Challenges of Open Access Adoption in Low-Resource Settings: Lessons From Tunisia

Author : Ridha Mhamdi

Introduction

Open Access (OA) publishing is a transformative movement that removes subscription barriers to facilitate unrestricted dissemination of scholarly research. This study aims to identify gaps in OA adoption in Tunisia, assess whether Gold OA publications enhance the visibility and impact of research, and determine how OA publishing aligns with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Methods

Using Scopus data, we performed a bibliometric analysis of Tunisian research (2020-2024), including publication trends, citation metrics, SDG alignment, and funding sources of OA publications.

Results

Despite high regional productivity, over 60% of publications by Tunisian researchers remain paywalled, limiting their visibility. Hybrid Gold OA demonstrated the highest citation impact, while the advantage of Gold OA was constrained by publication in lower-prestige journals. Although Medicine, Computer Science, and Engineering were the dominant fields in OA output, only 40% of OA publications were aligned with the SDGs.

International collaboration, notably with Saudi Arabia, was a key driver of OA adoption. However, high article processing charges (APCs) and a heavy reliance on institutional funding present significant financial barriers.

Conclusion

Tunisia’s OA expansion is hindered by financial sustainability challenges and a misalignment with SDG-focused research. To enhance global research visibility and contribution to sustainable development, we recommend strategic policy shifts: redirecting funds from subscriptions to OA models, pursuing transformative agreements, supporting Diamond OA, and incentivizing high-impact, sustainability-focused research.

URL : Challenges of Open Access Adoption in Low-Resource Settings: Lessons From Tunisia

DOI : https://doi.org/10.31274/jlsc.21182

Information seeking and sharing among doctoral peers: A model of influencing factors

Author : Peymon Montazeri

Peers are an essential part of any community. In doctoral studies, they can alleviate the challenges associated with pursuing a doctorate by providing information that supports academic progress. While prior research has examined peer interactions in structured environments, less is known about their behavior in unstructured settings.

A particular gap in the literature concerns the rationale behind choosing peers as sources of information in these contexts. This study addressed that gap by exploring information seeking and sharing among peers in unstructured environments.

Using a qualitative approach, it identified several influential factors related to the environment (e.g. access, resource availability) and the student involved (e.g. trust, convenience, desire to help, perceived competence, sense of obligation or giving back).

These led to the creation of the Doctoral Peer Information Behavior (DPIB) model. The findings further highlight the importance of peers in doctoral education. Institutions are encouraged to create opportunities for peer interaction, while students may benefit from becoming aware of their own information behavior and intentionally planning such interactions.

URL : Information seeking and sharing among doctoral peers: A model of influencing factors

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1177/09610006261444725

Visions and Infrastructures of Open Science

Author : Parissa Mokhtabad Amrei

Open Science practices are shaping both science and policymaking. This thesis examines the visions of Open Science and their enactments through four empirical cases. It provides an understanding of what Open Science means in terms of infrastructures: in cases where Open Science practices exhibit infrastructuring efforts, where they reconfigure existing infrastructures, or where such infrastructuring efforts are not sustained.

URL : https://research.chalmers.se/en/publication/552096

AI In Academic Publishing for Non-Native English Speakers: The Good, the Bot, and the Ugly

Authors : Talip Gönülal, Ramazan Güçlü, Salih Güçlü

This exploratory study investigated the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) tools on academic publishing for non-native English-speaking researchers. Through a mixed-methods convergent parallel design, it examined how these scholars utilize AI tools, their perceived benefits, and concerns regarding AI’s influence on academic publishing.

Data were collected from 105 non-native English-speaking academics coming from 25 language backgrounds. Participants primarily employed AI tools for grammar improvement, writing style enhancement, and translation, while maintaining control over higher-level intellectual tasks such as organizing manuscripts.

Three key dimensions of the perceived impact of AI were identified in this study: the good, reducing linguistic inequalities by improving paper quality and decreasing language-related challenges; the bad, involving inaccurate or misleading AI suggestions, over-reliance on AI tools, and diminished engagement with manuscripts; and the ugly, characterized by failure to disclose AI use, lack of clear guidelines for responsible AI integration in research, homogenization of academic writing, and the emergence of new forms of inequality.

The study concluded with several recommendations for individual researchers, academic institutions, and publishers and journals to promote the ethical and effective use of AI in academic publishing.

URL : AI In Academic Publishing for Non-Native English Speakers: The Good, the Bot, and the Ugly

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.2070

Do Early Career Researchers Consider AI as an Opportunity or a Threat? A Pathfinding Study

Authors : David Nicholas, David Clark,  Abdullah Abrizah, John Akeroyd, Eti Herman, Jorge Revez, Blanca Rodríguez-Bravo, Marzena Swigon, Tatyana Polezhaeva, Anne Gere

The article presents the latest (2025) iteration of the Harbingers longitudinal project on early career researchers (ECRs), artificial intelligence (AI) and scholarly communications. In conversation with a purposive and diverse sample of more than 60 ECRs in six countries and numerous subjects, we present an evaluation of a pressing issue: what impact will AI have on their work and career?

An important issue is that widespread media speculation suggests that it is entry-level positions that will be hit hardest by AI. While ECRs were asked 50 plus questions during interviews, none were directly asked about changes to job security and employment prospects, yet much of relevance was volunteered in answering related AI questions.

Adding a new methodological dimension to the Harbingers project, we employed AI (NotebookLM) for an initial qualitative analysis of the interview data, with findings reviewed and corrected by the national interviewers. We conclude that AI is a double-edged sword which has huge potential as well as posing significant challenges.

The AI-assisted analysis proved effective at identifying broad themes, though human oversight was essential to capture nuance, differences between cohorts, and unusual cases. Finally, given that we were working with a select and relatively small sample to inform a larger study, the data should be seen as illuminating and filling a research lacuna, rather than a definitive result in a fast-changing field.

URL : Do Early Career Researchers Consider AI as an Opportunity or a Threat? A Pathfinding Study

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.2068

Assessing open access scholarly journals for integration into artificial intelligence research assistants

Authors : Sanja Gidakovic, Heather Moulaison-Sandy, Jenny Bossalle

Introduction

Freely available standalone AI research assistants such as Elicit and Consensus are used by academics to find relevant literature. These systems rely extensively on freely available sources, including open access journal content. No baseline for understanding the level of quality of such journals used in these assistants has been carried out.

Method

A sample of 807 English-language journals from the Directory of Open Access Journals that became open access before 2021 was investigated for quality metrics using SCImago rankings and other defining characteristics and analysed in conjunction with the Directory data.

Analysis

Scimago journal ranking quartile scores were recorded for each of the journals. Descriptive statistics were produced using Excel, and visualizations using Tableau Public.

Results

Of our sample, over half were ranked in Scopus, and many were in quartile 1. Many university or small association journals were unranked.

Conclusions

AI research assistants may miss some high-quality open access content due to reliance on metrics. Commercial enterprises play a large role in sources used to produce content, effectively gatekeeping the process and potentially shaping the creation of new knowledge.

URL : Assessing open access scholarly journals for integration into artificial intelligence research assistants

DOI : https://doi.org/10.47989/ir31263095

Les effets ambivalents de l’IA sur les marges féminisées de la chaîne éditoriale scientifique. Le cas des traductrices et éditrices de sciences humaines et sociales

Autrice : Lison Burlat

Cet article interroge les effets ambivalents du déploiement, en France, de l’intelligence artificielle générative (IAg) sur deux activités professionnelles féminisées de « soutien à la recherche » : la traduction et l’édition de sciences humaines et sociales. Il s’inscrit dans une perspective croisant les travaux de sociologie des professions et du travail féminin face aux technologies et ceux de la traductologie féministe.

Une première partie souligne que l’IAg révèle des luttes de juridiction préexistantes entre chercheur·ses, éditrices et traductrices, à replacer dans un contexte socio-économique spécifique. Une seconde partie montre qu’éditrices et traductrices ne défendent pas à armes égales leur territoire professionnel dans ce contexte.

Le premier groupe, plus structuré, entend se saisir de l’IAg pour requalifier son activité. Le second, plus fragmenté et soumis aux évolutions de la demande, est au contraire déqualifié par la relégation à la post-édition, voire est évacué de la chaîne.

DOI : https://doi.org/10.3917/nqf.451.0069