Canadian academics' use of predatory journals.

Pub Date : 2021-12-01 DOI:10.29173/jchla29579
Maureen Babb
{"title":"Canadian academics' use of predatory journals.","authors":"Maureen Babb","doi":"10.29173/jchla29579","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction Predatory journals have been acknowledged as an increasing concern in the scholarly literature over the last decade, but research on the subject has been sparse. Research that has focused on predatory journals in the Canadian context has been even rarer, and limited to work focused on a single university. This study explores publishing trends in predatory journals by authors affiliated with Canadian universities. Methods Articles published by authors at 30 Canadian universities, including all universities in the U15, were pulled from select predatory journals. Key data including author affiliation, article type, discipline, and grant information were extracted from the articles. Results All universities in the study were found to have publications in predatory journals. The health sciences accounted for 72% of the publications, and the sciences for 20%. Research articles accounted for 50% of the articles. Opinion, editorial, or commentary pieces accounted for 24% and 19% were review articles. Grant funding was indicated in 34% of the articles, with NSERC and CIHR being top funders. The research-intensive U15 universities were found to publish more in predatory journals than their non-U15 compatriots, even when the universities were of similar size. Discussion Canadian scholars were found to publish in predatory journals, particularly those scholars from the health sciences and research-intensive U15 universities. Grant funding was common, and often came from high profile funders like NSERC and CIHR. This study suggests that policy and education initiatives may be warranted in Canadian contexts, especially in the health sciences and at research-intensive universities.","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9327599/pdf/","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29173/jchla29579","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Introduction Predatory journals have been acknowledged as an increasing concern in the scholarly literature over the last decade, but research on the subject has been sparse. Research that has focused on predatory journals in the Canadian context has been even rarer, and limited to work focused on a single university. This study explores publishing trends in predatory journals by authors affiliated with Canadian universities. Methods Articles published by authors at 30 Canadian universities, including all universities in the U15, were pulled from select predatory journals. Key data including author affiliation, article type, discipline, and grant information were extracted from the articles. Results All universities in the study were found to have publications in predatory journals. The health sciences accounted for 72% of the publications, and the sciences for 20%. Research articles accounted for 50% of the articles. Opinion, editorial, or commentary pieces accounted for 24% and 19% were review articles. Grant funding was indicated in 34% of the articles, with NSERC and CIHR being top funders. The research-intensive U15 universities were found to publish more in predatory journals than their non-U15 compatriots, even when the universities were of similar size. Discussion Canadian scholars were found to publish in predatory journals, particularly those scholars from the health sciences and research-intensive U15 universities. Grant funding was common, and often came from high profile funders like NSERC and CIHR. This study suggests that policy and education initiatives may be warranted in Canadian contexts, especially in the health sciences and at research-intensive universities.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
加拿大学者对掠夺性期刊的使用。
在过去的十年里,掠夺性期刊在学术文献中越来越受到关注,但对这一主题的研究却很少。在加拿大的背景下,关注掠夺性期刊的研究就更少了,而且仅限于一所大学。本研究探讨了加拿大大学附属作者在掠夺性期刊上发表文章的趋势。方法:作者在加拿大30所大学发表的文章,包括U15的所有大学,从掠夺性期刊中提取。从文章中提取关键数据,包括作者隶属关系、文章类型、学科和资助信息。结果:所有参与研究的大学都在掠夺性期刊上发表过文章。健康科学占出版物的72%,科学占20%。研究类文章占50%。观点、社论或评论文章占24%,评论文章占19%。34%的文章中提到了资助,其中NSERC和CIHR是最大的资助者。研究发现,研究密集型的U15大学比非U15大学在掠夺性期刊上发表的文章更多,即使这些大学的规模相似。讨论:发现加拿大学者在掠夺性期刊上发表文章,特别是来自卫生科学和研究密集型U15大学的学者。拨款很常见,通常来自NSERC和CIHR等知名资助者。这项研究表明,在加拿大的情况下,特别是在卫生科学和研究密集型大学,政策和教育举措可能是有必要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1