马来西亚早期职业研究人员关于学术出版的伦理问题

IF 0.5 4区 管理学 Q3 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science Pub Date : 2019-04-16 DOI:10.22452/MJLIS.VOL24NO1.5
A. Abrizah, Nordiana Ahmad Kharman Shah, D. Nicholas
{"title":"马来西亚早期职业研究人员关于学术出版的伦理问题","authors":"A. Abrizah, Nordiana Ahmad Kharman Shah, D. Nicholas","doi":"10.22452/MJLIS.VOL24NO1.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Publication ethics are rarely taught. This paper presents research into the knowledge of scholarly publishing ethics among Malaysian early-career researchers (ECRs). This research comes from year two of a projected three-year-long study of ECRs from seven countries (China, France, Malaysia, Poland, Spain, the UK, and the US), for which semi-structured indepth interviews were conducted with study participants. For the findings reported in this paper, 12 ECRs from science and social science disciplines at five Malaysian researchintensive universities were interviewed during the period from February to June 2017. The interview record was compared with the previous year’s (2016) record to identify changes in interviewees’ responses to a set of questions on their knowledge of ethics in scholarly communication. In addition, contextual data were obtained from the CVs of the ECRs. Our findings indicate that the attitudes and behaviours of Malaysian ECRs in relation to scholarly communication ethics have changed in the passage of one year. We observed noteworthy changes in ECRs’ knowledge of unethical behaviours. As compared with data from 2016, the ECRs are more verbose in their responses on what is generally regarded as ethical and unethical in research and/or publishing practices. Authorship policies, the academic evaluation system, and the scrutiny which will keep the lid on any unethical behaviours are the most important factors bringing about the changes we observed. This paper suggests that ECRs’ manifestation of publishing ethics is gauged through their publishing practices.","PeriodicalId":45072,"journal":{"name":"Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2019-04-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Malaysian early career researchers on the ethics of scholarly publishing\",\"authors\":\"A. Abrizah, Nordiana Ahmad Kharman Shah, D. Nicholas\",\"doi\":\"10.22452/MJLIS.VOL24NO1.5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Publication ethics are rarely taught. This paper presents research into the knowledge of scholarly publishing ethics among Malaysian early-career researchers (ECRs). This research comes from year two of a projected three-year-long study of ECRs from seven countries (China, France, Malaysia, Poland, Spain, the UK, and the US), for which semi-structured indepth interviews were conducted with study participants. For the findings reported in this paper, 12 ECRs from science and social science disciplines at five Malaysian researchintensive universities were interviewed during the period from February to June 2017. The interview record was compared with the previous year’s (2016) record to identify changes in interviewees’ responses to a set of questions on their knowledge of ethics in scholarly communication. In addition, contextual data were obtained from the CVs of the ECRs. Our findings indicate that the attitudes and behaviours of Malaysian ECRs in relation to scholarly communication ethics have changed in the passage of one year. We observed noteworthy changes in ECRs’ knowledge of unethical behaviours. As compared with data from 2016, the ECRs are more verbose in their responses on what is generally regarded as ethical and unethical in research and/or publishing practices. Authorship policies, the academic evaluation system, and the scrutiny which will keep the lid on any unethical behaviours are the most important factors bringing about the changes we observed. This paper suggests that ECRs’ manifestation of publishing ethics is gauged through their publishing practices.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45072,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-04-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22452/MJLIS.VOL24NO1.5\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22452/MJLIS.VOL24NO1.5","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

出版伦理很少被教授。本文介绍了对马来西亚早期职业研究人员(ECRs)的学术出版伦理知识的研究。这项研究来自于对七个国家(中国、法国、马来西亚、波兰、西班牙、英国和美国)的ecr进行的为期三年的研究的第二年,研究人员对研究参与者进行了半结构化的深度访谈。对于本文报告的研究结果,在2017年2月至6月期间,对来自马来西亚五所研究型大学的科学和社会科学学科的12名ecr进行了采访。将访谈记录与前一年(2016年)的记录进行比较,以确定受访者对一系列关于其学术传播伦理知识的问题的回答的变化。此外,从ecr的cv中获得上下文数据。我们的研究结果表明,马来西亚ecr在学术传播伦理方面的态度和行为在一年内发生了变化。我们观察到ecr对不道德行为的认识发生了显著变化。与2016年的数据相比,ecr在回答研究和/或出版实践中通常被视为道德和不道德的问题时更加啰嗦。作者政策、学术评估体系以及对任何不道德行为的审查是导致我们观察到的变化的最重要因素。本文建议通过出版实践来衡量出版伦理的表现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Malaysian early career researchers on the ethics of scholarly publishing
Publication ethics are rarely taught. This paper presents research into the knowledge of scholarly publishing ethics among Malaysian early-career researchers (ECRs). This research comes from year two of a projected three-year-long study of ECRs from seven countries (China, France, Malaysia, Poland, Spain, the UK, and the US), for which semi-structured indepth interviews were conducted with study participants. For the findings reported in this paper, 12 ECRs from science and social science disciplines at five Malaysian researchintensive universities were interviewed during the period from February to June 2017. The interview record was compared with the previous year’s (2016) record to identify changes in interviewees’ responses to a set of questions on their knowledge of ethics in scholarly communication. In addition, contextual data were obtained from the CVs of the ECRs. Our findings indicate that the attitudes and behaviours of Malaysian ECRs in relation to scholarly communication ethics have changed in the passage of one year. We observed noteworthy changes in ECRs’ knowledge of unethical behaviours. As compared with data from 2016, the ECRs are more verbose in their responses on what is generally regarded as ethical and unethical in research and/or publishing practices. Authorship policies, the academic evaluation system, and the scrutiny which will keep the lid on any unethical behaviours are the most important factors bringing about the changes we observed. This paper suggests that ECRs’ manifestation of publishing ethics is gauged through their publishing practices.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science
Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
7.70%
发文量
8
期刊最新文献
A study on the election factors of ACM Fellow based on the co-authorship relationship Compromising quality parameters lead to fallout: a study of de-indexing of research journals Teaching strategies for library instruction: directions from the literature Strategies for building institutional repositories a case study of content recruitment in Malaysian higher learning institutions Exploring authors engagement in journals with questionable practices: a case study of OMICS
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1