头部发文机构固化现象以及学科头部发文机构固化程度进行分析。[结果 /结论 ]CSSCI来源期刊各学科发文机构分布呈“头部集中—尾部分散”,少数发文机构近20年始终保持较大的发文占比,前1%、前10%、前20%不同范围内头部发文机构固化程度不同,整体上看,经济学头部发文机构固化程度最高,人文经济地理与艺术学头部发文机构固化程度最低。 相似文献
20.
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