Archives des mots-clés : scientific communication

How Long Can We Build It? Ensuring Usability of a Scientific Code Base

Posté le par

Authors : Klaus Rechert, Jurek Oberhauser, Rafael Gieschke

Software and in particular source code became an important component of scientific publications and henceforth is now subject of research data management. Maintaining source code such that it remains a usable and a valuable scientific contribution is and remains a huge task.

Not all code contributions can be actively maintained forever. Eventually, there will be a significant backlog of legacy source-code. In this article we analyse the requirements for applying the concept of long-term reusability to source code.

We use simple case study to identify gaps and provide a technical infrastructure based on emulator to support automated builds of historic software in form of source code.

URL : How Long Can We Build It? Ensuring Usability of a Scientific Code Base

DOI : https://doi.org/10.2218/ijdc.v16i1.770

Why Open Access: Economics and Business Researchers’ Perspectives

Posté le par

Authors : Carmen López-Vergara, Pilar Flores Asenjo, Alfonso Rosa-García

Public research policies have been promoting open-access publication in recent years as an adequate model for the dissemination of scientific knowledge. However, depending on the disciplines, its use is very diverse.

This study explores the determinants of open-access publication among academic researchers of economics and business, as well as their assessment of different economic measures focused on publication stimulus.

To do so, a survey of Spanish business and economics researchers was conducted. They reported an average of 19% of their publications in open-access journals, hybrids or fully Gold Route open access. Almost 80% of the researchers foresee a future increase in the volume of open-access publications.

When determining where to publish their research results, the main criterion for the selection of a scientific journal is the impact factor. Regarding open access, the most valued aspect is the visibility and dissemination it provides.

Although the cost of publication is not the most relevant criterion in the choice of a journal, three out of four researchers consider that a reduction in fees and an increase in funding are measures that would boost the open-access model.

URL : Why Open Access: Economics and Business Researchers’ Perspectives

DOI : https://doi.org/10.3390/publications9030037

Preprints in times of COVID19: the time is ripe for agreeing on terminology and good practices

Posté le par

Authors : Raffaella Ravinetto, Céline Caillet, Muhammad H. Zaman, Jerome Amir Singh, Philippe J. Guerin, Aasim Ahmad, Carlos E. Durán, Amar Jesani, Ana Palmero, Laura Merson, Peter W. Horby, E. Bottieau, Tammy Hoffmann, Paul N. Newton

Over recent years, the research community has been increasingly using preprint servers to share manuscripts that are not yet peer-reviewed. Even if it enables quick dissemination of research findings, this practice raises several challenges in publication ethics and integrity.

In particular, preprints have become an important source of information for stakeholders interested in COVID19 research developments, including traditional media, social media, and policy makers.

Despite caveats about their nature, many users can still confuse pre-prints with peer-reviewed manuscripts. If unconfirmed but already widely shared first-draft results later prove wrong or misinterpreted, it can be very difficult to “unlearn” what we thought was true. Complexity further increases if unconfirmed findings have been used to inform guidelines.

To help achieve a balance between early access to research findings and its negative consequences, we formulated five recommendations: (a) consensus should be sought on a term clearer than ‘pre-print’, such as ‘Unrefereed manuscript’, “Manuscript awaiting peer review” or ‘’Non-reviewed manuscript”; (b) Caveats about unrefereed manuscripts should be prominent on their first page, and each page should include a red watermark stating ‘Caution—Not Peer Reviewed’; (c) pre-print authors should certify that their manuscript will be submitted to a peer-review journal, and should regularly update the manuscript status; (d) high level consultations should be convened, to formulate clear principles and policies for the publication and dissemination of non-peer reviewed research results; (e) in the longer term, an international initiative to certify servers that comply with good practices could be envisaged.

URL : Preprints in times of COVID19: the time is ripe for agreeing on terminology and good practices

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12910-021-00667-7

Publication patterns’ changes due to the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal and short-term scientometric analysis

Posté le par

Authors : Shir Aviv-Reuven, Ariel Rosenfeld

In recent months the COVID-19 (also known as SARS-CoV-2 and Coronavirus) pandemic has spread throughout the world. In parallel, extensive scholarly research regarding various aspects of the pandemic has been published. In this work, we analyse the changes in biomedical publishing patterns due to the pandemic.

We study the changes in the volume of publications in both peer reviewed journals and preprint servers, average time to acceptance of papers submitted to biomedical journals, international (co-)authorship of these papers (expressed by diversity and volume), and the possible association between journal metrics and said changes.

We study these possible changes using two approaches: a short-term analysis through which changes during the first six months of the outbreak are examined for both COVID-19 related papers and non-COVID-19 related papers; and a longitudinal approach through which changes are examined in comparison to the previous four years.

Our results show that the pandemic has so far had a tremendous effect on all examined accounts of scholarly publications: A sharp increase in publication volume has been witnessed and it can be almost entirely attributed to the pandemic; a significantly faster mean time to acceptance for COVID-19 papers is apparent, and it has (partially) come at the expense of non-COVID-19 papers; and a significant reduction in international collaboration for COVID-19 papers has also been identified.

As the pandemic continues to spread, these changes may cause a slow down in research in non-COVID-19 biomedical fields and bring about a lower rate of international collaboration.

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04059-x

Manuscript Accepted!: Collaborating on a scholarly publishing symposium for graduate students and early career academic faculty

Posté le par

Authors : Teresa Auch Schultz, Rosalind Bucy, Amy Hunsaker, Amy Shannon, Chrissy Klenke, Iñaki Arrieta Baro

INTRODUCTION

As academic libraries expand their scholarly communication support, they also need to find ways to help educate graduate students about this area as well as market themselves.

DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM

The University of Nevada, Reno Libraries created a one-day symposium, called Manuscript Accepted!, aimed at graduate students and early career faculty that would use faculty and library expertise to lead panels and workshops.

This article discusses planning for the event, including collaborating with other on-campus groups, working with publishers for financial support, and planning a program that would meet a variety of needs. Assessment of the first two symposiums, held in 2019 and 2020, shows that attendees valued the event while also highlighting the need for more targeted support for specific areas, such as the humanities.

NEXT STEPS

The Libraries plans to continue Manuscript Accepted! as a one-day symposium, although it will also look to ways to expand attendance. Finally, the Libraries is investigating ways to create smaller events that could be tied into the Manuscript Acceptance! brand but that help meet other needs of our attendees.

URL : Manuscript Accepted!: Collaborating on a scholarly publishing symposium for graduate students and early career academic faculty

DOI : https://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.2385

Measuring academic entities’ impact by content-based citation analysis in a heterogeneous academic network

Posté le par

Authors : Fang Zhang, Shengli Wu

Evaluating the impact of papers, researchers and venues objectively is of great significance to academia and beyond. This may help researchers, research organizations, and government agencies in various ways, such as helping researchers find valuable papers and authoritative venues and helping research organizations identify good researchers.

A few studies find that rather than treating citations equally, differentiating them is a promising way for impact evaluation of academic entities. However, most of those methods are metadata-based only and do not consider contents of cited and citing papers; while a few content-based methods are not sophisticated, and further improvement is possible.

In this paper, we study the citation relationships between entities by content-based approaches. Especially, an ensemble learning method is used to classify citations into different strength types, and a word-embedding based method is used to estimate topical similarity of the citing and cited papers.

A heterogeneous network is constructed with the weighted citation links and several other features. Based on the heterogeneous network that consists of three types of entities, we apply an iterative PageRank-like method to rank the impact of papers, authors and venues at the same time through mutual reinforcement.

Experiments are conducted on an ACL dataset, and the results demonstrate that our method greatly outperforms state-of-the art competitors in improving ranking effectiveness of papers, authors and venues, as well as in being robust against malicious manipulation of citations.

URL : Measuring academic entities’ impact by content‑based citation analysis in a heterogeneous academic network

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04063-1

Invisible science: publication of negative research results

Posté le par

Authors : Luis Fernando Sayão, Luana Farias Sales, Carla Beatriz Marques Felipe

An important part of scientific research activities yield negative results – non-confirmatory and null data, inconclusive experiments, unexpected data. These results permeate the entire research cycle and constitute an important part of the full scientific knowledge flow generation.

However, despite the acknowledgment that it is the non-confirmatory findings that result in the rejection of consolidated hypotheses that drive the progress of science, most of these investigation routes are not documented.

Growing competition for resources, tenure, and impact publications induces researchers to produce “positive” results that are more likely to be published, interfering with the principles of science reproducibility and self-correction and in the scientific communication cycle.

This study aims to review negative results incorporation in the traditional academic publication cycle. It also seeks to identify and systematize the main barriers that prevent researchers from publishing negative results.

This exploratory study is based methodologically on the scarce literature on the subject. It confirms the initial assumption that few scientific journals accept, edit special issues or are dedicated to the publication of negative results.

URL : Invisible science: publication of negative research results

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1590/2318-0889202133e200009