Étiquette : scientific communication

Catégories
EN

To Open or Not to Open: An Exploration of Faculty Decisions to Publish Open-Access Article

Authors : Jessica Kirschner, Hillary Miller, Preeti Kamat, Jose Alcaine, Sergio Chaparro, Nina Exner

Introduction

Faculty face numerous pressures as they decide whether to publish articles open access (OA). This pilot study investigated the extent to which School of Education faculty members’ engagement with OA was influenced by promotion and tenure (P&T) and how this influence related to other intrinsic, extrinsic, and contextual factors.

Methods

This exploratory, sequential, mixed-method study adapted Social Exchange Theory to understand faculty engagement with OA article publication. The study used a quantitative survey followed by qualitative interviews and focus groups.

Results

Participants reported that P&T had substantive influence over faculty practices regarding OA. Connected factors included beliefs about OA journal quality, colleagues’ perceptions regarding OA, and OA articles’ wider impacts.

Discussion

P&T was an important driver in article publishing decisions. However, when discussing OA in P&T, faculty also discussed a range of related issues such as OA journal quality. Furthermore, OA adopters tended to be those who have even stronger beliefs about the impact of OA than about OA’s role in P&T.

URL : To Open or Not to Open: An Exploration of Faculty Decisions to Publish Open-Access Article

DOI : https://doi.org/10.31274/jlsc.16894

Catégories
EN

An analysis of the effects of sharing research data, code, and preprints on citations

Authors : Giovanni Colavizza, Lauren Cadwallader, Marcel LaFlamme, Grégory Dozot, Stéphane Lecorney, Daniel Rappo, Iain Hrynaszkiewicz

Calls to make scientific research more open have gained traction with a range of societal stakeholders. Open Science practices include but are not limited to the early sharing of results via preprints and openly sharing outputs such as data and code to make research more reproducible and extensible. Existing evidence shows that adopting Open Science practices has effects in several domains.

In this study, we investigate whether adopting one or more Open Science practices leads to significantly higher citations for an associated publication, which is one form of academic impact. We use a novel dataset known as Open Science Indicators, produced by PLOS and DataSeer, which includes all PLOS publications from 2018 to 2023 as well as a comparison group sampled from the PMC Open Access Subset. In total, we analyze circa 122’000 publications. We calculate publication and author-level citation indicators and use a broad set of control variables to isolate the effect of Open Science Indicators on received citations.

We show that Open Science practices are adopted to different degrees across scientific disciplines. We find that the early release of a publication as a preprint correlates with a significant positive citation advantage of about 20.2% on average. We also find that sharing data in an online repository correlates with a smaller yet still positive citation advantage of 4.3% on average.

However, we do not find a significant citation advantage for sharing code. Further research is needed on additional or alternative measures of impact beyond citations. Our results are likely to be of interest to researchers, as well as publishers, research funders, and policymakers.

Arxiv : https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.16171

Catégories
EN

Between Flat-Earthers and Fitness Coaches: Who is Citing Scientific Publications in YouTube Video Descriptions?

Authors : Olga Zagovora, Katrin Weller

In this study, we undertake an extensive analysis of YouTube channels that reference research publications in their video descriptions, offering a unique insight into the intersection of digital media and academia. Our investigation focuses on three principal aspects: the background of YouTube channel owners, their thematic focus, and the nature of their operational dynamics, specifically addressing whether they work individually or in groups. Our results highlight a strong emphasis on content related to science and engineering, as well as health, particularly in channels managed by individual researchers and academic institutions.

However, there is a notable variation in the popularity of these channels, with professional YouTubers and commercial media entities often outperforming in terms of viewer engagement metrics like likes, comments, and views. This underscores the challenge academic channels face in attracting a wider audience. Further, we explore the role of academic actors on YouTube, scrutinizing their impact in disseminating research and the types of publications they reference.

Despite a general inclination towards professional academic topics, these channels displayed a varied effectiveness in spotlighting highly cited research. Often, they referenced a wide array of publications, indicating a diverse but not necessarily impact-focused approach to content selection.

Arxiv : https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.15083

Catégories
FR

Rapport d’Enquête Création d’une revue d’articles sur des jeux de données Data Journal SHS

Auteur.ices/Authors : Laurence Bizien, Véronique Cohoner, Fiona Edmond, Arnaud Natal, Pierre Peraldi-Mittelette

La présente enquête a été menée dans le cadre du projet de création d’une revue de données interdisciplinaire en Sciences Humaines et Sociales à l’horizon 2025. Le groupe de travail (GT) œuvrant à ce projet a vu le jour suite à la journée d’études organisée par la Maison des Sciences de l’Homme Lorraine le 10 mars 2023; intitulée : « Un data journal interdisciplinaire pour les sciences humaines et sociales. Enjeux scientifiques et mise en œuvre pratique »

URL : Rapport d’Enquête Création d’une revue d’articles sur des jeux de données Data Journal SHS

HAL : https://hal.univ-lorraine.fr/hal-04541094

Catégories
FR

Utilisation et usages des identifiants numériques chercheurs en France. Synthèse de l’enquête nationale 2023

Auteur.ices/Authors : Aline Bouchard, Christophe Boudry

L’enquête présentée dans ce rapport s’insère dans un projet de recherche composé de quatre phases qualitatives et quantitatives, dont les résultats seront publiés au fur et à mesure de l’avancement du projet. Le présent rapport en constitue la première partie et présente les résultats d’un questionnaire national, conduit entre novembre 2022 et février 2023.

Son objectif principal était de faire un état des lieux des usages des identifiants numériques chercheurs (INC), et plus particulièrement d’ORCID, dans la communauté de recherche française, en étudiant leur contexte, leur connaissance et leurs pratiques associées, les moteurs et freins à leur adoption, et les besoins de formation à ces outils. 6 125 personnes ont complété intégralement ce questionnaire national, ce qui correspond à environ 3,2 % de la population nationale des chercheurs.

La première partie de ce rapport questionne les répondants sur leur familiarité et leurs connaissances des réseaux sociaux académiques (RSA), outils de visibilité et identifiants numériques chercheurs. Cette partie met en évidence le rôle essentiel de la discipline dans l’appropriation de ces différents outils, de grandes catégories d’usages et différents degrés d’acculturation à ces outils.

La deuxième partie de ce rapport concerne spécifiquement l’INC ORCID, et montre globalement une connaissance et une utilisation avant tout concrète et pragmatique de cet identifiant par les chercheurs. Concernant les besoins en formation ou initiation à ces outils, selon les chercheurs interrogés, ils s’avèrent être encore importants, que ce soit en présentiel ou en distanciel.

URL : Utilisation et usages des identifiants numériques chercheurs en France. Synthèse de l’enquête nationale 2023

HAL : https://hal.science/hal-04537803

Catégories
EN

The role of non-scientific factors vis-a-vis the quality of publications in determining their scholarly impact

Authors : Giovanni Abramo, Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo, Leonardo Grilli

In the evaluation of scientific publications’ impact, the interplay between intrinsic quality and non-scientific factors remains a subject of debate. While peer review traditionally assesses quality, bibliometric techniques gauge scholarly impact. This study investigates the role of non-scientific attributes alongside quality scores from peer review in determining scholarly impact.

Leveraging data from the first Italian Research Assessment Exercise (VTR 2001-2003) and Web of Science citations, we analyse the relationship between quality scores, non-scientific factors, and publication short- and long-term impact.

Our findings shed light on the significance of non-scientific elements overlooked in peer review, offering policymakers and research management insights in choosing evaluation methodologies. Sections delve into the debate, identify non-scientific influences, detail methodologies, present results, and discuss implications.

Arxiv : https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.05345

Catégories
EN

Sentiment Analysis of Citations in Scientific Articles Using ChatGPT: Identifying Potential Biases and Conflicts of Interest

Author : Walid Hariri

Scientific articles play a crucial role in advancing knowledge and informing research directions. One key aspect of evaluating scientific articles is the analysis of citations, which provides insights into the impact and reception of the cited works. This article introduces the innovative use of large language models, particularly ChatGPT, for comprehensive sentiment analysis of citations within scientific articles.

By leveraging advanced natural language processing (NLP) techniques, ChatGPT can discern the nuanced positivity or negativity of citations, offering insights into the reception and impact of cited works. Furthermore, ChatGPT’s capabilities extend to detecting potential biases and conflicts of interest in citations, enhancing the objectivity and reliability of scientific literature evaluation.

This study showcases the transformative potential of artificial intelligence (AI)-powered tools in enhancing citation analysis and promoting integrity in scholarly research.

Arxiv : https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.01800