Learned Publishing最新文献

The scholarly publishing system is adapting to many changes, including open access and open data mandates, artificial intelligence, and other new technologies. Members of the research and publishing communities are working to establish a more equitable, fair, and rigorous system that serves researchers' evolving needs. Early career researchers (ECRs) are drivers of change, and publishers may wonder why and how they should involve ECRs in shaping the future of scholarly publishing. We held a virtual unconference to explore this issue with publishers and ECRs who were working to improve publishing. Some participants sought to improve peer reviewer or editor performance, whereas others sought to improve the publishing system itself through iterative or transformative change. Strategies for collaborating with ECRs to shape the future of scholarly publishing included peer review programmes, editorial programmes, ECR-led journals, ECR boards and committee representatives, and other ECR-initiated activities. ECRs particularly wanted to see three things improved: (1) Sharing research outputs other than publications, (2) addressing technological limitations to create systems that meet the research community's needs and facilitate knowledge advancement, and (3) fostering diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility. We offer tips for publishers on how to collaborate with ECRs to enhance scholarly publishing, appeal to and learn from younger researchers, and better meet researchers' needs.

This study investigates how academic social networking site (ASNS) activity influences scholarly citations and, in turn, impacts university rankings. Data were gathered through an online survey targeting university faculty in Bangladesh via email and Facebook groups, such as the Public University Teachers Forum and University Teachers' Association of Bangladesh (UTAB). SmartPLS-4 software, structural equation modelling (SEM), was utilised to test hypotheses after confirming the validity and reliability of the survey items. The study discovered that most faculty members used ResearchGate (N = 363) and Google Scholar (N = 360), often checking citations per publication. The scholarly impact is measured through ASNS activities and citations, which play a crucial role in university rankings. Moreover, the reliability was verified with composite reliability and Cronbach's alpha surpassing 0.700, and validity was evaluated through discriminant and convergent validity. The SEM analysis indicated that ASNS activity positively impacts academic visibility, knowledge dissemination, scholarly partnership opportunities and career development (p = 0.000). The researcher developed three hypotheses to investigate the mediating function of ASNS engagement in the links among academic visibility, knowledge dissemination, collaborative opportunities, professional networking, academic resource accessibility and career development. However, the findings demonstrated that ASNS engagement only facilitated the connection between research production and academic visibility. By improving faculty profiles, encouraging collaborations and expanding the publication of research, universities can use ASNS techniques to raise their global rankings. Considering elements like institutional rules, research funding and collaborative networks, future studies should examine the specific ways in which ASNS activities affect university rankings globally.

Research datasets—capturing natural, societal, or artificial phenomena—are critical in generating new scientific insights, validating research models, and supporting data-intensive discovery. Data papers that describe and contextualise these datasets aim to ensure their findability, accessibility, interoperability, and reusability (FAIR) while providing academic credit to data creators. However, the peer review of data papers and associated datasets presents considerable challenges, requiring reviewers to assess both the syntactic and semantic integrity of the data, metadata quality, and domain-specific scientific relevance. Furthermore, the coordination between journal editors, reviewers, and curators demands substantial effort, often leading to publication delays in the conventional review and then publishing framework. This study proposes a novel Publish-Review-Curate (PRC) model tailored to the synchronised publication and review of data papers and their underlying datasets. Building on preprint and open science practices, the model defines a collaborative, multi-stakeholder workflow involving authors, peer reviewers, data experts, and journal editors. The PRC model integrates open feedback, transparent peer review, and structured curation to improve research data's quality, discoverability, and impact. By articulating conceptual and operational workflows, this study contributes a practical framework for modernising data publishing infrastructures and supporting the co-evaluation of narrative and data artefacts.

Scholarly communication of scientific and technological research has had a complex global journey, specifically in India. Post 1947, with the rise of universities, the development of the research ecosystem, and science and technology research in India has progressed to a space that makes it today the no. 4 country in terms of production in research publications (The Times of India 2023) just below the most developed countries. However, the scholarly publication infrastructure has not kept pace with publishing output from universities across the country; while the complex colonial and post-colonial reasons are beyond the scope of this study, the study will focus on the unique challenges of the scholarly publishing landscape in India.

In recent decades, academic publishing has shifted at high speed from conventional print media to electronic forms, and scholarly publishing is now becoming almost entirely in digital formats with various models of subscriptions. APC and digital access have also undergone many changes. In developing nations, such as India, escalating subscription fees have rendered it progressively challenging for institutions of learning to receive fundamental scholarship materials. Only a few major institutions can afford such subscriptions, while other higher education institutions suffer significantly (Kadam 2025).

Given this background, India has launched the ‘One Nation One Subscription’ (ONOS) initiative. This is an ambitious policy whose objective is to make academic knowledge accessible without barriers for every Indian citizen using a centralized national approach through public institutions (Aspesi and Brand 2020; Suber 2012).

Conventional subscription-based models can enable paywalls, narrowing access to knowledge, while open-access models transform discipline by eliminating worldwide barriers to knowledge and making scientific information available for all. A study by Koley and Lala (Koley and Lala 2024) identifies subscription-based journals still possess salient relevance, highlighting requirements for a balance shift toward open-access models. International cooperation, such as Ibero-America, can facilitate better mechanisms for dealing with predatory publishing and enhancing quality scholarship (Wiley Newsroom 2025). Such partnerships can promote an ideal of a diamond open-access approach with equitable quality scholarship. Therefore, although India's ONOS policy is a key short-term objective, constant investigation and adjustment become fundamental for meeting future challenges related to scholarly communication and accessibility in a sustainable manner.

With the ONOS program launched on 1st January 2025 (Kamerlin et al. 2021; The Times of India 2023), India is embarking on a transformative journey to democratize access to knowledge for all its citizens. The plan is simple but revolutiona

This paper aims to paint portraits of international authors contributing to journals in China and to analyse the relationship between these authors and journals. An international authorship is crucial to the academic quality and global influence of journals. This study integrates bibliometric analysis with academic portrait methods. It employs the Boston Consulting Group (BCG) growth-share matrix to identify and label critical dimensions of international authors' research. The findings indicate that scholars from the United States, India, Japan, Germany, Australia and other countries are the main international contributors to journals in China. These authors present unique characteristics in terms of quantity, collaboration, influence, loyalty and quality. The characteristics of scholars from these countries/regions in terms of dimensions such as research areas, open access, funding sources and Sustainable Development Goals are also analysed.

Building on evidence of the “gatekeeper” effect in a publish or perish culture whereby faculty authors have a more difficult time publishing some studies compared to others, the present study investigates potential biases based on the content of the study. We explore potential relationships with the journal quality (i.e., do higher quality journals publish more liberal or conservative leaning content?), author backgrounds, and institutional characteristics. Using a dataset of over 20 000 article titles and abstracts on 12 controversial topics (e.g., DEI training, gun control), we applied both human and GPT-supported coding to assess bias. Results suggest a slight liberal bias across topics, such that more liberal articles were published, with notable differences based on the topic. Interestingly, journal impact factors and author demographics had only weak relationships with bias ratings. Our findings challenge the assumption that political bias heavily influences academic publishing, suggesting instead that the focus rightly remains on research quality. However, the study highlights the need for further exploration of factors like author self-censorship and editorial gatekeeping that could influence the publication of controversial research.