首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
相似文献
 共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 15 毫秒
1.
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   

2.
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   

3.
Peer review is a cornerstone of scientific publication, and consequently, predatory journals are feared to be a threat to the credibility of science as they perform no or low‐quality peer review. The question of why researchers decide to publish in a questionable journal remains relatively unexplored. This paper provides an overview of the existing literature on why researchers decide to publish papers in questionable journals, specifically whether or not they search for a low‐barrier way to getting published while being aware that the chosen journal probably does not adhere to acceptable academic standards. The choice of a publication outlet can be seen as a submission tree that consists of various incentives, and explaining why authors publish in deceptive journals may thus consist of a combination of awareness and motivational factors. Awareness and motivation of diligent authors is very different from that of unethical authors. Unethical authors may use a lack of awareness to excuse their actions, but they may actively search for a low‐barrier way to getting published. As there are different types of authors who publish in deceptive journals, we need different approaches to solve the problem.  相似文献   

4.
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   

5.
Replications are an important part of the research process because they allow for greater confidence in the findings of communication research. However, engaging in replications is often undervalued, replication studies can be difficult to publish, and thus it is difficult for individual scholars to devote their resources toward replication. This essay outlines the importance of replications for communication science and provides a framework for this special issue on replications. The authors also issue a call for communication scholars to consider future projects and structural changes that would incentivize future replication studies.  相似文献   

6.
  相似文献   

7.
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   

8.
The early academic beginning is critical in the development of a researcher's academic career because it helps determine one's further success. We aim to shed light on the path that drives the success of talents in the field of artificial intelligence (AI) by investigating the academic education background of distinguished AI researchers and analyzing the contribution of different educational factors to their research performance. In this study, we collected and coded the curriculum vitae of 1832 AI researchers. Results show that most AI researchers were educated in the United States and obtained their highest degrees from top universities. As for their educational background, approximately 18.27% of AI researchers chose non-AI majors, such as mathematics, physics, and chemistry, instead of AI-related majors, such as computer science. Furthermore, negative binomial regression analysis demonstrates that individuals who publish more during study period will have better research output, whether they are currently in academia or industry. Researchers in academia with overseas degrees published more articles than those without overseas degrees. In terms of interdisciplinary education, a mathematics background leads to increased research visibility of AI researchers in the industry but depresses the scholarly productivity of AI researchers in academia. Academic qualification is the main factor determining the scientific performance of AI researchers in industry, which is not the case in academia. The analysis also showed that individuals who graduated from more prestigious universities tended to receive more citations than those graduating from less famous universities. Moreover, AI researchers in academia who have graduated from prestigious universities seem to pay more attention to the quality of the papers rather than the quantity.  相似文献   

9.
邱峰 《出版科学》2016,24(4):72-76
对104个高校人文社会科学学报的数据采集,探索现阶段高校学报的本校科研人员发文情况,并分析其对高校学报影响力的影响。研究表明：高校学报的本校科研人员发文比率在20%—60%之间;985或211高校、具有社科博士点高校学报更倾向于刊发本校作者的论文;从区域上来看,华东、华北、东北的高校学报更倾向于刊发本校作者的论文;CSSCI 和非 CSSCI 高校学报在本校科研人员发文占比上差异不显著;高校学报的本校科研人员发文占比并未显著影响学报的影响力。  相似文献   

10.
Using the theory of planned behavior as a theoretical framework, survey data from 121 authors in the professional field of school librarianship (40% of whom were practitioners) were used to identify beliefs about publishing in the field, attitudes to research and publication, perceived social norms and social influences on research and publication, and perceived barriers to research and publication. The journals in which the authors prefer to publish and their reasons for journal choice are also reported. This is the first reported study to specifically address reasons for publication choice in a professional field, and it indicates that relevance to practice is an important consideration, in addition to scholarly rigor, when authors in professional fields consider where to publish their research. The views and motivations of full professors, other researchers and practitioner-authors were surprisingly similar, although practitioners—who had less research preparation than researchers—were less confident about their ability to conduct and write-up research. Additionally, researchers other than full professors, and practitioners, reported that the encouragements of peers and supervisors or senior colleagues were important social influences for research and publication.  相似文献   

11.
ABSTRACT

Computational social science has caused a shift of research paradigm in social science in general and communication in particular. The special issue brings together a community of active researchers to introduce computational social science for Asia-Pacific communication research. The special issue outlines major computational methods closely related to communication research and demonstrates how computational methods can be applied to address theoretical and practical questions in Asia-Pacific societies. The advantages and limitations of computational methods have been conceptually discussed and/or empirically illustrated. Finally, the special issue provides a guideline of conducting computational research for communication researchers in Asia-Pacific societies and beyond.  相似文献   

12.
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   

13.
In an increasingly digital environment, many factors influence how academic researchers decide what to read, what to cite, where to publish their work, and how they assign trust when making these decisions. This study focuses on how this differs according to the geographical location of the researcher, specifically in terms of the country's level of development. Data were collected by a questionnaire survey of 3650 authors who had published articles in international journals. The human development index (HDI) was used to compare authors' scholarly behavior. The findings show that researchers from less developed countries such as India and China (medium HDI) compared to those in developed countries, such as the USA and UK (very high HDI) are more reliant on external factors and those criteria that are related to authority, brand and reputation, such as authors' names, affiliation, country and journal name. Even when deciding where to publish, the publisher of the journal is more important for developing countries than it is for researchers from the US and UK. Scholars from high HDI countries also differ in these aspects: a) they are less discriminatory than authors from developing countries in their citation practices; b) for them the fact that a source is peer reviewed is the most important factor when deciding where to publish; c) they are more negative towards the use of repositories and social media for publishing and more skeptical about their potential for increasing usage or reaching a wider audience.  相似文献   

14.
论加强公共图书馆问题研究   总被引：31，自引：13，他引：18  
对公共图书馆的研究始终是图书馆学的焦点,但在我国七展得远远不够,这是因为图书馆 基础薄弱和公共图书馆的研究人才不足而引起的,作者对如何加强我国的公共图书馆研究的有关问题作了探讨。  相似文献   

15.
The article presents one of the main findings of an international study of 4,000 academic researchers that examined how trustworthiness is determined in the digital environment when it comes to scholarly reading, citing, and publishing. The study shows that peer review is still the most trustworthy characteristic of all. There is, though, a common perception that open access journals are not peer reviewed or do not have proper peer‐review systems. Researchers appear to have moved inexorably from a print‐based system to a digital system, but it has not significantly changed the way they decide what to trust. They do not trust social media. Only a minority – although significantly mostly young and early career researchers – thought that social media are anything other than more appropriate to personal interactions and peripheral to their professional/academic lives. There are other significant differences, according to the age of the researcher. Thus, in regard to choosing an outlet for publication of their work, young researchers are much less concerned with the fact that it is peer reviewed.  相似文献   

16.
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   

17.
This paper provides information on a research project undertaken at the University of Arkansas in Fayetteville to study publications by the campus researchers with an emphasis on the STEM (agricultural sciences, physical science, biological sciences, engineering and mathematics, etc.) disciplines at the macro level for a 3-year period. The overall objective of the study was to provide evidence-based data of periodical use to assist with collection decisions and to identify collection strengths at the university level. We used the Web of Knowledge database (Science Citation Index, Social Science Citation Index, and Arts and Humanities Citation Index) to identify the periodical literature in which our researchers published and those that they cite in their publications. We also determined the extent to which our researchers are publishing in and citing periodicals from the Elsevier, Wiley, and IEEE journal packages. A methodology for extracting citations from Web of Knowledge into an Excel spreadsheet is also provided.  相似文献   

18.
PurposeThis mixed-methods study integrates bibliometric and altmetric investigation with a qualitative method in order to assess the prevalence and societal-impact of Open-Access (OA) publications, and to reveal the considerations behind researchers' decision to publish articles in closed and open-access.Design/methodology/approachThe bibliometric-altmetric study analyzed 584 OA and closed publications published between 2014 and 2019 by 40 Israeli researchers: 20 from STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Math) and 20 from SSH (Social Sciences and Humanities) discipline. We used a multistage cluster sampling method to select a representative sample for the STEM disciplines group (engineering, computer science, biology, mathematics, and physics), and for the SSH disciplines group (sociology, economics, psychology, political science, and history). Required data were extracted from Scopus and Unpaywall databases, and the PlumX-platform. Among the 40 researchers who were selected for the bibliometric-altmetric study, 20 researchers agreed to be interviewed for this study.FindingsComparing bibliometrics and altmetrics for the general publications did not reveal any significant differences between OA and closed publications. These were found only when comparing OA and closed publications across disciplines. STEM-researchers published 59 % of their publications in OA, compared to just 29 % among those in SSH, and they received significantly more bibliometric and altmetric citations from SSH OA publications and from their own closed-access publications. The altmetrics findings indicate that researchers are well acquainted and active in social media. However, according to the interviewees, there is no academic contribution for sharing research findings on social-media; it is viewed as a “public-service”. Researchers' primary consideration for publishing in closed or OA was the journal impact-factor.Research limitations/implicationsOur findings contribute to the increasing body of research that addresses OA citations and societal-impact advantages. The findings suggest the need to adopt an OA-policy after a thorough assessment of the consequences for SSH disciplines.  相似文献   

19.
刘良璧 《图书馆》2011,(4):96-97,105
国家社会科学基金项目是目前我国唯一的国家级的哲学、社会科学和人文科学的研究项目,它从宏观上反映了各学科研究的轨迹、现状及发展趋势。论文通过对1994-2009年间国家社会科学基金立项项目的数量、类型与主题进行统计和分析,揭示我国图书情报文献学领域研究的现状、热点与发展趋势,为该领域的研究和发展提供参考。  相似文献   

20.
This study provides an overview of the research output of Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India, in terms of number of publications contributed by faculty members and researchers. The study analyzes bibliometric indicators of published research of Jawaharlal Nehru University as indexed in the Web of Science. There were 5,007 research publications from Jawaharlal Nehru University in the four decades from 1971–2010 (70s; 80s; 90s; and 2000s). The study noted encouraging trends in collaborative research work with multiple-authored research papers. International collaboration in research was also observed among the faculty members and researchers. English was the predominant language of communication. The social scientists and humanists of Jawaharlal Nehru University publish books which are not indexed in the Web of Science. Similarly, research work published in regional languages or published in national level journals are seldom included in the Web of Science. It suggests that research needs to be done by collecting data from the Indian Citation Index and books published by the researchers in order to get an accurate and consolidated picture of the research output of the university.  相似文献   

设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号