Abstract:The purpose of this article is twofold: 1) to analyse common career difficulties experienced by academic journal editors in China and explain their causes; and 2) to identify how stakeholders in Chinese scholarly publishing can support editors. Thirty-two academic journal editors were surveyed, and fourteen of those were subsequently interviewed. We found that a deficit of high-quality manuscripts, a large number of laborious tasks at work, limited opportunities for professional advancement, and low job satisfaction were the main career difficulties, of which the two most common were a deficit of high-quality manuscripts and low job satisfaction. The key causes of these difficulties were an unbalanced academic evaluation system that rewarded indexed over non-indexed journals and the marginal status of journal offices at their affiliated institutions. The forms of support most desired by respondents were recognition for their work, salary increases, greater opportunities for continued learning, easier job title promotion, and more scholarly communication with their peers.
{"title":"Career Difficulties That Chinese Academic Journal Editors Face and Their Causes","authors":"Zhiwu Xu, Dandan Yang, Bing Chen","doi":"10.3138/JSP.52.4.02","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3138/JSP.52.4.02","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:The purpose of this article is twofold: 1) to analyse common career difficulties experienced by academic journal editors in China and explain their causes; and 2) to identify how stakeholders in Chinese scholarly publishing can support editors. Thirty-two academic journal editors were surveyed, and fourteen of those were subsequently interviewed. We found that a deficit of high-quality manuscripts, a large number of laborious tasks at work, limited opportunities for professional advancement, and low job satisfaction were the main career difficulties, of which the two most common were a deficit of high-quality manuscripts and low job satisfaction. The key causes of these difficulties were an unbalanced academic evaluation system that rewarded indexed over non-indexed journals and the marginal status of journal offices at their affiliated institutions. The forms of support most desired by respondents were recognition for their work, salary increases, greater opportunities for continued learning, easier job title promotion, and more scholarly communication with their peers.","PeriodicalId":44613,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Scholarly Publishing","volume":"12 8 1","pages":"212 - 232"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2021-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82632996","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:As an academic writing coach and developmental editor, I have worked with scores of humanists and social scientists on successfully revising their dissertations into books. A first step in revision is understanding the distinctiveness of the academic monograph as a genre, particularly its requirements in terms of scope, voice, and through-line. In this article, I describe the common stages of reconceptualizing the project and revising the text, as well as the strategies I have found effective in helping authors move through the stages as adeptly and efficiently as possible. Drafting a book proposal is a challenging but often key step. Later stages include incorporating new research, revising and expanding some chapters and possibly cutting one or more, and soliciting feedback on the new articulations of ideas from colleagues. At every stage of this iterative process, authors need to have patience and compassion for themselves.
{"title":"The Stages of Revising a Dissertation into a Book","authors":"A. B. Brown","doi":"10.3138/JSP.52.3.01","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3138/JSP.52.3.01","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:As an academic writing coach and developmental editor, I have worked with scores of humanists and social scientists on successfully revising their dissertations into books. A first step in revision is understanding the distinctiveness of the academic monograph as a genre, particularly its requirements in terms of scope, voice, and through-line. In this article, I describe the common stages of reconceptualizing the project and revising the text, as well as the strategies I have found effective in helping authors move through the stages as adeptly and efficiently as possible. Drafting a book proposal is a challenging but often key step. Later stages include incorporating new research, revising and expanding some chapters and possibly cutting one or more, and soliciting feedback on the new articulations of ideas from colleagues. At every stage of this iterative process, authors need to have patience and compassion for themselves.","PeriodicalId":44613,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Scholarly Publishing","volume":"36 1","pages":"127 - 140"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2021-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81997517","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":"Reassembling Scholarly Communications: Histories, Infrastructures, and Global Politics of Open Access by Martin Paul Eve and Jonathan Gray","authors":"M. Wilson","doi":"10.3138/JSP.52.3.05","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3138/JSP.52.3.05","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44613,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Scholarly Publishing","volume":"15 1","pages":"190-192"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85079775","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:Drawing from personal experience revising my dissertation into a book and helping dozens of authors do the same, I put language to a critical yet challenging phase in this process: working on one's book. After describing what working on one's book entails, elucidating how it fundamentally differs in posture from writing a book proposal, and explaining why authors might abandon this work prematurely in favour of more familiar modes of working, I offer actionable prompts and exercises that authors can use to make working on their book more concrete.
{"title":"Against Using the Book Proposal to Rethink Your Book: Why and How to Work on Your Book Instead","authors":"Kate Knox","doi":"10.3138/JSP.52.3.02","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3138/JSP.52.3.02","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Drawing from personal experience revising my dissertation into a book and helping dozens of authors do the same, I put language to a critical yet challenging phase in this process: working on one's book. After describing what working on one's book entails, elucidating how it fundamentally differs in posture from writing a book proposal, and explaining why authors might abandon this work prematurely in favour of more familiar modes of working, I offer actionable prompts and exercises that authors can use to make working on their book more concrete.","PeriodicalId":44613,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Scholarly Publishing","volume":"77 1","pages":"141 - 155"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76083921","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:This is part two of a study drawing on semi-structured interviews with twenty-one academics working in the humanities and social sciences at Australian universities. Part two explores why academics write books, who their target audience is, how they learned about publishing, and how they share their knowledge with others. I use self-determination theory to analyze their motives for publishing books. The interviews revealed that academics publish books primarily to share knowledge with other academics, to build their reputation, and to advance their career. These intrinsic motives (enjoyment and satisfaction) and extrinsic motives (success and reputation) are intertwined, and their relative importance evolves over an academic's career. In the past, authors learned about book publishing primarily from experience, but today there are more formal and informal opportunities to acquire publishing knowledge.
{"title":"Book Publishing in the Humanities and Social Sciences in Australia, Part Two: Author Motivation, Audience, and Publishing Knowledge","authors":"Agata Mrva-Montoya","doi":"10.3138/JSP.52.3.04","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3138/JSP.52.3.04","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:This is part two of a study drawing on semi-structured interviews with twenty-one academics working in the humanities and social sciences at Australian universities. Part two explores why academics write books, who their target audience is, how they learned about publishing, and how they share their knowledge with others. I use self-determination theory to analyze their motives for publishing books. The interviews revealed that academics publish books primarily to share knowledge with other academics, to build their reputation, and to advance their career. These intrinsic motives (enjoyment and satisfaction) and extrinsic motives (success and reputation) are intertwined, and their relative importance evolves over an academic's career. In the past, authors learned about book publishing primarily from experience, but today there are more formal and informal opportunities to acquire publishing knowledge.","PeriodicalId":44613,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Scholarly Publishing","volume":"5 1","pages":"173 - 189"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"78673421","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:Author guidelines for submitting manuscripts to journals play an essential role in communicating academic ethics and standards to prospective authors and in ensuring the originality of the articles that journals publish. The purpose of this study was to conduct a cross-journal analysis of author guidelines to see how they address plagiarism. One hundred author guidelines were selected randomly and were analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively. The findings revealed that the guidelines varied in the extent to which they covered plagiarism. Among the elements of plagiarism addressed, the four most common were duplicate publication, copyright, the definition of plagiarism of others' work, and proper citation. The allowance for reproduction of language ranged along a spectrum from very strict (no verbatim copying of another's words) to less strict (no verbatim copying of significant portions of others' work). Although self-plagiarism is the most common form of plagiarism, it was addressed relatively less often than plagiarism of others' work.
{"title":"Do Journals' Author Guidelines Tell Us What We Need to Know about Plagiarism?","authors":"Yu-Chih Sun","doi":"10.3138/JSP.52.3.03","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3138/JSP.52.3.03","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:Author guidelines for submitting manuscripts to journals play an essential role in communicating academic ethics and standards to prospective authors and in ensuring the originality of the articles that journals publish. The purpose of this study was to conduct a cross-journal analysis of author guidelines to see how they address plagiarism. One hundred author guidelines were selected randomly and were analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively. The findings revealed that the guidelines varied in the extent to which they covered plagiarism. Among the elements of plagiarism addressed, the four most common were duplicate publication, copyright, the definition of plagiarism of others' work, and proper citation. The allowance for reproduction of language ranged along a spectrum from very strict (no verbatim copying of another's words) to less strict (no verbatim copying of significant portions of others' work). Although self-plagiarism is the most common form of plagiarism, it was addressed relatively less often than plagiarism of others' work.","PeriodicalId":44613,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Scholarly Publishing","volume":"1 1","pages":"156 - 172"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76493085","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":"Contemporary Publishing and the Culture of Books by Alison Baverstock, Richard Bradford, and Madelena Gonzalez","authors":"Steven E. Gump","doi":"10.3138/JSP.52.3.06","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3138/JSP.52.3.06","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44613,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Scholarly Publishing","volume":"6 1","pages":"192-198"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2021-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84168931","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 aim of this study was to analyze the features of retracted articles by authors affiliated with hospitals in mainland China. We searched the PubMed, Web of Science, and Retraction Watch databases for retractions and identified the following characteristics of each retracted article: publisher, open access status, impact factor of the journal that retracted the article, any PubPeer comments recorded before the retraction, status of the hospital where the authors worked, and any response to the retraction from the authors. We found 521 retractions, primarily by authors at grade A, third-level hospitals located in a limited number of regions of mainland China, and found that the journals that had published and later retracted the articles tended to have a medium to high impact factor. The main reasons for retraction were data manipulation, fabrication, or fraud; errors made by the authors; or plagiarism. Few of the retracted publications had PubPeer comments before their retraction. This is the first report to focus on retracted research coming out of hospitals in mainland China. The large number of retractions for Chinese hospitals is worrying. The results suggest that some retractions were related to third parties that provided editorial and other services.
摘要:本研究旨在分析中国大陆医院作者撤稿的特点。我们检索了PubMed、Web of Science和Retraction Watch数据库中有关撤稿的信息，并确定了每篇撤稿文章的以下特征:出版商、开放获取状态、撤稿期刊的影响因子、撤稿前记录的PubPeer评论、作者所在医院的状况以及作者对撤稿的任何回应。我们发现521篇撤稿，作者主要来自中国大陆有限地区的三级甲等医院，并且发现已经发表并随后撤稿的期刊往往具有中高影响因子。撤稿的主要原因是数据篡改、捏造或欺诈;作者的错误;或剽窃。被撤稿的出版物中，很少有在撤稿前有PubPeer的评论。这是第一份关注中国大陆医院撤回研究的报告。中国医院的大量撤稿令人担忧。结果表明，一些撤稿与提供编辑和其他服务的第三方有关。
{"title":"An Analysis of Recently Retracted Articles by Authors Affiliated with Hospitals in Mainland China","authors":"Tianye Zhao, T. Dai, Zhijun Lun, Yanli Gao","doi":"10.3138/JSP.52.2.03","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3138/JSP.52.2.03","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:The aim of this study was to analyze the features of retracted articles by authors affiliated with hospitals in mainland China. We searched the PubMed, Web of Science, and Retraction Watch databases for retractions and identified the following characteristics of each retracted article: publisher, open access status, impact factor of the journal that retracted the article, any PubPeer comments recorded before the retraction, status of the hospital where the authors worked, and any response to the retraction from the authors. We found 521 retractions, primarily by authors at grade A, third-level hospitals located in a limited number of regions of mainland China, and found that the journals that had published and later retracted the articles tended to have a medium to high impact factor. The main reasons for retraction were data manipulation, fabrication, or fraud; errors made by the authors; or plagiarism. Few of the retracted publications had PubPeer comments before their retraction. This is the first report to focus on retracted research coming out of hospitals in mainland China. The large number of retractions for Chinese hospitals is worrying. The results suggest that some retractions were related to third parties that provided editorial and other services.","PeriodicalId":44613,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Scholarly Publishing","volume":"20 1","pages":"107 - 122"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79399535","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:This is part one of a two-part study on the publishing behaviours of academics in the humanities and social sciences (HSS) at Australian universities. Our data consist of semi-structured interviews with twenty-one participants. Part one explores how current institutional pressures and the research funding environment are shaping academics' book publishing practices. In particular, we attend to the growing concerns of academics relating to the measurement and ranking of universities, which are driving performance expectations for publishing, and we examine how this trend is influenced by changes in governmental policy and the requirements of funding bodies. We found that Australian HSS academics face increasing pressure to publish journal articles rather than books, to publish books with prestigious international publishers, and to secure external funding for their research. These pressures could restrict their scholarly autonomy or even influence their research agenda. We contend that these developments have concerning implications for HSS in Australia.
{"title":"Book Publishing in the Humanities and Social Sciences in Australia, Part One: Understanding Institutional Pressures and the Funding Context","authors":"Agata Mrva-Montoya, E. Luca","doi":"10.3138/JSP.52.2.01","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3138/JSP.52.2.01","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:This is part one of a two-part study on the publishing behaviours of academics in the humanities and social sciences (HSS) at Australian universities. Our data consist of semi-structured interviews with twenty-one participants. Part one explores how current institutional pressures and the research funding environment are shaping academics' book publishing practices. In particular, we attend to the growing concerns of academics relating to the measurement and ranking of universities, which are driving performance expectations for publishing, and we examine how this trend is influenced by changes in governmental policy and the requirements of funding bodies. We found that Australian HSS academics face increasing pressure to publish journal articles rather than books, to publish books with prestigious international publishers, and to secure external funding for their research. These pressures could restrict their scholarly autonomy or even influence their research agenda. We contend that these developments have concerning implications for HSS in Australia.","PeriodicalId":44613,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Scholarly Publishing","volume":"30 1","pages":"67 - 87"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83577101","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":"Scholarship, Money, and Prose: Behind the Scenes at an Academic Journal by Michael Chibnik (review)","authors":"R. Brown","doi":"10.3138/JSP.52.2.04","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.3138/JSP.52.2.04","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44613,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Scholarly Publishing","volume":"10 1","pages":"123 - 126"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74146509","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：