共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 15 毫秒
1.
ResearchGate (RG) is a scholarly social network that possesses an impressive array of reputational metrics and has the potential to supplant publishers as the prime deliverer of scholarly reputation. It possesses 10 reputational mechanisms, and these are the subject of an evaluation employing desk research, expert evaluation, and an analysis of 400 RG members. The main conclusions are: RG (1) provides a rich, albeit confusing, amount of reputational data; (2) struggles with the deployment of alternative, engagement metrics, such as Q&A and follower data, which can lead to reputational anomalies; (3) employs usage data in an especially effective manner; and (4) leads the field in the way it engages with the scholar. 相似文献
2.
Peter ASHMAN 《Learned Publishing》2009,22(3):209-219
Societies, whose publishing programmes are primarily mission‐driven, play a unique role in funding and disseminating research. But by their nature – often small and with limited resources – they are particularly prone to the turbulence currently affecting scholarly publishing. BMJ Journals is itself a society publisher but also publishes under contract for other societies. During 2008, we carried out research to assess societies' evolving needs from their publishing partnerships. The changing expectations and behaviours of the next generation of researchers are considered to be as much of a threat as declining revenues. Societies are planning to expand professional development activities and to maximise their use of emerging technologies to help maintain and grow membership. Although surplus is a low priority for societies and, accordingly, for their publishing programmes, a high financial return is nonetheless a key criterion when choosing publishing partners – as are reputation, technological innovation, and individual title development. 相似文献
3.
This article reports on scholarly communication and open access (OA) in Korea. Drawing on a range of databases, articles, and reference sources, it provides unique insights. In contrast to the UK/US model of scholarly communication, in Korea, most scholarly journals are published by discipline‐based scholarly societies and research institutes affiliated to universities. Payment for publication is the norm, and typically features article processing charges and scholarly society membership fees for both OA and toll access (TA) journals. Online access to journals in Korea is provided by commercial vendors who enter into contracts with the scholarly societies for exclusive use. Three online access models apply – TA, gold OA, and dual access – with the use of these models varying between disciplines. In parallel with this access provided by commercial vendors, there are a number of government‐funded open access repositories (OARs) to which university researchers are requested to deposit their research outputs, as well as OARs run by universities and other research institutes. 相似文献
4.
One of the most important issues facing scholarly communication today is what constitutes quality in the publishing and dissemination of research findings; the aim of this exploratory research study was to investigate author‐perceived quality characteristics of science, technology and medicine journals. We triangulated data from a small number of volunteer full‐time faculty members of Long Island University, using three different research techniques: (1) questionnaire survey, (2) focus groups, and (3) semi‐structured face‐to‐face interviews. The study identified some significant differences by discipline, gender, and tenure status. Overall, the three most important attributes were the reputation of the journal, the estimated length of time to article publication, and the readership of the journal. Our findings bring new insight into this area for the scholarly research community as a whole. 相似文献
5.
As one of the largest active academic social networking sites, ResearchGate (RG) has been utilized by scholars to share publications, seek collaborators, communicate work in progress, and build scholarly reputation. This study collects data from RG users from 61 U.S. research universities at different research activity levels, as categorized by the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education, to examine the impact of institutional differences on RG reputational metrics. The results confirm that RG is a research-oriented academic social networking site that closely and realistically mirrors the research activity level of institutions. With an increase in the research activity level of a university, its affiliated RG users tend to have higher RG scores, more publications and citations, and more profile views and followers, while the average number of reads of their publications and followees tend to be lower and fluctuant. In addition, RG users primarily follow others from institutions of a higher research activity level, forming virtual social networks centered around esteemed institutions. The study suggests academic social networks can serve as indicators in evaluation of research activities among research institutions, and such sites can be helpful and credible for acquiring resources, keeping informed about research, and promoting academic influence. 相似文献
6.
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
7.
David NICHOLAS Anthony WATKINSON Hamid R. JAMALI Eti HERMAN Carol TENOPIR Rachel VOLENTINE Suzie ALLARD Kenneth LEVINE 《Learned Publishing》2015,28(1):15-21
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
8.
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
9.
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
10.
David Nicholas Hamid R. Jamali Eti Herman Anthony Watkinson Abdullah Abrizah Blanca Rodríguez‐Bravo Cherifa Boukacem‐Zeghmouri Jie Xu Marzena
wigo&#x; Tatiana Polezhaeva 《Learned Publishing》2020,33(3):198-211
This article describes an international study informed by a 3‐year‐long qualitative longitudinal project, which sought to discover the scholarly communication attitudes and behaviour of early career researchers (ECRs). Using a combination of small‐scale interviews and a larger‐scale survey, ECRs were questioned on their searching and reading behaviour, publishing practices, open data, and their use of social media. Questionnaire invitations were sent out via publisher lists, social media networks, university research networks, and specialist ECR membership organizations. One‐thousand and six‐hundred responses were received, with many coming from China, Russia, and Poland. Results showed that ECRs are adopting millennial‐facing tools/platforms, with Google, Google Scholar, social media, and smartphones becoming embedded in their scholarly activities. Open data sharing obtains widespread support but somewhat less practice. There are some differences in attitudes and behaviour according to age and subject specialism. 相似文献
11.
David NICHOLAS Anthony WATKINSON Rachel VOLENTINE Suzie ALLARD Kenneth LEVINE Carol TENOPIR Eti HERMAN 《Learned Publishing》2014,27(2):121-134
The paper provides the results of the first phase of the research project Trust and Authority in Scholarly Communications in the Light of the Digital Transition. It provides for an examination of the behaviours and attitudes of academic researchers as producers and consumers of scholarly information resources in the digital era in respect to how they determine authority and trustworthiness in the sources they use, cite, and publish in. The first phase of the study utilized focus groups to formulate research questions for the project as a whole. It provided the direction for the literature review, interviews, and questionnaires studies that would follow. Fourteen focus groups were held in the UK and US in order to obtain this information. A total of 66 science and social science researchers participated. The main findings were: (a) researchers play down difficulties of establishing trustworthiness, not because there are none, but because they have well‐developed methods of establishing trust; (b) citation‐derived metrics are becoming more important in regard to where researchers publish; (c) social media are ancillary to research, but are used for promotion of research and idea generation; (d) researchers are suspicious and confused about open access, but less so if produced by a traditional publisher; (e) there was a uniformity of perceptions/behaviour of researchers irrespective of differences in subject, country, and age; (f) although some early career researchers behave the same as their more senior colleagues this is because of a fear of the system: they actually think differently. 相似文献
12.
《Journal of Informetrics》2022,16(2):101288
Research articles are being shared in increasing numbers on multiple online platforms. Although the scholarly impact of these articles has been widely studied, the online interest determined by how long the research articles are shared online remains unclear. Being cognizant of how long a research article is mentioned online could be valuable information to the researchers. In this paper, we analyzed multiple social media platforms on which users share and/or discuss scholarly articles. We built three clusters for papers, based on the number of yearly online mentions having publication dates ranging from the year 1920 to 2016. Using the online social media metrics for each of these three clusters, we built machine learning models to predict the long-term online interest in research articles. We addressed the prediction task with two different approaches: regression and classification. For the regression approach, the Multi-Layer Perceptron model performed best, and for the classification approach, the tree-based models performed better than other models. We found that old articles are most evident in the contexts of economics and industry (i.e., patents). In contrast, recently published articles are most evident in research platforms (i.e., Mendeley) followed by social media platforms (i.e., Twitter). 相似文献
13.
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
14.
David Nicholas Cherifa Boukacem‐Zeghmouri Blanca Rodríguez‐Bravo Jie Xu Anthony Watkinson A. Abrizah Eti Herman Marzena Świgoń 《Learned Publishing》2017,30(1):19-29
This article presents findings from the first year of the Harbingers research project started in 2015. The project is a 3‐year longitudinal study of early career researchers (ECRs) to ascertain their current and changing habits with regard to information searching, use, sharing, and publication. The study recruited 116 researchers from seven countries (UK, USA, China, France, Malaysia, Poland, and Spain) and performed in‐depth interviews by telephone, Skype, or face‐to‐face to discover behaviours and opinions. This paper reports on findings regarding discovery and access to scholarly information. Findings confirm the universal popularity of Google/Google Scholar. Library platforms and web‐scale discovery services are largely unmentioned and unnoticed by this user community, although many ECRs pass through them unknowingly on the way to authenticated use of their other preferred sources, such as Web of Science. ECRs are conscious of the benefits of open access in delivering free access to papers. Social media are widely used as a source of discovering scholarly information. ResearchGate is popular and on the rise in all countries surveyed. Smartphones have become a regularly used platform on which to perform quick and occasional searches for scholarly information but are only rarely used for reading full text. 相似文献
15.
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
16.
This article provides an overview of the Public Knowledge Project (PKP) and its open source software development projects, with a particular focus on Open Journal Systems (OJS), an online journal publishing platform now used by over 11,500 journals around the world. OJS is just one of many examples of software and services that provide new and cost‐effective alternatives, especially for small scholarly societies and commercial publishers. The development of online publishing, open source software, and virtual communities are together opening up new opportunities for scholars, researchers, societies, small publishers, and librarians to reassert their independence and control over the publishing process, and provides a wider range of options than has ever existed before. 相似文献
17.
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
18.
David Nicholas Anthony Watkinson Cherifa Boukacem‐Zeghmouri Blanca Rodríguez‐Bravo Jie Xu Abdullah Abrizah Marzena
wigo&#x; David Clark Eti Herman 《Learned Publishing》2019,32(3):237-247
This article provides the final results of a 3‐year study that sought to discover whether early career researchers (ECRs) were the harbingers of change with respect to scholarly communications. Over a hundred science and social science ECRs from seven countries, spanning three continents, were depth‐interviewed annually for 3 years (2016–2018) about their attitudes and behaviours with respect to 23 scholarly issues and activities (aspects). In order to provide an accessible overarching assessment of an extremely large and complex dataset, the interview data were categorized according to the strength and direction of change exhibited and the trends and points of interest raised. Results show that all ECRs have changed in one way or another, and a small minority has changed greatly in both attitude and practice and that collaboration and research impact are the scholarly aspects where most changes have occurred, and the greatest cause of change is not so much new technology as a change of jobs. 相似文献
19.
Laura COX 《Learned Publishing》2010,23(4):347-356
In summer 2009 ALPSP undertook the first industry‐wide survey into scholarly book publishing practice. This article covers the key findings and attempts to describe the current scholarly book and e‐book publishing landscape. Publishers' development of e‐books varies considerably from early experimentation to being a standard component of their publishing programme. However, publishers of all shapes and sizes have developed some common policies and practices despite the rapid evolution of an emerging element of scholarly publishing. E‐books currently make up a small, if growing, proportion of total book sales, although they are currently one of the most talked about developments in the entire publishing industry. 相似文献
20.
Scholarly article seeking,reading, and use: a continuing evolution from print to electronic in the sciences and social sciences 下载免费PDF全文
下载免费PDF全文 Electronic journals are now the norm for accessing and reading scholarly articles. This article examines scholarly article reading patterns by faculty in five US universities in 2012. Selected findings are also compared to some general trends from studies conducted periodically since 1977. In the 2012 survey, over three‐quarters (76%) of the scholarly readings were obtained through electronic means and just over half (51%) of readings were read on a screen rather than from a print source or being printed out. Readings from library sources are overwhelmingly from e‐sources. The average number of articles read per month was 20.66, with most articles read by the medical and other sciences, and on average each article was read for 32 minutes. 相似文献