Pub Date : 2023-09-06DOI: 10.3390/publications11030043
Péter Sasvári, Tamás Kaiser, Krisztián Várföldi, Csaba Fasi
The following paper examines some of the publishing habits observed among the winning applicants of the Bolyai János Research Scholarship. As an academic support programme, the Bolyai Research Scholarship forms a bridge between scholars with the title of doctor of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (HAS) and the young generation of researchers with an academic degree. The winning applicants in 2021 were researchers under the age of 45, cooperating with international co-authors, having highly cited publications and showing a continuous publication history of 15 years on average. The scholarship holders come primarily from research centres and universities. The paper argues that the achievements of scholarship holders follow the international patterns of academic excellence and publication as well as the requirements for international cooperation and publishing mainly in open access journals. In doing so, they prefer journals under the umbrella of Elsevier for performing their publication activities; however, there has been a significant increase in those publishing in MDPI journals, recently. The results show that one-third of the applicants had published before and a fifth of them had published in one of the journals of MDPI two months after announcing the list of the winning applicants. At the same time, differences in publication traditions and award systems reveal marked differences in publication strategies and evaluation criteria across fields of science. Based on this, the descriptive statistics presented in this paper contribute to our understanding of the conscious career planning of young scholars in line with international standards.
{"title":"Scientific Excellence and Publication Patterns: The Winning Applicants of the Bolyai János Research Scholarship in Hungary in 2021","authors":"Péter Sasvári, Tamás Kaiser, Krisztián Várföldi, Csaba Fasi","doi":"10.3390/publications11030043","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3390/publications11030043","url":null,"abstract":"The following paper examines some of the publishing habits observed among the winning applicants of the Bolyai János Research Scholarship. As an academic support programme, the Bolyai Research Scholarship forms a bridge between scholars with the title of doctor of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (HAS) and the young generation of researchers with an academic degree. The winning applicants in 2021 were researchers under the age of 45, cooperating with international co-authors, having highly cited publications and showing a continuous publication history of 15 years on average. The scholarship holders come primarily from research centres and universities. The paper argues that the achievements of scholarship holders follow the international patterns of academic excellence and publication as well as the requirements for international cooperation and publishing mainly in open access journals. In doing so, they prefer journals under the umbrella of Elsevier for performing their publication activities; however, there has been a significant increase in those publishing in MDPI journals, recently. The results show that one-third of the applicants had published before and a fifth of them had published in one of the journals of MDPI two months after announcing the list of the winning applicants. At the same time, differences in publication traditions and award systems reveal marked differences in publication strategies and evaluation criteria across fields of science. Based on this, the descriptive statistics presented in this paper contribute to our understanding of the conscious career planning of young scholars in line with international standards.","PeriodicalId":37551,"journal":{"name":"Publications","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2023-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49377541","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-18DOI: 10.3390/publications11030042
R. Damaševičius, Ligita Zailskaitė-Jakštė
This paper analyzes the impact of the ongoing war in Ukraine on the productivity and collaboration networks of Ukrainian academics. As a case study, we analyze the publication patterns in open-access MDPI journals using bibliographic analysis methods and compare the research output published in 2022 with research papers published in the three preceding years (2019–2021) with at least one author having an Ukrainian affiliation. A total of 2365 publications were analyzed. The identified publication trends provide an interesting insight into the dynamics of the research network of Ukrainian researchers, which demonstrated a decline in diversity of international collaborations in 2022. The findings of this study emphasize the necessity of international research collaboration in a variety of fields in order to mitigate the detrimental effects of national crises and emergencies.
{"title":"The Impact of a National Crisis on Research Collaborations: A Scientometric Analysis of Ukrainian Authors 2019–2022","authors":"R. Damaševičius, Ligita Zailskaitė-Jakštė","doi":"10.3390/publications11030042","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3390/publications11030042","url":null,"abstract":"This paper analyzes the impact of the ongoing war in Ukraine on the productivity and collaboration networks of Ukrainian academics. As a case study, we analyze the publication patterns in open-access MDPI journals using bibliographic analysis methods and compare the research output published in 2022 with research papers published in the three preceding years (2019–2021) with at least one author having an Ukrainian affiliation. A total of 2365 publications were analyzed. The identified publication trends provide an interesting insight into the dynamics of the research network of Ukrainian researchers, which demonstrated a decline in diversity of international collaborations in 2022. The findings of this study emphasize the necessity of international research collaboration in a variety of fields in order to mitigate the detrimental effects of national crises and emergencies.","PeriodicalId":37551,"journal":{"name":"Publications","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2023-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49236508","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-07DOI: 10.3390/publications11030041
P. Arthur, L. Hearn, Johnston Ryan, Nirmala Menon, Langa Khumalo
Democratizing access to information is an enabler for our digital future. It can transform how knowledge is created, preserved, and shared, and strengthen the connection between academics and the communities they serve. Yet, open scholarship is influenced by history and politics. This article explores the foundations underlying open scholarship as a quest for more just, equitable, and inclusive societies. It analyzes the origins of the open scholarship movement and explores how systemic factors have impacted equality and equity of knowledge access and production according to location, nationality, race, age, gender, and socio-economic circumstances. It highlights how the privileges of the global North permeate academic and technical standards, norms, and infrastructures. It also reviews how the collective design of more open and collaborative networks can engage a richer diversity of communities, enabling greater social inclusion, and presents key examples. By fostering dialogue with multiple stakeholders, more effective avenues for knowledge production and representation can be built based on approaches that are accessible, participatory, interactive, ethical, and transparent, and that reach a far broader public. This expansive vision of open science will lead to a more unified knowledge economy.
{"title":"Making Open Scholarship More Equitable and Inclusive","authors":"P. Arthur, L. Hearn, Johnston Ryan, Nirmala Menon, Langa Khumalo","doi":"10.3390/publications11030041","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3390/publications11030041","url":null,"abstract":"Democratizing access to information is an enabler for our digital future. It can transform how knowledge is created, preserved, and shared, and strengthen the connection between academics and the communities they serve. Yet, open scholarship is influenced by history and politics. This article explores the foundations underlying open scholarship as a quest for more just, equitable, and inclusive societies. It analyzes the origins of the open scholarship movement and explores how systemic factors have impacted equality and equity of knowledge access and production according to location, nationality, race, age, gender, and socio-economic circumstances. It highlights how the privileges of the global North permeate academic and technical standards, norms, and infrastructures. It also reviews how the collective design of more open and collaborative networks can engage a richer diversity of communities, enabling greater social inclusion, and presents key examples. By fostering dialogue with multiple stakeholders, more effective avenues for knowledge production and representation can be built based on approaches that are accessible, participatory, interactive, ethical, and transparent, and that reach a far broader public. This expansive vision of open science will lead to a more unified knowledge economy.","PeriodicalId":37551,"journal":{"name":"Publications","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2023-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42243289","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-08-04DOI: 10.3390/publications11030040
Oswaldo Terán, Jacinto A. Dávila
Open Access is a global cause with the aim of allowing unrestricted access to all scientific research output in electronic formats. This paper presents a model for simulating the game of interests behind this cause in order to investigate ways of promoting the practice of open access. The model represents the following actors: Academics, Administrators, Funders, Publishers and Politicians. Five scenarios were developed to represent both realistic and ideal, interesting, situations. The model was developed using the SocLab platform—a formalization of the sociology of organizational action. It is based on previous descriptions of the game and expert knowledge. A structural analysis permits us to examine the properties of the sub-model behind each scenario. The results corroborate certain intuitions about the scenarios representing realistic cases, e.g., they indicate that publishers, being isolated in their interests, are subject to strong pressures from other actors, who have a circumstantial alliance. Administrators take an intermediate stance in all scenarios. The best scenarios for open access are those in which Politicians and Funders clearly support the cause by expressing mandates in that direction, backing academics. Surprisingly, the model shows that it is in the Publishers’ interest not to take an extremist position against open access.
{"title":"Simulating and Contrasting the Game of Open Access in Diverse Cultural Contexts: A Social Simulation Model","authors":"Oswaldo Terán, Jacinto A. Dávila","doi":"10.3390/publications11030040","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3390/publications11030040","url":null,"abstract":"Open Access is a global cause with the aim of allowing unrestricted access to all scientific research output in electronic formats. This paper presents a model for simulating the game of interests behind this cause in order to investigate ways of promoting the practice of open access. The model represents the following actors: Academics, Administrators, Funders, Publishers and Politicians. Five scenarios were developed to represent both realistic and ideal, interesting, situations. The model was developed using the SocLab platform—a formalization of the sociology of organizational action. It is based on previous descriptions of the game and expert knowledge. A structural analysis permits us to examine the properties of the sub-model behind each scenario. The results corroborate certain intuitions about the scenarios representing realistic cases, e.g., they indicate that publishers, being isolated in their interests, are subject to strong pressures from other actors, who have a circumstantial alliance. Administrators take an intermediate stance in all scenarios. The best scenarios for open access are those in which Politicians and Funders clearly support the cause by expressing mandates in that direction, backing academics. Surprisingly, the model shows that it is in the Publishers’ interest not to take an extremist position against open access.","PeriodicalId":37551,"journal":{"name":"Publications","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2023-08-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47115562","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-31DOI: 10.3390/publications11030039
J. Stojanovski, Iva Grabarić Andonovski
Open access has emerged from the need to make scholarly communication freely available to the scientific community and not hidden behind a paywall [...]
开放获取源于使科学界能够自由进行学术交流的需要，而不是隐藏在付费墙后面[…]
{"title":"Toward a New World in Scholarly Communication: The 9th PUBMET2022 Conference on Scholarly Communication in the Context of Open Science","authors":"J. Stojanovski, Iva Grabarić Andonovski","doi":"10.3390/publications11030039","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3390/publications11030039","url":null,"abstract":"Open access has emerged from the need to make scholarly communication freely available to the scientific community and not hidden behind a paywall [...]","PeriodicalId":37551,"journal":{"name":"Publications","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2023-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42247139","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The purpose of this study is to map the practices regarding open educational resources’ (OERs) development and implementation at European higher education institutions (HEIs) in the field of library and information science (LIS) during the COVID-19 pandemic and to identify the challenges and obstacles to their full and optimal utilization, both during crisis situations and beyond. A systematic literature review and questionnaire-based survey yielded results from 56 European LIS schools/departments (n = 56). Statistical analysis was performed using the R programming language, and descriptive statistics were used to quantify the data sets. The results have shown that the COVID-19 pandemic served as an impetus for the adoption of OERs, particularly in the context of digital education (DE) and remote learning. However, there is still a lack of awareness of the many benefits and opportunities they provide to higher education, as evidenced by the fact than less than half LIS schools/departments used OERs. Certain issues were identified, such as the lack of institutional policies regarding OERs, inadequate peer-review of OERs, and, in most cases, the absence of monitoring and evaluation practices for OERs. The results and insights from this study can be used to improve all aspects of OERs’ implementation and thus accelerate their adoption, both with regard to LIS schools/departments and other fields. Further research into the topic through interviews and focus groups should provide a deeper understanding of opportunities, challenges and practices surrounding the adoption of OERs in the field of LIS education.
{"title":"Open Educational Resources (OERs) at European Higher Education Institutions in the Field of Library and Information Science during COVID-19 Pandemic","authors":"Milijana Mićunović, Sabina Rako, Kristina Feldvari","doi":"10.3390/publications11030038","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3390/publications11030038","url":null,"abstract":"The purpose of this study is to map the practices regarding open educational resources’ (OERs) development and implementation at European higher education institutions (HEIs) in the field of library and information science (LIS) during the COVID-19 pandemic and to identify the challenges and obstacles to their full and optimal utilization, both during crisis situations and beyond. A systematic literature review and questionnaire-based survey yielded results from 56 European LIS schools/departments (n = 56). Statistical analysis was performed using the R programming language, and descriptive statistics were used to quantify the data sets. The results have shown that the COVID-19 pandemic served as an impetus for the adoption of OERs, particularly in the context of digital education (DE) and remote learning. However, there is still a lack of awareness of the many benefits and opportunities they provide to higher education, as evidenced by the fact than less than half LIS schools/departments used OERs. Certain issues were identified, such as the lack of institutional policies regarding OERs, inadequate peer-review of OERs, and, in most cases, the absence of monitoring and evaluation practices for OERs. The results and insights from this study can be used to improve all aspects of OERs’ implementation and thus accelerate their adoption, both with regard to LIS schools/departments and other fields. Further research into the topic through interviews and focus groups should provide a deeper understanding of opportunities, challenges and practices surrounding the adoption of OERs in the field of LIS education.","PeriodicalId":37551,"journal":{"name":"Publications","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2023-07-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48129614","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-11DOI: 10.3390/publications11030037
Oleksandr Kuchanskyi, Y. Andrashko, A. Biloshchytskyi, S. Omirbayev, A. Mukhatayev, S. Biloshchytska, A. Faizullin
The article’s purpose is an analysis of the citation impact of scientific publications by authors of different gender compositions. The page method was chosen to calculate the citation impact of scientific publications, and the obtained results allowed to estimate the impact of the scientific publications based on the number of citations. The normalized citation impact is calculated according to nine subsets of scientific publications that correspond to patterns of different gender compositions of authors. Also, these estimates were calculated for each country with which the authors of the publications are affiliated. The Citation database, Network Dataset (Ver. 13), was chosen for the scientometric analysis. The dataset includes more than 5 million scientific publications and 48 million citations. Most of the publications in the dataset are from the STEM field. The results indicate that articles with a predominantly male composition are cited more than articles with a mixed or female composition of authors in this direction. Analysis of advantages in dynamics indicates that in the last decade, in developed countries, there has been a decrease in the connection between the citation impact of scientific publications and the gender composition of their authors. However, the obtained results still confirm the presence of gender inequality in science, which may be related to socioeconomic and cultural characteristics, natural homophily, and other factors that contribute to the appearance of gender gaps. An essential consequence of overcoming these gaps, including in science, is ensuring the rights of people in all their diversity.
{"title":"Gender-Related Differences in the Citation Impact of Scientific Publications and Improving the Authors’ Productivity","authors":"Oleksandr Kuchanskyi, Y. Andrashko, A. Biloshchytskyi, S. Omirbayev, A. Mukhatayev, S. Biloshchytska, A. Faizullin","doi":"10.3390/publications11030037","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3390/publications11030037","url":null,"abstract":"The article’s purpose is an analysis of the citation impact of scientific publications by authors of different gender compositions. The page method was chosen to calculate the citation impact of scientific publications, and the obtained results allowed to estimate the impact of the scientific publications based on the number of citations. The normalized citation impact is calculated according to nine subsets of scientific publications that correspond to patterns of different gender compositions of authors. Also, these estimates were calculated for each country with which the authors of the publications are affiliated. The Citation database, Network Dataset (Ver. 13), was chosen for the scientometric analysis. The dataset includes more than 5 million scientific publications and 48 million citations. Most of the publications in the dataset are from the STEM field. The results indicate that articles with a predominantly male composition are cited more than articles with a mixed or female composition of authors in this direction. Analysis of advantages in dynamics indicates that in the last decade, in developed countries, there has been a decrease in the connection between the citation impact of scientific publications and the gender composition of their authors. However, the obtained results still confirm the presence of gender inequality in science, which may be related to socioeconomic and cultural characteristics, natural homophily, and other factors that contribute to the appearance of gender gaps. An essential consequence of overcoming these gaps, including in science, is ensuring the rights of people in all their diversity.","PeriodicalId":37551,"journal":{"name":"Publications","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2023-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46109835","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-07-06DOI: 10.3390/publications11030036
R. Raju, Jill Claassen, Kaela De Lillie
The current publishing landscape perpetuates biases that continue to exclude those who have been previously marginalized, specifically from the Global South including Africa. Incorporating philanthropy as the only driving principle to openly share knowledge is insufficient to truly empower and be inclusive to those who have been relegated to the periphery of the scholarly communication ecosystem. Social justice principles have to underpin the foundation of this ecosystem, in tandem with philanthropy, to shed light on these exclusionary, systemic publishing practices and processes. This will entail first breaking down these unfair practices and then rebuilding the ecosystem by advancing equity, diversity and inclusion. This paper highlights the current gaps in the openness movement and demonstrates, through an exemplar of a publishing platform, how the publishing landscape can be transformed. The publishing platform employs a multi-tenant model that enables multiple institutions to publish and disseminate knowledge on one shared instance of the software. The continental platform and the tenant model that it utilizes address the technological and infrastructural barriers often experienced in the Global South and Africa, while simultaneously serving as a collective hub for hosting African scholarship. This case study methodology is used to investigate how the alternate publishing route recaptures the philanthropic pillars of the openness movement. The findings provide evidence for a return to the founding principles of the openness movement and, as importantly, demonstrates the impact of open access on student success.
{"title":"Social Justice: The Golden Thread in the Openness Movement","authors":"R. Raju, Jill Claassen, Kaela De Lillie","doi":"10.3390/publications11030036","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3390/publications11030036","url":null,"abstract":"The current publishing landscape perpetuates biases that continue to exclude those who have been previously marginalized, specifically from the Global South including Africa. Incorporating philanthropy as the only driving principle to openly share knowledge is insufficient to truly empower and be inclusive to those who have been relegated to the periphery of the scholarly communication ecosystem. Social justice principles have to underpin the foundation of this ecosystem, in tandem with philanthropy, to shed light on these exclusionary, systemic publishing practices and processes. This will entail first breaking down these unfair practices and then rebuilding the ecosystem by advancing equity, diversity and inclusion. This paper highlights the current gaps in the openness movement and demonstrates, through an exemplar of a publishing platform, how the publishing landscape can be transformed. The publishing platform employs a multi-tenant model that enables multiple institutions to publish and disseminate knowledge on one shared instance of the software. The continental platform and the tenant model that it utilizes address the technological and infrastructural barriers often experienced in the Global South and Africa, while simultaneously serving as a collective hub for hosting African scholarship. This case study methodology is used to investigate how the alternate publishing route recaptures the philanthropic pillars of the openness movement. The findings provide evidence for a return to the founding principles of the openness movement and, as importantly, demonstrates the impact of open access on student success.","PeriodicalId":37551,"journal":{"name":"Publications","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2023-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45356202","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-06-25DOI: 10.3390/publications11030035
D. Spennemann, Rudolf J. Spennemann
Born-digital content is rapidly becoming the norm for literary works, professional reports, academic journal articles, and formal corporate correspondence. From the perspective of digital forensics, there is a need to understand the origin of a document and its entire creation process, from outlining and drafting to editing the final version of the text. Revision save identifier (RSID) numbers embedded in MS Word documents have been used to examine the nature and extent of individual edits within a document. These RSIDs remain logged in the metadata even if the text with which they were associated has been removed. As copies of such files retain the original’s RSIDs, this metadata can be used to determine the order in which documents were cloned from each other. As a proof-of-concept, this paper examined over 400 template files generated by a single publisher for manuscript submissions to its journals. The study can show that it is possible to establish genealogies and thus relative chronologies of born digital content by first identifying those documents that share a document (root) RSID and then seriating those RSIDs that are shared between two or more documents.
{"title":"Establishing Genealogies of Born Digital Content: The Suitability of Revision Identifier (RSID) Numbers in MS Word for Forensic Enquiry","authors":"D. Spennemann, Rudolf J. Spennemann","doi":"10.3390/publications11030035","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3390/publications11030035","url":null,"abstract":"Born-digital content is rapidly becoming the norm for literary works, professional reports, academic journal articles, and formal corporate correspondence. From the perspective of digital forensics, there is a need to understand the origin of a document and its entire creation process, from outlining and drafting to editing the final version of the text. Revision save identifier (RSID) numbers embedded in MS Word documents have been used to examine the nature and extent of individual edits within a document. These RSIDs remain logged in the metadata even if the text with which they were associated has been removed. As copies of such files retain the original’s RSIDs, this metadata can be used to determine the order in which documents were cloned from each other. As a proof-of-concept, this paper examined over 400 template files generated by a single publisher for manuscript submissions to its journals. The study can show that it is possible to establish genealogies and thus relative chronologies of born digital content by first identifying those documents that share a document (root) RSID and then seriating those RSIDs that are shared between two or more documents.","PeriodicalId":37551,"journal":{"name":"Publications","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.2,"publicationDate":"2023-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44926075","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-02-09DOI: 10.3390/publications11010007
C. Sean Burns
Science depends on a communication system, and today, that is largely provided by digital technologies such as the internet and web. Despite the fact that digital technologies provide the infrastructure for this communication system, peer-reviewed journals continue to mimic workflows and processes from the print era. This paper focuses on one artifact from the print era, the journal issue, and describes how this artifact has been detrimental to the communication of science, and therefore, to science itself. To replace the journal issue, this paper argues that scholarly publishing and journals could more fully embrace digital technologies by creating digital libraries to present and organize scholarly output.
{"title":"The Issues with Journal Issues: Let Journals Be Digital Libraries","authors":"C. Sean Burns","doi":"10.3390/publications11010007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3390/publications11010007","url":null,"abstract":"Science depends on a communication system, and today, that is largely provided by digital technologies such as the internet and web. Despite the fact that digital technologies provide the infrastructure for this communication system, peer-reviewed journals continue to mimic workflows and processes from the print era. This paper focuses on one artifact from the print era, the journal issue, and describes how this artifact has been detrimental to the communication of science, and therefore, to science itself. To replace the journal issue, this paper argues that scholarly publishing and journals could more fully embrace digital technologies by creating digital libraries to present and organize scholarly output.","PeriodicalId":37551,"journal":{"name":"Publications","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"136156092","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：