Authors : Mike Thelwall, Amalia Mas-Bleda
Although explicitly labeled research questions seem to be central to some fields, others do not need them.
This may confuse authors, editors, readers, and reviewers of multidisciplinary research. This article assesses the extent to which research questions are explicitly mentioned in 17 out of 22 areas of scholarship from 2000 to 2018 by searching over a million full-text open access journal articles. Research questions were almost never explicitly mentioned (under 2%) by articles in engineering and physical, life, and medical sciences, and were the exception (always under 20%) for the broad fields in which they were least rare: computing, philosophy, theology, and social sciences. Nevertheless, research questions were increasingly mentioned explicitly in all fields investigated, despite a rate of 1.8% overall (1.1% after correcting for irrelevant matches).
Other terminology for an article’s purpose may be more widely used instead, including aims, objectives, goals, hypotheses, and purposes, although no terminology occurs in a majority of articles in any broad field tested. Authors, editors, readers, and reviewers should therefore be aware that the use of explicitly labeled research questions or other explicit research purpose terminology is non-standard in most or all broad fields, although it is becoming less rare.
URL : How common are explicit research questions in journal articles?
Original location : https://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/qss_a_00041?af=R&
Authors : William Bülow, Gert Helgesson
This article discusses gift authorship, the practice where co-authorship is awarded to a person who has not contributed significantly to the study. From an ethical point of view, gift authorship raises concerns about desert, fairness, honesty and transparency, and its prevalence in research is rightly considered a serious ethical concern.
We argue that even though misuse of authorship is always bad, there are instances where accepting requests of gift authorship may nevertheless be the right thing to do. More specifically, we propose that researchers may find themselves in a situation much similar to the problem of dirty hands, which has been frequently discussed in political philosophy and applied ethics.
The problem of dirty hands is relevant to what we call hostage authorship, where the researchers include undeserving authors unwillingly, and only because they find it unavoidable in order to accomplish a morally important research goal.
URL : Hostage authorship and the problem of dirty hands
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1177/1747016118764305
Auteur/Author : Lucile Desmoulins
L’émergence dans les médias états-uniens et français de discours questionnant la légitimité du rôle politique joué par les think tanks est en partie liée à des actions de communication stratégique illégales et immorales employées par certaines entreprises, qui fabriquent et promeuvent des discours d’une scientificité contestable pour défendre leurs intérêts économiques et faire du lobbying. Cette forme d’instrumentalisation de l’autorité du discours scientifique bénéficie de l’hybridité des formes organisationnelles « think tanks » et « lobbies ».
La fabrication, la médiatisation et l’instrumentalisation de discours auréolés d’une autorité scientifique interroge la normalité des techniques de communication stratégique.
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02554508
Authors : Katie Wilson, Anthony Kiuna, Richard Lamptey, Susan Veldsman, Lucy Montgomery, Cameron Neylon, Richard Hosking, Karl Huang, Alkim Ozaygen
This paper discusses research undertaken by the Curtin Open Knowledge Initiative (COKI) and participants during and following an Open Knowledge international workshop held in Mauritius in September 2019.
The workshop brought together key experts to explore the role of open knowledge in the creation of equitable and inclusive global knowledge landscapes.
This paper explores the role of open access and institutional repositories in knowledge sharing and the dissemination of research output from higher education and research institutions within the African continent.
The paper reviews the landscape of research output from the African continent; analyses open access research output, overviews of institutional knowledge sharing positions and the dissemination of research output from Ghana, Rwanda, South Africa and Uganda.
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02544891
Author : Iva Zlodi
In the last years here is an increasing need to ensure a more objective and transparent evaluation of scientific research in the Humanities and Social Sciences. This short paper explores some of the underlying issues and suggests a study using the suvey method based on a sample of 146 publications.
The results of this study could contribute to the identification and describing distinctive types of edited books and conference proceedings according to their peer-review procedures, and thus to facilitate the recognition of their scholarly value and reliability.
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02544293
Authors : Samara Klar, Yanna Krupnikov, John Barry Ryan, Kathleen Searles, Yotam Shmargad
To disseminate research, scholars once relied on university media services or journal press releases, but today any academic can turn to Twitter to share their published work with a broader audience.
The possibility that scholars can push their research out, rather than hope that it is pulled in, holds the potential for scholars to draw wide attention to their research. In this manuscript, we examine whether there are systematic differences in the types of scholars who most benefit from this push model.
Specifically, we investigate the extent to which there are gender differences in the dissemination of research via Twitter.
We carry out our analyses by tracking tweet patterns for articles published in six journals across two fields (political science and communication), and we pair this Twitter data with demographic and educational data about the authors of the published articles, as well as article citation rates.
We find considerable evidence that, overall, article citations are positively correlated with tweets about the article, and we find little evidence to suggest that author gender affects the transmission of research in this new media.
URL : Using social media to promote academic research: Identifying the benefits of twitter for sharing academic work
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0229446
Authors : Alkim Ozaygen, Lucy Montgomery, Cameron Neylon, Katie Wilson, RichardHosking, Karl Huang
This paper reports on a study of social media events relating to 28 Open Access (OA) monographs, published between 2014 and 2015. As with citations (Cronin 1981) social media events represent the frozen footprints of the journey that monographs take as they move through digital landscapes.
The study captured mentions of the study-set of monographs via Twitter, Facebook, Wikipedia and online blogs; as well as user ratings on Google Books, Amazon and Goodreads.
Information relating to the ways in which the books were bookmarked and cited was captured via the online reference managing platform Mendeley. The benefits and limitations of different altmetrics approaches to capturing and analyzing this data are discussed.
Practical suggestions for researchers interested in the application of Altmetrics approaches to studies of monographs are also provided.
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02544911