Authors : Kelly D Cobey, Agnes Grudniewicz, Manoj M Lalu, Danielle B Rice, Hana Raffoul, David Moher
To develop effective interventions to prevent publishing in presumed predatory journals (ie, journals that display deceptive characteristics, markers or data that cannot be verified), it is helpful to understand the motivations and experiences of those who have published in these journals.
An online survey delivered to two sets of corresponding authors containing demographic information, and questions about researchers’ perceptions of publishing in the presumed predatory journal, type of article processing fees paid and the quality of peer review received. The survey also asked six open-ended items about researchers’ motivations and experiences.
Using Beall’s lists, we identified two groups of individuals who had published empirical articles in biomedical journals that were presumed to be predatory.
Eighty-two authors partially responded (~14% response rate (11.4%[44/386] from the initial sample, 19.3%[38/197] from second sample) to our survey. The top three countries represented were India (n=21, 25.9%), USA (n=17, 21.0%) and Ethiopia (n=5, 6.2%).
Three participants (3.9%) thought the journal they published in was predatory at the time of article submission. The majority of participants first encountered the journal via an email invitation to submit an article (n=32, 41.0%), or through an online search to find a journal with relevant scope (n=22, 28.2%).
Most participants indicated their study received peer review (n=65, 83.3%) and that this was helpful and substantive (n=51, 79.7%). More than a third (n=32, 45.1%) indicated they did not pay fees to publish.
Auteurs/Authors : Marie-Laure Malingre, Morgane Mignon, Cécile Pierre, Alexandre Serres
La structuration et le partage des données s’imposent depuis cinq ans au monde de la recherche, à travers des injonctions politiques (de Horizon 2020 au Plan national pour la science ouverte).
L’analyse de l’enquête menée en 2017 auprès des chercheurs de l’université Rennes 2 sur leurs pratiques, représentations et attentes en matière de données conduit à interroger le terme lui-même. Variable et complexe, contrairement à ce que suggère le mot « donnée », la notion ne va pas de soi.
L’article s’efforcera de montrer qu’elle fait l’objet d’une triple construction, épistémologique, intellectuelle et politique, dans les discours des chercheurs et des acteurs institutionnels, en tension avec les pratiques constatées sur le terrain.
DOI : https://www.openscience.fr/Construction-s-et-contradictions-des-donnees-de-recherche-en-SHS#
Authors : Kathleen Gregory, Paul Groth, Helena Cousijn, Andrea Scharnhorst, Sally Wyatt
A cross‐disciplinary examination of the user behaviors involved in seeking and evaluating data is surprisingly absent from the research data discussion. This review explores the data retrieval literature to identify commonalities in how users search for and evaluate observational research data in selected disciplines.
Two analytical frameworks, rooted in information retrieval and science and technology studies, are used to identify key similarities in practices as a first step toward developing a model describing data retrieval.
URL : Searching Data: A Review of Observational Data Retrieval Practices in Selected Disciplines
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24165
Authors : Carol Tenopir, Lisa Christian, Jordan Kaufman
While journal articles are still considered the most important sources of scholarly reading, libraries may no longer have a monopoly on providing discovery and access. Many other sources of scholarly information are available to readers.
This international study examines how researchers discover, read, and use scholarly literature for their work. Respondents in 2018 report an average of almost 20 article readings a month and there are still significant differences found in the reading and use of scholarly literature by discipline and geographical location, consistent with the earlier studies.
Researchers show they are willing to change or adopt new strategies to discover and obtain articles.
URL : Seeking, Reading, and Use of Scholarly Articles: An International Study of Perceptions and Behavior of Researchers
Alternative location : https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/7/1/18
Authors : Gregory S. Patience, Federico Galli, Paul A. Patience, Daria C. Boffito
Authorship is the currency of an academic career for which the number of papers researchers publish demonstrates creativity, productivity, and impact. To discourage coercive authorship practices and inflated publication records, journals require authors to affirm and detail their intellectual contributions but this strategy has been unsuccessful as authorship lists continue to grow.
Here, we surveyed close to 6000 of the top cited authors in all science categories with a list of 25 research activities that we adapted from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) authorship guidelines.
Responses varied widely from individuals in the same discipline, same level of experience, and same geographic region. Most researchers agreed with the NIH criteria and grant authorship to individuals who draft the manuscript, analyze and interpret data, and propose ideas.
However, thousands of the researchers also value supervision and contributing comments to the manuscript, whereas the NIH recommends discounting these activities when attributing authorship.
People value the minutiae of research beyond writing and data reduction: researchers in the humanities value it less than those in pure and applied sciences; individuals from Far East Asia and Middle East and Northern Africa value these activities more than anglophones and northern Europeans.
While developing national and international collaborations, researchers must recognize differences in peoples values while assigning authorship.
URL : Intellectual contributions meriting authorship: Survey results from the top cited authors across all science categories
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0198117
Auteur/Author : Julie Duprat
Alors que ces dernières années l’importance de l’ouverture des publications écrites par les chercheurs des universités françaises a été largement abordée, les regards se tournent désormais sur une autre de leurs productions avec les données de la recherche.
Dans ce contexte, l’Université Bordeaux Montaigne, spécialisée en sciences humaines et sociales, souhaite mettre en place un service « données de la recherche » afin d’accompagner ses chercheurs dans la gestion et le partage de leurs données de recherche.
Au préalable du service à venir, une enquête a été menée entre septembre et décembre 2018 auprès des chercheurs de l’Université par la conservatrice-stagiaire Julie Duprat afin de faire remonter les besoins du terrain, dans une logique bottom up.
URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02020141
Author : Laura Bowering Mullen
Scholarly communication and open access practices in psychological science are rapidly evolving. However, most published works that focus on scholarly communication issues do not target the specific discipline, and instead take a more “one size fits all” approach.
When it comes to scholarly communication, practices and traditions vary greatly across the disciplines. It is important to look at issues such as open access (of all types), reproducibility, research data management, citation metrics, the emergence of preprint options, the evolution of new peer review models, coauthorship conventions, and use of scholarly networking sites such as ResearchGate and Academia.edu from a disciplinary perspective.
Important issues in scholarly publishing for psychology include uptake of authors’ use of open access megajournals, how open science is represented in psychology journals, challenges of interdisciplinarity, and how authors avail themselves of green and gold open access strategies.
This overview presents a discipline-focused treatment of selected scholarly communication topics that will allow psychology researchers and others to get up to speed on this expansive topic.
Further study into researcher behavior in terms of scholarly communication in psychology would create more understanding of existing culture as well as provide early career researchers with a more effective roadmap to the current landscape.
As no other single work provides a study of scholarly communication and open access in psychology, this work aims to partially fill that niche.
DOI : https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/2d7um