共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 31 毫秒
1.
David NICHOLAS Anthony WATKINSON Hamid R. JAMALI Eti HERMAN Carol TENOPIR Rachel VOLENTINE Suzie ALLARD Kenneth LEVINE 《Learned Publishing》2015,28(1):15-21
The article presents one of the main findings of an international study of 4,000 academic researchers that examined how trustworthiness is determined in the digital environment when it comes to scholarly reading, citing, and publishing. The study shows that peer review is still the most trustworthy characteristic of all. There is, though, a common perception that open access journals are not peer reviewed or do not have proper peer‐review systems. Researchers appear to have moved inexorably from a print‐based system to a digital system, but it has not significantly changed the way they decide what to trust. They do not trust social media. Only a minority – although significantly mostly young and early career researchers – thought that social media are anything other than more appropriate to personal interactions and peripheral to their professional/academic lives. There are other significant differences, according to the age of the researcher. Thus, in regard to choosing an outlet for publication of their work, young researchers are much less concerned with the fact that it is peer reviewed. 相似文献
2.
Information workflow of academic researchers in the evolving information environment: an interview study 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
Digital journals have been widely adopted by academic researchers and have nearly replaced printed journals in many contexts. The adoption of digital books is accelerating. The transition to digital information has changed information workflows of researchers by transforming the methods they use to find, store, retrieve, and use information from monographs, journals, and other sources. It has also changed the needs and expectations of scholars in relation to research information. To investigate these changes, 45 researchers in science, medicine, engineering, social sciences, and humanities at Stanford University were interviewed regarding information workflow and preferences. Results are compared with the findings of the e‐Journal User Study (eJUSt), completed in 2002. 相似文献
3.
Serhat Kurt 《Learned Publishing》2018,31(2):141-147
This study examines the reasons why authors publish in ‘predatory’ OA journals. In total, 50 journals were randomly selected from Beall's list of ‘predatory’ journals. Different methods, including WHOIS tracking, were utilized to query basic information about the selected journals, including location and registrant. Then, 300 articles were randomly selected from within selected journals in various scientific fields. Authors of the selected articles were contacted and sent survey questions to complete. A grounded theory qualitative methods approach was used for data collection and analysis. The results demonstrated that most of these journals were located in the developing world, usually Asia or Africa, even when they claimed they were in the USA or UK. Furthermore, four themes emerged after authors’ survey responses were coded, categorized, and sub‐categorized. The themes were: social identity threat, unawareness, high pressure, and lack of research proficiency. Scholars in the developing world felt that reputable Western journals might be prejudiced against them and sometimes felt more comfortable publishing in journals from the developing world. Other scholars were unaware of the reputation of the journals in which they published and would not have selected them had they known. However, some scholars said they would still have published in the same journals if their institution recognised them. The pressure to ‘publish or perish’ was another factor influencing many scholars’ decisions to publish in these fast‐turnaround journals. In some cases, researchers did not have adequate guidance and felt they lacked the knowledge of research to submit to a more reputable journal. More needs to be done by institutions and reputable journals to make researchers aware of the problem of ‘predatory’ journals. 相似文献
4.
《Library & information science research》2014,36(3-4):192-202
In an increasingly digital environment, many factors influence how academic researchers decide what to read, what to cite, where to publish their work, and how they assign trust when making these decisions. This study focuses on how this differs according to the geographical location of the researcher, specifically in terms of the country's level of development. Data were collected by a questionnaire survey of 3650 authors who had published articles in international journals. The human development index (HDI) was used to compare authors' scholarly behavior. The findings show that researchers from less developed countries such as India and China (medium HDI) compared to those in developed countries, such as the USA and UK (very high HDI) are more reliant on external factors and those criteria that are related to authority, brand and reputation, such as authors' names, affiliation, country and journal name. Even when deciding where to publish, the publisher of the journal is more important for developing countries than it is for researchers from the US and UK. Scholars from high HDI countries also differ in these aspects: a) they are less discriminatory than authors from developing countries in their citation practices; b) for them the fact that a source is peer reviewed is the most important factor when deciding where to publish; c) they are more negative towards the use of repositories and social media for publishing and more skeptical about their potential for increasing usage or reaching a wider audience. 相似文献
5.
Kate Corby 《Behavioral & Social Sciences Librarian》2013,32(3):7-19
ABSTRACT The move to electronic forms of communication has changed the way educational research is communicated. In particular, it has led to an increased reliance on journals. This change has been more precipitous than one might expect. As journals become a larger proportion of the body of current scholarship, authors and readers seek new methods of determining and communicating journal quality. Methods that have worked for researchers in the sciences are not directly transferable to the education discipline. This paper examines existing tools and looks for new methods of assessing quality in journal publishing. This article was developed from a paper presented at the Society for Information Technology in Teacher Education (SITE) conference in Spring 2007. 相似文献
6.
Jie Xu Chen He Jing Su Yuanxiang Zeng Zixian Wang Fei Fang Wenhui Tang 《Learned Publishing》2020,33(3):246-258
This paper reports the results of a survey on Chinese researchers' perceptions and use of open access journals (OAJs). A total of 381 Chinese researchers from different universities and disciplines were investigated through an online questionnaire survey in August and September 2018. The results showed that most Chinese researchers are familiar with and have positive attitude to OAJs. They know OAJs mainly through their peers, colleagues, and friends. PubMed Central, PLoS, and COAJ (China Open Access Journals) are the most well‐known OAJ websites among Chinese researchers. As for use, most of the respondents read and cite OAJs frequently and have experience of publishing in OAJs. However, they strongly prefer to use OAJs indexed in reputable databases (e.g. Web of Science, WoS) when making publishing decisions. Significant differences can be seen among disciplines, with researchers in HSS areas using OAJs less frequently than researchers from other disciplines, although they have the same positive attitudes and are equally well informed about them. Younger researchers preferred to rely on prestigious institutions and authors when using OAJs. 相似文献
7.
In this paper we map the scientific journals from Ibero‐American countries indexed in the Web of Science and Scopus. Data were collected from the journals' websites. Of 879 journals in the two databases, Spain accounted for 35.6% of the titles, Brazil 28.5%, and the remaining 11 countries together 35.9%. Medicine had the most titles in almost all countries, with 28.9% of the total, followed by agricultural and biological sciences (particularly in Brazil) with 14.9%, and social sciences with 11.5%. A digital format was used by 95% of the journals and 82% were open access, with an even higher level of open access in Latin America. The publishers were mainly universities (37.7%) and associations (31.1%). Ibero‐American countries, with the exception of Spain, do not have a long tradition as scientific journal publishers, but in the last few years they have gained in importance as players in scientific communication with the use of new business models for journals. 相似文献
8.
Academic libraries should be considered research tools, co‐evolving with technology. The Internet has changed the way science is communicated and hence also the role of libraries. It has made it possible for researchers to provide open access (OA) (i.e. toll‐free, full‐text, online access, web‐wide) to their peer‐reviewed journal articles in two different ways: (i) by publishing in them in OA journals, and (ii) by publishing them in non‐OA journals but also self‐archiving them in their institutional OA archives. Librarians are researchers' best allies in both of these strategies. Examples of these strategies are described. We conclude that an official mandate for OA provision is necessary to accelerate its growth and thereby the growth of research usage and impact worldwide. 相似文献
9.
通过调查台湾图书馆学与资讯科学学术期刊网站的数字化资源，选出有代表性的13种期刊。从开放性、出版周期、刊载量、引文等方面分析这些数字化期刊的特色，以便于图书馆研究人员查找和利用台湾图书馆学研究文献，并为两岸文献资源的共建共享提供参考。 相似文献
10.
Kanwal Ameen 《Learned Publishing》2017,30(2):133-142
This paper aims to investigate the practices of Pakistani academic researchers with respect to using, citing, and publishing their scholarly work. The quantitative survey method adopted to collect data from local researchers was based on an instrument developed and used by CIBER. Their notions and practices involved in deciding trust and quality of scholarly journals were obtained. The findings revealed that national and institutional policies have significantly influenced their decisions regarding the publishing outlets. The credibility of indexing services was found to be an important factor in choosing the journal for publishing research. ISI Web of Science Impact Factor was not considered as the top source for determining quality and trustworthiness. This study is the first of its kind that targets the top two universities of the country. A comparison of the findings with another international study shows that some of the behavioural traits are compatible with scholars from less‐developed countries like India and China, while others are more similar to the ones from highly developed countries like USA and UK. 相似文献
11.
《The Journal of Academic Librarianship》2023,49(1):102630
This research aims to examine whether faculty's perceptions of the importance of the library's resources and services for their teaching, clinical practice or research were different based on disciplines, and to explore the degree that faculty's perceptions of the library's importance and its role have changed over time. The findings revealed that online journals, databases, and Interlibrary loan (ILL) were considered by the majority of faculty as the most important for faculty's research. Another key finding indicated that faculty from social sciences perceived assistance from a subject specialist librarian as more important than faculty members from physical sciences. The top three strategies faculty use to obtain articles not available through the university include searching for a freely available online version, using ILL, and obtaining it from Google Scholar. These findings assist the library to better understand our user community's needs. As this survey is regularly deployed, it also allows us to observe potential changes over time, and as necessary, make strategic changes to library resources and services. 相似文献
12.
Ahmed Maher Khafaga Shehata 《Learned Publishing》2019,32(4):304-311
The purpose of this paper is to report the findings of a study of scholarly communication behaviour among Arab scholars. The main objective of this study is to determine how Egyptian and Saudi Arabian social sciences and humanities scholars engage in scholarly communication practices. The study used a mixed‐methods approach. A questionnaire was answered by a sample of 104 participants, followed by interviews with 36 participants to gain insight into the scholarly communication behaviour of the Arab scholars. The analysis demonstrated that participants use different styles of scholarly communication approaches. Most of the participants do use informal (social media) channels to communicate their research findings (particularly ResearchGate and Facebook), although priority is given to formal over informal publication in peer reviewed journals. Responses showed that the promotional systems of both countries dictate publication choices of scholars, reducing the amount of collaboration by ranking co‐publications lower than sole publications and favouring printed journals over online‐only journals. 相似文献
13.
14.
David NICHOLAS Anthony WATKINSON Rachel VOLENTINE Suzie ALLARD Kenneth LEVINE Carol TENOPIR Eti HERMAN 《Learned Publishing》2014,27(2):121-134
The paper provides the results of the first phase of the research project Trust and Authority in Scholarly Communications in the Light of the Digital Transition. It provides for an examination of the behaviours and attitudes of academic researchers as producers and consumers of scholarly information resources in the digital era in respect to how they determine authority and trustworthiness in the sources they use, cite, and publish in. The first phase of the study utilized focus groups to formulate research questions for the project as a whole. It provided the direction for the literature review, interviews, and questionnaires studies that would follow. Fourteen focus groups were held in the UK and US in order to obtain this information. A total of 66 science and social science researchers participated. The main findings were: (a) researchers play down difficulties of establishing trustworthiness, not because there are none, but because they have well‐developed methods of establishing trust; (b) citation‐derived metrics are becoming more important in regard to where researchers publish; (c) social media are ancillary to research, but are used for promotion of research and idea generation; (d) researchers are suspicious and confused about open access, but less so if produced by a traditional publisher; (e) there was a uniformity of perceptions/behaviour of researchers irrespective of differences in subject, country, and age; (f) although some early career researchers behave the same as their more senior colleagues this is because of a fear of the system: they actually think differently. 相似文献
15.
Serap Kurbanoglu 《International Information and Library Review》2013,45(4):252-256
The purpose of this article is to explore the use of mixed methods research (MMR) in articles published in library and information science (LIS) journals in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) from 2004 to 2008. A mixed methods research framework provided in the methodological literature is used to determine how this method was practiced within the LIS scientific community in SSA. Six hundred and eighty five articles published in nine peer-reviewed LIS journals in SAA were reviewed, finding the dominant research methods in these journals to be survey designs and historical research. The use of MMR was limited: 48 out of 685 articles used the mixed methods approaches that were identified in the methodological literature. A paradigm shift and a change of mindset are recommended for LIS researchers in SSA so that they may exploit the advantages offered by mixed methods research in conducting their studies. 相似文献
16.
The purpose of this article is to explore the use of mixed methods research (MMR) in articles published in library and information science (LIS) journals in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) from 2004 to 2008. A mixed methods research framework provided in the methodological literature is used to determine how this method was practiced within the LIS scientific community in SSA. Six hundred and eighty five articles published in nine peer-reviewed LIS journals in SAA were reviewed, finding the dominant research methods in these journals to be survey designs and historical research. The use of MMR was limited: 48 out of 685 articles used the mixed methods approaches that were identified in the methodological literature. A paradigm shift and a change of mindset are recommended for LIS researchers in SSA so that they may exploit the advantages offered by mixed methods research in conducting their studies. 相似文献
17.
18.
19.
Mary WALTHAM 《Learned Publishing》2010,23(2):136-143
The paper summarizes the findings of a pilot study for the National Humanities Alliance, including the methodology, research tools, analysis, and initial conclusions about the publishing business of eight association published humanities and social sciences journals in the context of a move to an open access (author/producer pays) publishing model. The eight disciplines represented by these journals are modern languages, history, religion, economics, sociology, anthropology, politics and statistics. Specific tools were developed for the study to enable like‐for‐like comparison of the journals. Detailed information on current trends in revenue, costs, and surplus is included. Significant differences between HSS and STM journals are reviewed. Open access to research articles on publication as the ‘gold’ author/producer‐pays approach would not be sustainable for this sample of HSS journals for reasons articulated in the report. Further studies using the tools and methodology developed are required to broaden and confirm these results. 相似文献
20.
To assess quantitatively the completeness and clarity of author guidelines of international English‐language journals in the biomedical and physical sciences, we randomly sampled 80 journals for which author guidelines were available online in English. The guidelines were reviewed for completeness and clarity in addressing ‘aims and scope’, ‘submission and post‐submission processes’, ‘formatting instructions’, ‘ethical requirements’, and ‘authorship’, and were subjectively assessed as being complete (score 1) or incomplete (0), and clear (1) or unclear (0). Scores were represented as mean percentages. No journal scored 100% for completeness and clarity. ‘Formatting instructions’ was the most complete and clear category, and ‘authorship’ the least complete and clear category. Biomedical science journals were more complete and clear in all categories, except ‘authorship‘, compared to physical science journals. While author guidelines of many English‐language journals of biomedical and physical sciences adequately address some essential aspects, they currently do not provide all necessary information as clearly as possible. 相似文献