Étiquette : scientific communication

Publié le

Why are these publications missing? Uncovering the reasons behind the exclusion of documents in free-access scholarly databases

Authors : Lorena Delgado-Quirós, Isidro F. Aguillo, Alberto Martín-Martín, Emilio Delgado López-Cózar, Enrique Orduña-Malea, José Luis Ortega

This study analyses the coverage of seven free-access bibliographic databases (Crossref, Dimensions—non-subscription version, Google Scholar, Lens, Microsoft Academic, Scilit, and Semantic Scholar) to identify the potential reasons that might cause the exclusion of scholarly documents and how they could influence coverage.

To do this, 116 k randomly selected bibliographic records from Crossref were used as a baseline. API endpoints and web scraping were used to query each database. The results show that coverage differences are mainly caused by the way each service builds their databases.

While classic bibliographic databases ingest almost the exact same content from Crossref (Lens and Scilit miss 0.1% and 0.2% of the records, respectively), academic search engines present lower coverage (Google Scholar does not find: 9.8%, Semantic Scholar: 10%, and Microsoft Academic: 12%). Coverage differences are mainly attributed to external factors, such as web accessibility and robot exclusion policies (39.2%–46%), and internal requirements that exclude secondary content (6.5%–11.6%).

In the case of Dimensions, the only classic bibliographic database with the lowest coverage (7.6%), internal selection criteria such as the indexation of full books instead of book chapters (65%) and the exclusion of secondary content (15%) are the main motives of missing publications.

URL : Why are these publications missing? Uncovering the reasons behind the exclusion of documents in free-access scholarly databases

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24839

Publié le

The Predatory Paradox : Ethics, Politics, and Practices in Contemporary Scholarly Publishing

Authors : Amy Koerber, Jesse C. Starkey, Karin Ardon-Dryer, R. Glenn Cummins, Lyombe Eko, Kerk F. Kee

In today’s ‘publish or perish’ academic setting, the institutional prizing of quantity over quality has given rise to and perpetuated the dilemma of predatory publishing. Upon a close examination, however, the definition of ‘predatory’ itself becomes slippery, evading neat boxes or lists which might seek to easily define and guard against it.

This volume serves to foreground a nuanced representation of this multifaceted issue. In such a rapidly evolving landscape, this book becomes a field guide to its historical, political, and economic aspects, presenting thoughtful interviews, legal analysis and original research. Case studies from both European-American and non-European-American stakeholders emphasize the worldwide nature of the challenge faced by researchers of all levels.

This coauthored book is structured into both textual and supplemental materials. Key takeaways, discussion questions, and complete classroom activities accompanying each chapter provide opportunities for engagement and real-world applications of these concepts.

Crucially relevant to early career researchers and the senior faculty, library scholars, and administrators who mentor and support them, ‘The Predatory Paradox: Ethics, Politics, and Practices in Contemporary Scholarly Publishing’ offers practical recommendations for navigating the complex and often contradictory advice currently available. University instructors and teaching faculty will also find the reading essential in order to properly prepare both graduate and undergraduate students for the potential pitfalls endemic to scholarly publishing.

URL : The Predatory Paradox : Ethics, Politics, and Practices in Contemporary Scholarly Publishing

DOI : https://doi.org/10.11647/OBP.0364

Publié le

Academic co-authorship is a risky game

Authors : Teddy Lazebnik, Stephan Beck, Labib Shami

Conducting a project with multiple participants is a complex task that involves multiple social, economic, and psychological interactions. Conducting academic research in general and the process of writing an academic manuscript, in particular, is notorious for being challenging to successfully navigate due to the current form of collaboration dynamics common in academia.

In this study, we propose a game-theory-based model for a co-authorship writing project in which authors are allowed to raise an ultimatum, blocking the publishment of the manuscript if they do not get more credit for the work.

Using the proposed model, we explore the influence of the contribution and utility of publishing the manuscript on the rate one or more authors would gain from raising an ultimatum. Similarly, we show that the project’s duration and the current state have a major impact on this rate, as well as the number of authors.

In addition, we examine common student-advisor and colleague-colleague co-authorships scenarios. Our model reveals disturbing results and demonstrates that the current, broadly accepted, academic practices for collaborations are designed in a way that stimulates authors to raise an ultimatum and stopped only by their integrity and not by a systematic design.

URL : Academic co-authorship is a risky game

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-023-04843-x

Publié le

The use of shadow libraries at Universitas Indonesia

Authors : Fauzan Eka Kusuma, Rahmi Rahmi

Shadow libraries (SLs), such as Sci-Hub, Z-Library, and Library Genesis (LibGen), are online databases that provide content that is otherwise difficult to access (due to paywalls or other copyright controls) using unofficial methods of questionable legality. Interest in the SL phenomenon has focused on copyright infringement that occurs when a database provides library materials, for which access rights need to be purchased, without the knowledge of a given copyright owner.

This study analyzes the use of SLs at the Universitas Indonesia (UI). The research uses a quantitative approach, with a survey distributed to 262 undergraduate students at UI. The frequency of SL use in academic activities of UI students is compared with the use of the UI Online Public Access Catalog (OPAC UI).

The results show that most UI students have not used SLs. However, those who have used SLs report more positive impressions and higher levels of satisfaction compared with OPAC UI.

URL : The use of shadow libraries at Universitas Indonesia

DOI : https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v28i10.12947

Publié le

The Importance of Single Source Publishing in Scientific Publishing

Authors : Antoine Fauchié, Yann Audin

Academic publishing currently raises several issues, such as the production of multiple artifacts from a single source. The expression “single source publishing” refers to generating several formats from a single source.

A single document can be used to produce various formats, without having to switch from one process to another, whether it is a PDF format for printing, an XML export for a digital platform, or a digital version in HTML format. This editorial challenge brings up both theoretical and technical questions, such as the legitimization of content, the evolution of publishing practices, and the creation of adequate tools.

At the intersection of media studies, publishing studies, and literature, the concepts of hybridity (McLuhan, 1968), hybridization (Ludovico, 2012), or editorialization (Vitali-Rosati, 2016) allow us to question the principles of this editorial design.

URL : The Importance of Single Source Publishing in Scientific Publishing

DOI : https://doi.org/10.16995/dscn.9655

Publié le

L’utilisation de HAL par les laboratoires de recherche : Une étude quantitative

Auteur.ice.s/Authors : Joachim Schöpfel, Florence Thiault, Hélène Prost, Bernard Jacquemin, Éric Kergosien

L’article présente les résultats d’une étude menée dans le cadre du projet HAL/LO, sur un échantillon de 1 246 laboratoires (=1 035 612 dépôts) rattachés aux dix grandes universités de recherche et membres de l’association Udice.

L’objectif est une description plus détaillée des pratiques sur HAL. 99 % des laboratoires sont présents sur HAL, avec une distribution du type « longue traîne ». 52 % des publications sont des articles, 23 % des communications. Le degré d’ouverture moyen est 32 % (dépôts avec documents). 50 % des laboratoires ont créé une collection sur HAL.

La discussion porte sur trois aspects : le rôle des laboratoires par rapport à HAL, avec une description plus détaillée de plusieurs situations types ; l’impact des disciplines par rapport au nombre des dépôts, à la création d’une collection, au dépôt de certains types de documents ou à l’auto-archivage des documents en texte intégral ; l’évolution du dispositif HAL vers un outil pour recenser la production scientifique, ce qui pose plusieurs questions notamment sur la provenance et la qualité des métadonnées.

URL : L’utilisation de HAL par les laboratoires de recherche : Une étude quantitative

DOI : https://dx.doi.org/10.35562/balisages.1166

Publié le

Long-term availability of data associated with articles in PLOS ONE

Author : Lisa M. Federer

The adoption of journal policies requiring authors to include a Data Availability Statement has helped to increase the availability of research data associated with research articles. However, having a Data Availability Statement is not a guarantee that readers will be able to locate the data; even if provided with an identifier like a uniform resource locator (URL) or a digital object identifier (DOI), the data may become unavailable due to link rot and content drift. :

To explore the long-term availability of resources including data, code, and other digital research objects associated with papers, this study extracted 8,503 URLs and DOIs from a corpus of nearly 50,000 Data Availability Statements from papers published in PLOS ONE between 2014 and 2016.

These URLs and DOIs were used to attempt to retrieve the data through both automated and manual means. Overall, 80% of the resources could be retrieved automatically, compared to much lower retrieval rates of 10–40% found in previous papers that relied on contacting authors to locate data.

Because a URL or DOI might be valid but still not point to the resource, a subset of 350 URLs and 350 DOIs were manually tested, with 78% and 98% of resources, respectively, successfully retrieved.

Having a DOI and being shared in a repository were both positively associated with availability. Although resources associated with older papers were slightly less likely to be available, this difference was not statistically significant, suggesting that URLs and DOIs may be an effective means for accessing data over time.

These findings point to the value of including URLs and DOIs in Data Availability Statements to ensure access to data on a long-term basis.

URL : Long-term availability of data associated with articles in PLOS ONE

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0272845