全国学术出版渠道目录:综述及建设与维护建议

Janne Pölönen, Raf Guns, Emanuel Kulczycki, G. Sivertsen, Tim C. E. Engels
{"title":"全国学术出版渠道目录:综述及建设与维护建议","authors":"Janne Pölönen, Raf Guns, Emanuel Kulczycki, G. Sivertsen, Tim C. E. Engels","doi":"10.2478/jdis-2021-0004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Purpose This paper presents an overview of different kinds of lists of scholarly publication channels and of experiences related to the construction and maintenance of national lists supporting performance-based research funding systems. It also contributes with a set of recommendations for the construction and maintenance of national lists of journals and book publishers. Design/methodology/approach The study is based on analysis of previously published studies, policy papers, and reported experiences related to the construction and use of lists of scholarly publication channels. Findings Several countries have systems for research funding and/or evaluation, that involve the use of national lists of scholarly publication channels (mainly journals and publishers). Typically, such lists are selective (do not include all scholarly or non-scholarly channels) and differentiated (distinguish between channels of different levels and quality). At the same time, most lists are embedded in a system that encompasses multiple or all disciplines. This raises the question how such lists can be organized and maintained to ensure that all relevant disciplines and all types of research are adequately represented. Research limitation The conclusions and recommendations of the study are based on the authors’ interpretation of a complex and sometimes controversial process with many different stakeholders involved. Practical implications The recommendations and the related background information provided in this paper enable mutual learning that may feed into improvements in the construction and maintenance of national and other lists of scholarly publication channels in any geographical context. This may foster a development of responsible evaluation practices. Originality/value This paper presents the first general overview and typology of different kinds of publication channel lists, provides insights on expert-based versus metrics-based evaluation, and formulates a set of recommendations for the responsible construction and maintenance of publication channel lists.","PeriodicalId":92237,"journal":{"name":"Journal of data and information science (Warsaw, Poland)","volume":"6 1","pages":"50 - 86"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"20","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"National Lists of Scholarly Publication Channels: An Overview and Recommendations for Their Construction and Maintenance\",\"authors\":\"Janne Pölönen, Raf Guns, Emanuel Kulczycki, G. Sivertsen, Tim C. E. Engels\",\"doi\":\"10.2478/jdis-2021-0004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Purpose This paper presents an overview of different kinds of lists of scholarly publication channels and of experiences related to the construction and maintenance of national lists supporting performance-based research funding systems. It also contributes with a set of recommendations for the construction and maintenance of national lists of journals and book publishers. Design/methodology/approach The study is based on analysis of previously published studies, policy papers, and reported experiences related to the construction and use of lists of scholarly publication channels. Findings Several countries have systems for research funding and/or evaluation, that involve the use of national lists of scholarly publication channels (mainly journals and publishers). Typically, such lists are selective (do not include all scholarly or non-scholarly channels) and differentiated (distinguish between channels of different levels and quality). At the same time, most lists are embedded in a system that encompasses multiple or all disciplines. This raises the question how such lists can be organized and maintained to ensure that all relevant disciplines and all types of research are adequately represented. Research limitation The conclusions and recommendations of the study are based on the authors’ interpretation of a complex and sometimes controversial process with many different stakeholders involved. Practical implications The recommendations and the related background information provided in this paper enable mutual learning that may feed into improvements in the construction and maintenance of national and other lists of scholarly publication channels in any geographical context. This may foster a development of responsible evaluation practices. Originality/value This paper presents the first general overview and typology of different kinds of publication channel lists, provides insights on expert-based versus metrics-based evaluation, and formulates a set of recommendations for the responsible construction and maintenance of publication channel lists.\",\"PeriodicalId\":92237,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of data and information science (Warsaw, Poland)\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"50 - 86\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-10-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"20\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of data and information science (Warsaw, Poland)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2478/jdis-2021-0004\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of data and information science (Warsaw, Poland)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/jdis-2021-0004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 20

摘要

摘要目的本文概述了不同类型的学术出版渠道清单,以及与支持基于绩效的研究资助系统的国家清单的构建和维护相关的经验。它还为建立和维护国家期刊和图书出版商名单提出了一系列建议。设计/方法论/方法本研究基于对先前发表的研究、政策论文和报告的与学术出版渠道列表的构建和使用有关的经验的分析。研究结果几个国家有研究资助和/或评估系统,涉及使用国家学术出版渠道清单(主要是期刊和出版商)。通常,此类列表是有选择性的(不包括所有学术或非学术渠道)和有区别的(区分不同级别和质量的渠道)。同时,大多数列表都嵌入到一个包含多个或所有学科的系统中。这就提出了一个问题,即如何组织和维护这些清单,以确保所有相关学科和所有类型的研究都有充分的代表性。研究局限性研究的结论和建议是基于作者对一个复杂且有时有争议的过程的解释,其中涉及许多不同的利益相关者。实际意义本文提供的建议和相关背景信息有助于相互学习,有助于在任何地理背景下改进国家和其他学术出版渠道的建设和维护。这可能有助于发展负责任的评价做法。原创性/价值本文首次对不同类型的出版渠道列表进行了概述和类型化,对基于专家与基于度量的评估提供了见解,并为负责任地构建和维护出版渠道列表制定了一套建议。
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
National Lists of Scholarly Publication Channels: An Overview and Recommendations for Their Construction and Maintenance
Abstract Purpose This paper presents an overview of different kinds of lists of scholarly publication channels and of experiences related to the construction and maintenance of national lists supporting performance-based research funding systems. It also contributes with a set of recommendations for the construction and maintenance of national lists of journals and book publishers. Design/methodology/approach The study is based on analysis of previously published studies, policy papers, and reported experiences related to the construction and use of lists of scholarly publication channels. Findings Several countries have systems for research funding and/or evaluation, that involve the use of national lists of scholarly publication channels (mainly journals and publishers). Typically, such lists are selective (do not include all scholarly or non-scholarly channels) and differentiated (distinguish between channels of different levels and quality). At the same time, most lists are embedded in a system that encompasses multiple or all disciplines. This raises the question how such lists can be organized and maintained to ensure that all relevant disciplines and all types of research are adequately represented. Research limitation The conclusions and recommendations of the study are based on the authors’ interpretation of a complex and sometimes controversial process with many different stakeholders involved. Practical implications The recommendations and the related background information provided in this paper enable mutual learning that may feed into improvements in the construction and maintenance of national and other lists of scholarly publication channels in any geographical context. This may foster a development of responsible evaluation practices. Originality/value This paper presents the first general overview and typology of different kinds of publication channel lists, provides insights on expert-based versus metrics-based evaluation, and formulates a set of recommendations for the responsible construction and maintenance of publication channel lists.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Editorial board publication strategy and acceptance rates in Turkish national journals Multimodal sentiment analysis for social media contents during public emergencies Perspectives from a publishing ethics and research integrity team for required improvements Build neural network models to identify and correct news headlines exaggerating obesity-related scientific findings An author credit allocation method with improved distinguishability and robustness
×
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