Abstract:Predatory journals, with low standards of publication, means flawed or fraudulent research can compromise future research. Often called ‘predatory’ or ‘deceptive’ publishers, both these terms have an implication that the editors and publishers behind them have a motivation to deceive or con authors. However, the motivations remain an assumption because little is known about the individuals behind these journals. This research intended to use qualitative, in-depth interviews to find out more about the individuals behind predatory journals. By engaging with them directly, we hoped to gain an understanding of how they see themselves in the publishing landscape, what value they add and how they achieve these aims. Emails received by the authors were mined for contact information of suspected predatory journals. Over the course of a year, 2552 emails were sent inviting respondents to an interview, for which there would be a small monetary compensation. Despite sending 2552 emails, only three responses were received, and all three did not schedule an interview when prompted. Two of the three requested that a translator be present. A significant percentage of the emails (36.2 per cent) bounced back, indicating the contact information was not valid. While the information gained was limited, it would appear many are aware of the dubious nature of their journal and do not wish further scrutiny by being contacted. Others may lack the English-language skills necessary to be engaged in basic written communication, let alone the more complex language and grammar of scientific publishing.
{"title":"What Can Be Learned about Predatory Journals from a Failed Study? Possible Motivations behind Predatory Journals","authors":"A. Ross-White, Rosemary Wilson","doi":"10.3138/jsp-2022-0049","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3138/jsp-2022-0049","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Predatory journals, with low standards of publication, means flawed or fraudulent research can compromise future research. Often called ‘predatory’ or ‘deceptive’ publishers, both these terms have an implication that the editors and publishers behind them have a motivation to deceive or con authors. However, the motivations remain an assumption because little is known about the individuals behind these journals. This research intended to use qualitative, in-depth interviews to find out more about the individuals behind predatory journals. By engaging with them directly, we hoped to gain an understanding of how they see themselves in the publishing landscape, what value they add and how they achieve these aims. Emails received by the authors were mined for contact information of suspected predatory journals. Over the course of a year, 2552 emails were sent inviting respondents to an interview, for which there would be a small monetary compensation. Despite sending 2552 emails, only three responses were received, and all three did not schedule an interview when prompted. Two of the three requested that a translator be present. A significant percentage of the emails (36.2 per cent) bounced back, indicating the contact information was not valid. While the information gained was limited, it would appear many are aware of the dubious nature of their journal and do not wish further scrutiny by being contacted. Others may lack the English-language skills necessary to be engaged in basic written communication, let alone the more complex language and grammar of scientific publishing.","PeriodicalId":44613,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Scholarly Publishing","volume":"12 1","pages":"14 - 3"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77576384","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract:Citations in a scientific paper reference other studies and form the information backbone of that paper. If cited literature is valid and non-retracted, an analysis of citations can offer unique perspectives about the supportive or contradictory nature of a statement. Yet, such analyses are still limited by the relative lack of access to open citation data. The creation of open citation databases (OCDs) allows for data analysts, bibliometric specialists, and other academics interested in such topics to independently verify the validity and accuracy of a citation. Since the strength of an individual’s curriculum vitae can be based on, and assessed by, metrics (citation counts, altmetric mentions, journal ranks, etc.), there is interest in appreciating citation networks and their link to research performance. Open citations would thus not only benefit career, funding, and employment initiatives, but they could also be used to reveal citation rings, abusive author–author or journal–journal citation strategies, or to detect false or erroneous citations. OCDs should be open to the public, and publishers have a moral responsibility of releasing citation data for free use and academic exploration. Some challenges remain, including long-term funding, and data and information security.
{"title":"Open Citations as a Tool for Bibliometric Verification and Transparency and for Correcting Erroneous References","authors":"J. A. Teixeira da Silva, C. Huang, J. Ortega","doi":"10.3138/jsp-2022-0016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3138/jsp-2022-0016","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Citations in a scientific paper reference other studies and form the information backbone of that paper. If cited literature is valid and non-retracted, an analysis of citations can offer unique perspectives about the supportive or contradictory nature of a statement. Yet, such analyses are still limited by the relative lack of access to open citation data. The creation of open citation databases (OCDs) allows for data analysts, bibliometric specialists, and other academics interested in such topics to independently verify the validity and accuracy of a citation. Since the strength of an individual’s curriculum vitae can be based on, and assessed by, metrics (citation counts, altmetric mentions, journal ranks, etc.), there is interest in appreciating citation networks and their link to research performance. Open citations would thus not only benefit career, funding, and employment initiatives, but they could also be used to reveal citation rings, abusive author–author or journal–journal citation strategies, or to detect false or erroneous citations. OCDs should be open to the public, and publishers have a moral responsibility of releasing citation data for free use and academic exploration. Some challenges remain, including long-term funding, and data and information security.","PeriodicalId":44613,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Scholarly Publishing","volume":"66 6","pages":"60 - 79"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72465887","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Devon Whetstone, Laura Ridenour, Heather Moulaison-Sandy
Abstract:Quid pro quo authorship (QPQ) is a type of gift authorship in which authorship credit is exchanged in a mutually beneficial agreement. Such practices are considered to be unethical, but incentives to publish can nonetheless make QPQ appealing. Terminology to describe the QPQ phenomenon can differ across scholarly communities, making a thorough analysis of the attention to QPQ difficult. This article uses content analysis to conduct an in-depth examination of a corpus of scholarly literature on QPQ. This research seeks to ascertain information about the nature of QPQ and how it is perceived relative to other types of unethical authorship practices. Results support three defining characteristics of QPQ: mutual awareness, mutual agreement, and mutual benefit. Content analysis reveals two forms of QPQ: authorship-for-goods and authorship-for-authorship. Findings reinforce the notion that QPQ is a distinct form of gift authorship that is related to coercion authorship and honorary authorship. Implications for the scientific enterprise, academia, and society are presented, since as with other forms of gift authorship, QPQ falsifies the scholarly record. Finally, suggestions for future directions such as education for researchers are presented.
{"title":"Quid Pro Quo Authorship: Characteristics and Implications","authors":"Devon Whetstone, Laura Ridenour, Heather Moulaison-Sandy","doi":"10.3138/jsp-2022-0035","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3138/jsp-2022-0035","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Quid pro quo authorship (QPQ) is a type of gift authorship in which authorship credit is exchanged in a mutually beneficial agreement. Such practices are considered to be unethical, but incentives to publish can nonetheless make QPQ appealing. Terminology to describe the QPQ phenomenon can differ across scholarly communities, making a thorough analysis of the attention to QPQ difficult. This article uses content analysis to conduct an in-depth examination of a corpus of scholarly literature on QPQ. This research seeks to ascertain information about the nature of QPQ and how it is perceived relative to other types of unethical authorship practices. Results support three defining characteristics of QPQ: mutual awareness, mutual agreement, and mutual benefit. Content analysis reveals two forms of QPQ: authorship-for-goods and authorship-for-authorship. Findings reinforce the notion that QPQ is a distinct form of gift authorship that is related to coercion authorship and honorary authorship. Implications for the scientific enterprise, academia, and society are presented, since as with other forms of gift authorship, QPQ falsifies the scholarly record. Finally, suggestions for future directions such as education for researchers are presented.","PeriodicalId":44613,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Scholarly Publishing","volume":"84 1","pages":"15 - 29"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83948972","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract:What role do networks play during the digital transformation of the scholarly publishing system? This article depicts sociospatial practices and its strategic relevance for stakeholders being involved within the Open Access community. The aim is to explore networks of scholar-led publishing initiatives and to facilitate an extended understanding of the scholarly publishing system in transition by thinking it through with sociospatial theory from a Lefebvrian perspective. As a case study, the Radical Open Access Collective (ROAC) with more than 70 members is explored in a mixed methods research design. The focus of the qualitatively-driven research is the Collective’s sociospatial strategies e.g. networking and multiscalar activities. A systematic literature research and interviews with experts in the field of scholar-led publishing provide the main data set, being triangulated with desk-based research on the ROAC. The results show networking processes on three different levels building on a social network analysis. Moreover, this article contributes to a deeper understanding of a network of scholar-led publishers indicating key sociospatial strategies considering dialectics of scalability. Concluding, this study emphasises the importance of sociospatial strategies for non-profit publishing initiatives in order to create a knowledge commons around open and equitable infrastructures.
摘要:网络在学术出版系统数字化转型中扮演着怎样的角色?本文描述了社会空间实践及其与开放获取社区中利益相关者的战略相关性。目的是探索以学者为主导的出版倡议网络，并通过从列非弗尔的角度思考社会空间理论，促进对转型中的学术出版系统的扩展理解。以激进开放获取组织(Radical Open Access Collective, ROAC)为研究对象，采用混合方法进行研究设计。定性驱动研究的重点是集体的社会空间策略，如网络和多标量活动。系统的文献研究和对学者主导出版领域专家的访谈提供了主要数据集，并与基于桌面的ROAC研究进行了三角测量。结果表明，在社会网络分析的基础上，建立了三个不同层次的网络过程。此外，本文有助于更深入地理解以学者为主导的出版商网络，指出考虑可扩展性辩证法的关键社会空间策略。最后，本研究强调了社会空间策略对于非营利出版计划的重要性，以便围绕开放和公平的基础设施创建知识共享。
{"title":"Exploring Networks of Scholar-Led Publishing Initiatives with a Social Network Analysis of the Radical Open Access Collective","authors":"Christoph Schimmel","doi":"10.3138/jsp-2022-0048","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3138/jsp-2022-0048","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:What role do networks play during the digital transformation of the scholarly publishing system? This article depicts sociospatial practices and its strategic relevance for stakeholders being involved within the Open Access community. The aim is to explore networks of scholar-led publishing initiatives and to facilitate an extended understanding of the scholarly publishing system in transition by thinking it through with sociospatial theory from a Lefebvrian perspective. As a case study, the Radical Open Access Collective (ROAC) with more than 70 members is explored in a mixed methods research design. The focus of the qualitatively-driven research is the Collective’s sociospatial strategies e.g. networking and multiscalar activities. A systematic literature research and interviews with experts in the field of scholar-led publishing provide the main data set, being triangulated with desk-based research on the ROAC. The results show networking processes on three different levels building on a social network analysis. Moreover, this article contributes to a deeper understanding of a network of scholar-led publishers indicating key sociospatial strategies considering dialectics of scalability. Concluding, this study emphasises the importance of sociospatial strategies for non-profit publishing initiatives in order to create a knowledge commons around open and equitable infrastructures.","PeriodicalId":44613,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Scholarly Publishing","volume":"118 1","pages":"121 - 151"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77402198","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"On Revision: The Only Writing That Counts by William Germano; Revise: The Scholar-Writer’s Essential Guide to Tweaking, Editing, and Perfecting Your Manuscript by Pamela Haag","authors":"Steven E. Gump","doi":"10.3138/jsp-2022-0011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3138/jsp-2022-0011","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44613,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Scholarly Publishing","volume":"90 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80457087","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Demystifying Scholarly Metrics: A Practical Guide by Marc W. Vinyard and Jaimie Beth Colvin","authors":"Steven E. Gump","doi":"10.3138/jsp-2022-0053","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3138/jsp-2022-0053","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44613,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Scholarly Publishing","volume":"86 3 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83543272","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract:The main purpose of this study is to identify the trends in predatory publishing and to compile a core reading list of documents on the topic of ‘predatory journals.’ The study examined 541 documents on the topic of ‘predatory journals’ indexed in the Web of Science database published between 2012 and 2021. The data set was analyzed quantitatively (bibliometric study) and qualitatively (document classification). For bibliometric analysis, parameters like year, disciplines, number of citations, countries, document types, and journals were used. The documents were classified into four groups, namely, General (326), Empirical Studies (89), Technical Specifics (71), and Cautionary Texts (55). The results of the analysis and co-relation between quantitative and qualitative parameters reveal that publications in medical sciences (221) form the majority in almost all groups. There is a steady growth in publications in all groups during 2018 and 2019. Research papers and editorial materials are greater in number. The largest number of documents are from the United States (163 documents). A large number of papers have been published in the journals Scientometrics (22) and Learned Publishing (28). The most highly cited (17) papers have been published in Nature. The core reading list of forty documents on predatory journals is the outcome of the study after examining the co-relationship between the two methods. The core reading list may assist new researchers in comprehending the various aspects of predatory journals. The article concludes with suggestions for further research.
摘要:本研究的主要目的是识别掠夺性出版的趋势，并编制掠夺性期刊主题的核心阅读清单。这项研究调查了2012年至2021年间发表的541份以“掠夺性期刊”为主题的论文，这些论文被编入了Web of Science数据库。对数据集进行定量分析(文献计量学研究)和定性分析(文献分类)。对于文献计量分析，使用了年份、学科、引用次数、国家、文献类型和期刊等参数。这些文件被分为四组，即一般(326)，实证研究(89)，技术细节(71)和警示性文本(55)。定量和定性参数之间的分析和相互关系的结果显示，医学领域的出版物(221份)在几乎所有群体中占多数。2018年和2019年，所有群体的出版物数量都在稳步增长。研究论文和编辑材料的数量更多。来自美国的文件数量最多(163份)。在《科学计量学》(22)和《学术出版》(28)期刊上发表了大量论文。被引用最多的(17篇)论文发表在《自然》杂志上。在考察了两种方法之间的相互关系后，得出了掠夺性期刊40篇文献的核心阅读清单。核心阅读书目可以帮助新研究者理解掠夺性期刊的各个方面。文章最后提出了进一步研究的建议。
{"title":"Predatory Journals: Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis of Literature Published Between 2012 and 2021","authors":"S. Nagarkar, Sayali Khole","doi":"10.3138/jsp-2022-0005","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3138/jsp-2022-0005","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:The main purpose of this study is to identify the trends in predatory publishing and to compile a core reading list of documents on the topic of ‘predatory journals.’ The study examined 541 documents on the topic of ‘predatory journals’ indexed in the Web of Science database published between 2012 and 2021. The data set was analyzed quantitatively (bibliometric study) and qualitatively (document classification). For bibliometric analysis, parameters like year, disciplines, number of citations, countries, document types, and journals were used. The documents were classified into four groups, namely, General (326), Empirical Studies (89), Technical Specifics (71), and Cautionary Texts (55). The results of the analysis and co-relation between quantitative and qualitative parameters reveal that publications in medical sciences (221) form the majority in almost all groups. There is a steady growth in publications in all groups during 2018 and 2019. Research papers and editorial materials are greater in number. The largest number of documents are from the United States (163 documents). A large number of papers have been published in the journals Scientometrics (22) and Learned Publishing (28). The most highly cited (17) papers have been published in Nature. The core reading list of forty documents on predatory journals is the outcome of the study after examining the co-relationship between the two methods. The core reading list may assist new researchers in comprehending the various aspects of predatory journals. The article concludes with suggestions for further research.","PeriodicalId":44613,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Scholarly Publishing","volume":"23 1","pages":"102 - 80"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76410037","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Kim Wilkins and Lisa Bennett. Writing Bestsellers: Love, Money, and Creative Practice","authors":"Ting Zhang, Ju-Huey Wen","doi":"10.3138/jsp-2022-0051","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3138/jsp-2022-0051","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44613,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Scholarly Publishing","volume":"15 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80290252","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract:A growing number of PhD scholars graduated from Western universities are returning to China, and this raises a range of research topics for scholars. Previous studies of these returnee scholars have mainly focused on the challenges of publishing in English but have ignored their difficulties in choosing between international and/or local academic communities. Academic publishing is regarded as a social practice in this study. Based on the data collected from 102 Chinese returnee scholars in the humanities and social sciences and drawing on the concept of discourse community, it is found that these volunteers’ publication practices are shaped by the culturally specific academic norms established in particular academic communities. This study highlights the differences between international and local discourse communities and identifies factors influencing Chinese returnee scholars’ publication practices. The ways in which they seek to exercise agency and strategies for publishing in the international and local academic communities are considered. The complexity of these returnee scholars’ publication practices is revealed through their lived experiences, adding depth and detail to current research into returnee scholars across the globe.
{"title":"International Engagement or Local Commitment? Investigating the Publication Practices of Chinese Returnee Scholars in the Humanities and Social Sciences","authors":"Weishan Miao, Bingbing Ai, Xinyu Liao","doi":"10.3138/jsp-2022-0014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3138/jsp-2022-0014","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:A growing number of PhD scholars graduated from Western universities are returning to China, and this raises a range of research topics for scholars. Previous studies of these returnee scholars have mainly focused on the challenges of publishing in English but have ignored their difficulties in choosing between international and/or local academic communities. Academic publishing is regarded as a social practice in this study. Based on the data collected from 102 Chinese returnee scholars in the humanities and social sciences and drawing on the concept of discourse community, it is found that these volunteers’ publication practices are shaped by the culturally specific academic norms established in particular academic communities. This study highlights the differences between international and local discourse communities and identifies factors influencing Chinese returnee scholars’ publication practices. The ways in which they seek to exercise agency and strategies for publishing in the international and local academic communities are considered. The complexity of these returnee scholars’ publication practices is revealed through their lived experiences, adding depth and detail to current research into returnee scholars across the globe.","PeriodicalId":44613,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Scholarly Publishing","volume":"19 1","pages":"249 - 270"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87172059","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Georgina Tuari Stewart, Nesta Devine, and Leon Benade, eds. Writing for Publication: Liminal Reflections for Academics.","authors":"Steven E. Gump","doi":"10.3138/jsp-2022-0054","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3138/jsp-2022-0054","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44613,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Scholarly Publishing","volume":"90 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82264695","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","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：