共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 15 毫秒
1.
《The Journal of Academic Librarianship》2020,46(6):102236
Predatory journals and publishers are a growing concern in the scholarly publishing arena. As one type of attempt to address this increasingly important issue, numerous individuals, associations, and companies have begun curating journal watchlists or journal safelists. This study uses a qualitative content analysis to explore the inclusion/exclusion criteria stated by scholarly publishing journal watchlists and safelists to better understand the content of these lists, as well as the larger controversies that continue to surround the phenomenon that has come to be known as predatory publishing. Four watchlists and ten safelists were analyzed through an examination of their published mission statements and inclusion/exclusion criteria. Notable differences that emerged include the remaining influence of librarian Jeffrey Beall in the watchlists, and the explicit disavowal of his methods for the safelists, along with a growing recognition that the “list” approach may not fully address systemic aspects of predatory publishing that go beyond the individual author's ethical decision-making agency. 相似文献
2.
Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva Judit Dobránszki Panagiotis Tsigaris Aceil Al-Khatib 《The Journal of Academic Librarianship》2019,45(6):102071
The issue of “predatory” publishing continues to affect many scholars around the world who publish. When one reads the fairly vast literature surrounding “predatory” publishing, there is an erroneous tendency to continue pivoting around Jeffrey Beall's blacklists of “predatory” open access (OA) journals and publishers. However, to be “predatory” involves much more than defining a handful of select behaviours, and it is becoming increasingly important to start defining, or curtailing, the lexicon to avoid referring to any journal or publisher that might display one of the following qualities (exploitative, deceptive, excessive, unscrupulous, abusive, advantageous, manipulative, profit-seeking, or others) as synonymously meaning “predatory”. This paper focuses mainly on the oft-interchangeable terms “predatory” and “exploitation”, and explores the morality of predatory and exploitative actions by applying a deontological ethics approach which implies that certain actions are wrong even if they achieve good consequences, with the understanding that because a predatory entity aims to exploit others, these actions would be considered morally wrong from a deontologist's perspective. In articulating our argument, we attempt to expand the conversation around this important topic, with the hope that it might bring additional clarity to the issue of what might constitute a “predatory” journal or publisher. 相似文献
3.
David Emblidge 《Publishing Research Quarterly》2016,32(2):148-152
Notes about the February 2016 PubWest Conference (Santa Fe, New Mexico) and a panel discussion about the relationship between academic publishing studies programs and publishers. PubWest is a regional publishers’ organization in the U.S., with Canadian members. The 2016 conference—“A Passion for Books”—included keynotes, intensive sessions, and panels on making publishing more profitable. Per Henningsgaard, Portland State University, chaired the panel “What Publishers and Academics Who Study Publishing Can Learn from Each Other.” Co-panelists: Sybil Nolan, University of Melbourne; David Emblidge, Emerson College. Henningsgaard gave an overview of publishing studies programs worldwide, what they teach and how they serve students interested in entering the publishing business. Emblidge presented a publishing studies student project from Emerson College—a book proposal for an illustrated nonfiction trade book. Nolan commented on broader research interests concerning the book business and its history, shared by academics in publishing studies. Similar conferences for publishing industry professionals and publishing studies courses at various universities are noted here, as is a research project aiming to build a comprehensive database for publishing studies teaching and learning materials. 相似文献
4.
《The Journal of Academic Librarianship》2022,48(1):102481
The issue of ‘predatory publishing’, and indeed unscholarly publishing practices, affects all academics and librarians around the globe. However, there are some flaws in arguments and analyses made in several papers published on this topic, in particular those that have relied heavily on the blacklists that were established by Jeffrey Beall. While Beall advanced the discussion on ‘predatory publishing’, relying entirely on his blacklists to assess a journal for publishing a paper is problematic. This is because several of the criteria underlying those blacklists were insufficiently specific, excessively broad, arbitrary with no scientific validation, or incorrect identifiers of predatory behavior. The validity of those criteria has been deconstructed in more detail in this paper. From a total of 55 criteria in Beall's last/latest 2015 set of criteria, we suggest maintaining nine, eliminating 24, and correcting the remaining 22. While recognizing that this exercise involves a measure of subjectivity, it needs to advance in order to arrive – in a future exercise – at a more sensitive set of criteria. Fortified criteria alone, or the use of blacklists and whitelists, cannot combat ‘predatory publishing’, and an overhaul of rewards-based academic publishing is needed, supported by a set of reliable criteria-based guidance system. 相似文献
5.
6.
《The Journal of Academic Librarianship》2020,46(5):102187
The COVID-19 pandemic, which has led to a flood of papers and preprints, has placed multiple challenges on academic publishing, the most obvious one being sustained integrity under the pressure to publish quickly. There are risks of this high volume-to-speed ratio. Many letters, editorials, and supposedly “peer reviewed” papers in ranked and indexed journals were published in a matter of days, suggesting that peer review was either fleeting or non-existential, or that papers were rapidly approved by editors based on their perceived interest and topicality, rather than on their intrinsic academic value. In academic publishing circles, the claim of “peer review”, when in fact it has not been conducted, is a core characteristic of “predatory publishing”, and is also a “fake” element that may undermine efforts in recent years to build trust in science's budding serials crisis. While the world is still centrally focused on COVID-19, the issue of “predatory publishing” is being ignored, or not being given sufficient attention. The risks to the scholarly community, academic publishing and ultimately public health are at stake when exploitative and predatory publishing are left unchallenged. 相似文献
7.
《The Journal of Academic Librarianship》2022,48(3):102418
Jeffrey Beall, a US librarian, coined the term “predatory publishing” specifically to describe a movement or phenomenon of open access (OA) journals and publishers that he and others believed displayed exploitative and unscholarly principles. Using a blog to transmit those ideas, and profiling specific cases using blacklists, one of the most polemic aspects of Beall's blog was its tendency to attract and incite academic radicalism. Beall targeted both publishers and standalone journals, but how he precisely determined that an OA journal or a publisher was predatory was in many cases an ambiguity. Beall's deficient and highly subjective criteria, as well as those blacklists' incapacity to clearly distinguish low quality OA publishers from predatory ones, may have negatively impacted the operations of several Beall-blacklisted OA journals and publishers. Freedom of speech that embraces prejudice, via Beall's blog, and the establishment of “predatory” blacklists, are enhanced discriminatory ideologies that continue to be carried downstream from Beall to and by other like-minded individuals and groups who proliferate academic divisiveness and may also be formalizing and institutionalizing a culture of discriminative philosophies by cloning Beall's blacklists and encouraging their continued use. 相似文献
8.
Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva 《Publishing Research Quarterly》2014,30(1):166-178
Snub publishing is a new term that was coined in 2013 to describe a range of publishing cases in which the failure of quality control manifested itself through references in such a way that it would cause unintended damage to snubbed scientists whose names or identity were incorrectly represented in the literature. In this paper, real case studies are presented, mostly related to the author as a “victim” of incompetent editorial oversight, inexperienced or biased authors, or as a “victim” of direct professional conflicts of interest. In essence, this paper serves as a prototype showing in concrete terms how a scientist can or may be professionally snubbed (intentionally or unintentionally). Using the Anthurium literature, this paper aims to raise awareness about snub publishing and seeks to encourage other scientists to also quantify how they too may have been professionally snubbed in the literature. 相似文献
9.
Greening the German book industry is a large-scale task. This article, based in part on the results of a one-day conference titled “Bio im Bücherregal?” (Engl. translation: “Eco-friendly products on the bookshelf?”) that was held in Mainz in January 2013, considers different perspectives on green publishing in Germany and presents the status quo as well as an outlook. After a brief historical and theoretical overview on the media and the environmental movement, the article presents current developments such as the initiative “Nachhaltig Publizieren” (“Green Publishing”). Initiated in 2011 by the publisher Oekom, the project has become a catalyst for the green publishing movement in Germany. In addition, this contribution introduces publishers and imprints, in particular of children’s books, that strive to fulfill the highest possible criteria for green publishing in certain project areas. Finally, the close connection between green publishing and green content is discussed. 相似文献
10.
Melissa Tully 《Journal of Applied Communication Research》2013,41(1):41-59
This research analyzes a peace-media initiative in Kenya designed to promote conflict resolution and reconciliation in the months following the 2007 post-election violence. This multifaceted intervention featured a 19-episode television talk show that aired in Kenya for six months; a series of open-air screenings of the show; and workshops held in eight areas heavily affected by the violence. Using criteria for evaluating “media for peace,” I evaluate the effectiveness of the program strategy and provide recommendations for practitioners and researchers. Based on interview data, and analysis of internal documents and the talk show, I assess the program's effectiveness and offer suggestions, which can be used by both practitioners and academics interested in peace media. In addition, the findings suggest that recognition of the other was an important part of the conflict resolution process as workshop members recognized their “enemies” and Kenyans from disparate parts of the country as similar to themselves in their experience of the violence. This research contributes to our understanding of the implementation of media-for-peace initiatives using a systemic evaluation process that academics and practitioners can use when designing, implementing, and researching these types of programs. 相似文献
11.
《Library & information science research》2006,28(2):208-234
In the late 1990s and early 2000s, the concept of book self-publishing for fiction and nonfiction began to loom large in the North American publishing universe. As traditional mainstream publishers consolidated and were often loathe to take chances on unknown writers whose books might not turn immediate profits, some authors found that fewer and fewer publishing venues were open to them. As a result, new self-publishers—collectively called “author services” or print-on-demand (POD) publishers—appeared alongside subsidy (or vanity) publishers. Against the background of an increasing corporatization of mainstream publishing, book self-publishing can theoretically be situated as one of the last bastions of independent publishing. This article examines how academic and public libraries dealt with the book self-publishing phenomena during 1960–2004. To what extent did libraries collect fiction and nonfiction published by self-publishing houses? Can any patterns be discerned in their collecting choices? Did libraries choose to collect more titles from “author services” publishers than subsidy publishers? 相似文献
12.
Owen KULEMEKA 《Learned Publishing》2014,27(4):301-313
This study examined the views of advertising academics regarding the peer‐review process in English‐language advertising journals. Three issues were examined. First, how do advertising academics assess the peer‐review process in advertising journals on the following dimensions: fairness, anonymity (truly double‐blind), timeliness, and effectiveness in improving the quality of research? Second, how do they perceive the ethicality of review process behaviors? Third, what steps do they suggest for improving the quality or integrity of the peer‐review process? Data was collected through a survey of US‐based advertising academics. The findings reveal that advertising academics believe that, for the most part, advertising journals are succeeding at fairness, protecting anonymity, improving the research of submitters, and avoiding ethical infractions in the review process. However, advertising academics would like to see improvements in timeliness as well as in incentives and guidelines provided to participants in the peer‐review process. 相似文献
13.
Peter Binfield 《期刊图书馆员》2013,64(1-2):37-42
Rolnik's preconference went well beyond the “business of publishing from a very basic perspective” as described in the conference program. Rolnik's preconference described the publishing market, operations within publishing companies, and how publishers find content. Dr. Peter Binfield, a guest speaker with expertise in society publishing, complemented the preconference. 相似文献
14.
Volker Kirchberg 《Curator: The Museum Journal》2007,50(2):239-254
Abstract Sociologists have described “scenes” as voluntary social groupings or figurations that are “… thematically focused cultural networks of people who share certain material and/or cognitive forms of collective stylization,” according to Hitzler, Bucher, and Niederbacher (2001, 20). This terminology is quite useful for thinking about Stephen Weil's assertion that visitors play a role in shaping museums. Through “scenes,” we see how this might happen, and how visitors might already be exerting subtle pressure on the forms and contents of museums. The study of scenes could help us develop a tool that would offer a unique vision of the influences that visitors have on museums. 相似文献
15.
16.
Cabells’ Journal Whitelist and Blacklist: Intelligent data for informed journal evaluations 
下载免费PDF全文
下载免费PDF全文 Michael Bisaccio 《Learned Publishing》2018,31(3):243-248
Key points
- Cabells’ Whitelist of ca. 11,000 quality journals has recently been joined by a Blacklist of over 8,300 journals that fail basic quality criteria.
- Cabells’ Journal Blacklist is the only searchable database of deceptive and fraudulent journals with comprehensive reports detailing violations.
- Key components for establishing the Blacklist were objectivity and transparency with respect to the evaluation process and selection criteria, and unbiased evaluations.
- The Blacklist evaluation criteria were tested to ensure accurate judgement and are continually evolving to maintain suitability.
- Over 800 journals are added to the Blacklist each month.
17.
《Library Acquisitions: Practice & Theory #》1992,16(4):405-410
The interaction of payment transactions between WLN Acquisitions and Washington State University's “PAPR” system is described and analyzed. The preparation of WLN Acquisitions Receiving Reports is considered from the standpoint of editing them so that they will pass over into the WSU PAPR Request Payment Report function as valid transactions. The Geac Acquisitions-to-Lehigh University FRS interaction is briefly discussed as well. 相似文献
18.
《资料收集管理》2013,38(1):77-90
Abstract Over the years, the publishing industry has packaged single works of printed resources with accompanying media such as 3.5″ disks, CD-ROMs, videocassettes, audiocassettes, or web sites. Recognizing the importance of the information provided in the accompanying media and the library clients' access to them, the Library of Rush University (LRU) at Rush-Presbyterian-St. Luke's Medical Center developed and implemented “mixed media” policies and procedures. This paper discusses issues and Rush Library responses to the issues surrounding the management of “mixed media” titles in selection, cataloging, labeling, housing, circulation, loading data files, and the publicity that puts them in the client's hands. 相似文献
19.
Leo Walford 《期刊图书馆员》2013,64(1-2):99-103
Changes in journal publishing are often driven by the needs of the science community. Leo Walford, who is the Associate Director for Rights & Business Development for Sage Publications, highlighted differences between social science publishing and science publishing and discussed “why one size doesn't fit all.” 相似文献
20.
《Journalism Practice》2013,7(5):651-668
While the coverage of women's sport in UK media rises to comparable levels to men's sports during large sporting events like the Olympics, academics agree that “routine” women's sports coverage is under-represented. According to the Women's Sport and Fitness Foundation, “81% of people think that the female athletes at London 2012 make better role models for young girls than other celebrities.” This article examines the representation of women in sport and compares routine coverage of women's sports in the UK national press across a week in February 2012, six months before the London Olympics, with coverage in a week in February 2013, six months after the Olympics, to see if there has been an Olympic “legacy” that increased coverage. It also examines coverage at the same time of year a decade earlier, to see how far, if at all, women's sports coverage in newspapers has progressed. The results suggest that there has been minimal change in everyday coverage of women's sports after the Olympics, and that female athletes continue to be hugely under-represented in the UK press. 相似文献