Search

Macao's academic book publishing industry has a rich history and has grown significantly over the past two decades. This study employs a semi‐structured in‐depth interview to evaluate the current and prospective state of Macao's academic book publishing industry. The SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) analysis and the PEST (Political, Economic, Social, and Technological) analysis are used in this study. The strengths of Macao's academic book publishing industry include that requesting an ISBN in Macao is easy and quick under the principle of 'One Country, Two Systems' and financial support from the Macao SAR government. However, the industry faces several weaknesses, including an underdeveloped cultural industry, a small seller market and a talent shortage, and less copyright output. Opportunities for the industry exist through constructing a Culture‐based Bay Area in the Guangdong–Hong Kong–Macao Greater Bay Area and developing an international hub for digital trade in the Guangdong–Macao In‐Depth Cooperation Zone–Hengqin. However, Macao's academic book publishing industry is threatened by emerging Internet technologies, such as augmented reality, the metaverse, and ChatGPT. This paper also proposes strategies for future practice, such as taking the initiative to encourage a group of top‐tier publishers to establish branches in Macao and improve publications' cultural elements. The findings of this study provide valuable insights into the strategic management of Macao's academic book publishing industry and will be of interest to publishers, academic researchers, and policymakers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Key points: Our policy and implementation successfully identified references from predatory publishers, which authors without hesitation agreed to remove before publication.Higher predatory reference patterns emerged among authors in low‐income countries, those with non‐English primary languages, and sole authorship.After a year of implementing our policy, the editors changed our policy and workflow to better handle references from predatory publishers cited in literature reviews and meta‐analyses.Editorial responsibility is discussed, particularly concerning support for authors from lower‐ and middle‐income countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study was guided by previous research highlighting the significance of journal publishers' commercial or non‐profit orientations in shaping academic editors' perspectives regarding the necessity of enhancing editorial and business practices. There is limited understanding of how the editor–publisher relationship varies based on publishers' commercial orientation. This study revealed five key factors influencing editors' attitudes towards how publishers strive to provide high‐quality publications: (i) availability of high‐quality publication services; (ii) sufficient technological support and access to visibility‐related data; (iii) accessible marketing and indexing services; (iv) access to continuous education for the editorial team; and (v) a balance between editorial autonomy and publisher support in managing the journal. The study indicated that editors partnering with commercial publishers tended to receive more extensive and advanced services, better technological support, and more training opportunities, contributing to the production of superior end products. However, working with commercial publishers resulted in the trade‐off of less editorial independence, which sometimes compromised editors' decision‐making ability and made them feel uncertain about their further involvement. The study's findings highlighted the importance of publishers adopting a more strategic approach to support their editorial staff, while considering the unique needs of each journal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Academic book and journal publishing constitutes the majority focus of university presses. Besides commercial scholarly publishers, academic scholars and researchers view the opportunities provided by university presses as important venues for the dissemination of their research. This discussion focuses on the disciplinary imperative to publish scholarship that is ever more fluid and specialized as academic disciplines continue to become further nuanced in their response to the increasing knowledge produced by humanities and social science inquiry. The focus is on university presses and not commercial scholarly presses, although constitute a significant locus of scholarly publishing. What are the general characteristics of academic specialization and university press publishing? Further, how is disciplinary fluidity, especially evolving specialization, reflected in university press book publishing nomenclature and how scholarship is tied to the intellectual preoccupations of academic specialization? Multi‐ and inter‐disciplinarities further articulate disciplinary publishing, accelerating disciplinary fluidity. Examples from disciplinary and emerging configurations of disciplinary nomenclature utilized by university presses offers insight into specialization and publishing. Academic history publishing is used to illustrate newly emerging fluid disciplinary configurations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aimed to examine whether a graphical abstract (GA) on a publisher's official website affected an article's usage and citations. Articles published in Molecules during 2016 (n = 1389) and 2017 (n = 1804) were selected as the data sets. Propensity score matching analysis was conducted to examine the data sets. The results showed that articles with GAs had significantly greater text abstract usage than those without GAs. There were no significant differences between the two groups (articles with/without GAs) on the usage of the full text as well as citations, both in the data set of 2016 and the data set of 2017. Our study concluded that a GA played a role in attracting attention with 'the first impressions' to gain more clicks of text abstract for an article, however, it took no advantage in receiving more usage of full text and citations of the article. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Predatory publishers—those who do not adhere to rigorous standards of academic practice such as peer review—are increasingly infiltrating biomedical databases, to the detriment of the wider scientific community. These publishers frequently send unsolicited 'spam' emails to generate submission to their journals, with early career researchers (ECR) particularly susceptible to these practices because of pressures such as securing employment and promotion. This analysis sought to record and characterize the emails received over the course of a PhD and post‐doctoral position (~8 years), as well as attempts to unsubscribe from such emails, using a progressive and step‐wise manner. A total of 1,280 emails identified as academic spam were received (990 journal invitations, 220 conference invitations, 70 'other'). The first email was received 3 months after registration for an international conference. Attempts at unsubscribing were somewhat effective, whereby implications of reporting to respective authorities resulted in a 43% decrease in emails, although did not eliminate them completely, and therefore alternative approaches to eliminating academic spam may be needed. Ongoing education about predatory publishers, as well as action by key academic stakeholders, should look to reduce the impact these predatory publishers have upon the wider literature base. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Key points: Beall's list was an instrumental resource in its prime, however its cessation of updates since 2017 makes its continued use a potential concern.The landscape of predatory publishing has witnessed profound changes over recent years.In the context of up‐to‐date evaluations, many researchers and institutions are turning towards Kscien's list. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Key points: A name change policy ensures that any academic author wishing to change their name can do so 'silently' and without it being announced. This case study shares how De Gruyter designed and implemented a policy with a view to sharing its learning and experience with the wider publishing community.While anyone can take advantage of a name change policy, they are particularly important for transitioning scholars who want to change their name without being publicly 'outed' by the traditional revisions process.Academic publishers are increasingly seeing the importance of implementing name change policies. De Gruyter, alongside many others in the United States and Europe, are developing policies following COPE guidelines.The impetus for De Gruyter's name change policy came from a group of proactive employees who formed a committee to drive the idea forward. Over 18 months, the group researched best practice and engaged all parts of the business to build understanding, cooperation and support for the initiative.Introduced on 6th October 2022, De Gruyter's policy provides any academic author wishing to change their name with a 'blind update' of their name across all of their De Gruyter‐published material. The case study goes on to outline the personal learning points of the project leader, Dr. Christene Smith. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Key points: Diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) is at the core of Springer Nature's mission. Prioritizing DEI helps us become the business we aim to be: one that enables millions of people to access, trust and make sense of the latest insights, to improve and enrich both our lives and the planet.We are committed to championing DEI across our content, communities and organization—and also across the whole set of businesses that make up Springer Nature Group—education, health, professional and research.Working across our business to harness the varied reach, business capabilities and resources of all our colleagues has been important in this journey, but so too is accountability and the collective efforts of pan‐publisher initiatives.From editorial guidance to internal mentoring programmes and sustainable development curriculum programmes, our DEI work has been varied and successful, but we have learnt lessons along the way—and still have a way to go. This piece looks at what we have done so far, and our priorities for progress moving forward. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Key points: The main hurdle for publishers wishing to implement accessibility policies is staffing problems—including technical knowledge, experience, and time availability.The publishing industry is investing in accessibility, but often fails to communicate what investment has been made—they are just not telling their story.Over half of surveyed publishers included image descriptions in less than 10% of their content—not one publisher included it in more three‐quarters of their titles.The European Accessibility Act (EAA) will require compliance with accessibility and all publishers need to ensure they have systems in place for front and backlist titles by June 2025. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Key points: Accessibility is not binary, as easy as flipping a switch, it is closer to a web of interconnected elements, each of which can have serious implications on the accessibility of any content.Publishers need to be mindful of legislations, tools and the imminent arrival of European Accessibility Act requirements to build accessibility into workflows now.The future of accessibility format is EPUB.Authors respond well to requirements to provide alt text for images—so they should be encouraged to do so. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Key points: The main hurdle for publishers wishing to implement accessibility policies is staffing problems—including technical knowledge, experience, and time availability.The publishing industry is investing in accessibility, but often fails to communicate what investment has been made—they are just not telling their story.Over half of surveyed publishers included image descriptions in less than 10% of their content—not one publisher included it in more three‐quarters of their titles.The European Accessibility Act (EAA) will require compliance with accessibility and all publishers need to ensure they have systems in place for front and backlist titles by June 2025. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Key points: Accessibility is not binary, as easy as flipping a switch, it is closer to a web of interconnected elements, each of which can have serious implications on the accessibility of any content.Publishers need to be mindful of legislations, tools and the imminent arrival of European Accessibility Act requirements to build accessibility into workflows now.The future of accessibility format is EPUB.Authors respond well to requirements to provide alt text for images—so they should be encouraged to do so. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scholars engage with so‐called predatory or questionable journals for many different reasons. Among the contributing factors are monetary payoffs and the possibility of fast track faculty positions or promotion. It has been claimed that fast tracking promotion by using predatory publication outlets is an increasing problem. This study analyses the authors publishing in predatory journals with a focus on authors repeatedly publishing in predatory journals. In this study, a set of so‐called predatory journals indexed in Scopus was used. The data included 243,396 authorships of articles and reviews published from 2004 to 2021 by 169,742 unique authors. This study finds that 55% of the authors publish in one of these journals only once, 34.5% publish 2–5 times in these journals, 6.3% publish in them 6–10 times, and 4.2% publish more than 10 times. Furthermore, this study finds that the mean and median number of articles and reviews is correlated with the number of articles and reviews in predatory journals. Finally, authors publishing in predatory journals do not confine themselves to these journals and also publish in validated journals as well. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although interest in publishing studies is increasing, the academic status of PS is still uncertain. The aim of this work is to provide insight into the structure of the field by naming its core journals, determining the size of the research community and degree of collaboration, identifying the most relevant authors and institutions and answering the question as to whether PS is more academically or professionally oriented. This paper uses Scopus data and VOSviewer software to illustrate similarities between journals, authors and countries based on bibliographic coupling, co‐authorship, citation and co‐citation analysis. Eight journals representing various publishing sectors (trade, education, scholarly and professional publishing) were identified as the main sources of PS articles. They differ in their frequency of publication, number of citations, visibility in bibliographic databases, the percentage of co‐authored articles and the affiliation structure of the authors. Nine percent of authors out of 3370 unique authors form the publishing studies research community, with 1%–3% being identified as the key authors. The researchers worked mainly alone or in collaboration with one or two partners. Analysis of the authors' affiliations and a co‐citation analysis of source titles confirm strong PS research connections with the publishing industry. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A global survey of researchers was conducted to gather perceptions on the prevalence and impact of predatory academic journals and conferences. The survey was open and inclusive in nature, with 1872 researchers, from a wide array of geographic regions, disciplines and academic career stages, voluntarily participating. Both quantitative and qualitative data were collected and analysed. The survey revealed that over 80% (1537 of 1859) of respondents perceive predatory practices are already a serious problem or on the rise in their country of work, and risk infiltrating and undermining the research enterprise if left unchallenged. At least 24% (445 of 1872) of respondents admitted they had already published in a predatory journal, participated in a predatory conference, or did not know if they had. Over 87% of respondents who had published (174 of 199) or participated (60 of 64) indicated that a lack of awareness of predatory practices was the main reason. Those in lower‐middle and upper‐middle‐income countries were more likely to indicate they had engaged in these activities than those in high‐income ones, with some disciplines appearing to engage more than others. Individual impact was mixed: some indicated no impact while others noted a range of negative and detrimental feelings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study focuses on the phenomenon of presumed predatory scientific publications in the field of Educational Sciences, and the utilization of email by editors to request manuscripts. It examined, using content analysis methods, 210 emails received by three professors of the field of Education, at a Spanish university with different research profiles over a period of 3 months. Through analysis of the unsolicited emails a total of 139 journals and 37 publishers were identified and examined using: (a) the two main predatory journal inventories (Beall's list and Cabells' Predatory Reports), and (b) six of the major scientific bibliographic databases. The publishers and their websites were also analyzed, as well as the basic aspects of the emails' content. The majority of the unsolicited emails were from predatory journals or publishers and half of the article requests did not match the field of the recipient. In addition, it is relevant to note that more than half of the domains of predatory publishers analysed have untrustworthy security levels. The data provided relevant information on the phenomenon of predation in scientific publications in the field of Education and, most importantly, provided evidence for developing training and preventive strategies to tackle it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Key points: A group of UK‐based learned societies were anonymously interviewed to understand how trends are affecting their missions, strategies, and operations.The societies' missions focus on supporting academics and disseminating knowledge, with publishing being a means to achieve those goals rather than an end in itself.The responses were concerned about addressing open access (OA) but, particularly in the post‐COVID‐19 era, this was not necessarily their highest priority.The societies expressed reliance on larger corporate publishers on them to navigate the transition to OA publishing.The societies' focus is on evolving their missions to meet the changing needs of their academic communities, with issues around premises as a result of COVID‐19 being more pressing than publishing industry changes.The societies face challenges in adapting to the shift to online and digital operations, particularly in regards to maintaining engagement with their members. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Retraction notices are expected to be transparent about entities accountable for retractions and their reasons for retraction. No previous research on retraction notices has investigated accountable entities other than authors of retracted publications and their reasons for retraction from a cross‐disciplinary and a diachronic perspective. Drawing on a dataset of 7650 unique retraction notices published before 2020 and indexed in the Web of Science Core Collection, this study identified 457 retraction notices that held four types of non‐author entities accountable. Journal authorities (i.e., editors and publishers) were found responsible for retractions in 62.14% of the retraction notices, followed by unidentifiable entities (26.91%), third parties (6.13%), and dual entities (i.e., both authors and journal authorities, 4.81%). The three most frequent reasons for retraction were republication of valid publications (36.76%), unspecified reasons (26.91%), and publication of unpublishable work (17.07%). Accountable non‐author entities were more identifiable in the retraction notices published between 2010 and 2019 than in those published before 2010. Retraction notices in soft disciplines were more likely than those in hard disciplines to identify journal authorities as accountable entities. These findings offer implications for handling retractions more effectively and efficiently. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The list of potential, possible or probable predatory scholarly open access (OA) publishers compiled by Jeffrey Beall was examined to determine the effect of their inclusion upon authors, and a possible bias against OA journals. Manually collected data from the publication archives of a sample of 250 journals from Beall publishers reveals a strong tendency towards a decline in their article output during 2012–2020. A comparison of the subset of 506 Beall journals indexed in Scopus with a benchmark set of other OA journals in Scopus with similar characteristics shows that Beall journals reveal as a group a strong decline in citation impact over the years, and reached an impact level far below that of their benchmarks. The Beall list of publishers was found to be heterogeneous in terms of bibliometric indicators but to be clearly differentiated from OA journals not included in the list. The same bibliometric comparison against comparable non‐OA journals reveal similar, but less marked, differences in citation and publication growth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Data repositories are an essential component of data infrastructure. This article explores their functionalities with accompanying examples with a focus on open, quantitative data sets. Based on researcher needs, the principle of data friendliness is presented, which involves data context (data characteristics), research context (individual circumstances and research settings) and the context of reuse paths (conditions allowing access to, understanding of and use of data). An examination of data context suggests that metadata and data enrichment are required to provide successful data context. Enrichment is also required for orientation of the research context to provide greater insights across data sets. Finally the article considers the reuse paths, and the say that data paths intersect human interaction and how these are being addressed by different repositories. The review concludes that data repositories need to focus on how to present data that is fully interoperable and allows for reuse as well as access. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article investigates the research data policies of China's scholarly journals to provide a regional perspective. In total, 1243 science, technology, and medicine (STM) journals in the Chinese Science Citation Database (CSCD) were examined in June and July of 2021. The findings show that the existence and attitudinal strength of the research data policies of China's scholarly journals are weak overall, but differences exist across journals with different languages, publishers, disciplines, access models and metrics. A large imbalance exists between English‐language journals and Chinese‐language journals in setting their research data policies. The existence and attitudinal strength of the research data policies of journals co‐published by Western publishers and Chinese publishers are much stronger than those of journals published solely by Chinese publishers. In terms of discipline, journals belonging to the life sciences have stronger attitudes towards research data sharing. Open access model journals and hybrid model journals are better than subscription model journals in opening and sharing research data. The higher the impact factor (IF) and CiteScore of a journal, the more likely the journal is to have data policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While scholarly publishers have become increasingly interested in supporting the sharing of research beyond academia in recent times, there are few first‐hand accounts from academics that illustrate the realities and complexities of this process. As such, scholarly publishers may be somewhat in the dark about what is actually involved in such knowledge mobilization, and how to best support it. In this autoethnographic account, I describe my experience as an early career researcher involved in the creation of 14 scholarly outputs on the 2016 Western Australian Study in Children's Book Reading project. I illustrate how these scholarly outputs led to media engagements and Plain Language publications, and then were transformed into unique initiatives driven by schools and state government. The academic labour involved in these knowledge mobilization components are depicted as substantial. I also critically interrogate my own research training background and dispositions to identify some reasons for my adoption of knowledge mobilization as a priority, despite perceiving a general lack of support and recognition for this work. Finally, given the pragmatic considerations I raise in this article, I outline ways that scholarly publishers can support academic researchers to engage in knowledge mobilization more regularly and effectively. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

It is easy to launch and run a journal but, more difficult to ensure that it adheres to best practices and provides a sustainable, secure, validated and respected venue for research. On launching a new journal, it is vital that the publisher and editors create suitable policies, technical systems and procedures before the inaugural call for papers is sent out. This article reviews the plethora of guidance that is available but scattered across multiple websites and draws together the key issues required by any new journal. The key areas considered are: journal and article identifiers; ethical and practical policies; technical decisions and considerations; systems for submission, publication and archiving; and promotion and marketing. The article provides a snapshot of the issues that all new publishers and editors need to consider. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The National Agency of Research and Development from Chile is proposing, for the first time, a national OA policy aiming to ensure access to the scientific knowledge contained in publications resulting from research projects and graduate thesis. Since no information regarding APC expenditure in Chile is available, this study examined the cost of APC for the 2019 publications that included at least one Chilean affiliation. The total expenditure for the year 2019 was estimated at USD 9,129,939. The results confirm that almost one third of the total APC was spent on publications from Health & Medical Sciences, research area with the highest APC (USD 6000). Furthermore, five commercial publishers collected 52% of the total APC expenditure. Unfortunately, the cost of publishing in some journals is so high that it causes detrimental effects on the research capacity of under resourced individuals. In the Chilean scenario, APC is not well suited to scale as most universities do not have an OA budget to support researchers that are eager to publish their work in OA journals. Perhaps the implementation of an OA policy ought to be accompanied by sustainable APC funding grants aimed at supporting under resourced researchers that want to make their research freely available. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article analyses special issues, also referred to as thematic issues, monographic issues, or supplements, a mode of scientific journal publishing that has rarely been studied. It presents a bibliometric analysis of the production of journals in the field of communication in the period 2015–2019 and studies the impact of the publication of special issues in this field. The sample analysed includes 21,458 articles and reviews, 524 special issues, 418 publishers, and 94 journals. The study considers the presence of special issues in communication journals and the distribution and number of papers published in them and compares the impact of papers published in this mode with papers published in regular issues. The results reveal that 19% of articles and reviews published in the period studied appeared in special issues, which generally contain the same number of articles as regular issues. Moreover, 75% of journals achieved a higher average impact factor with articles published in special issues than they did with articles in regular issues. It is concluded that the publication of special issues appears to offer the potential benefits of attracting submissions, increasing profits, and improving impact, although it also has disadvantages. A reflection is offered on the strengths and weaknesses of this publishing practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Peer review of manuscripts is labour‐intensive and time‐consuming. Individual reviewers might feel themselves overburdened with the amount of reviewing they are requested to do. Aiming to explore how stakeholder groups perceive reviewing burden and what they believe to be the causes of a potential overburdening of reviewers, we conducted focus groups with early‐, mid‐, and senior career scholars, editors, and publishers. By means of a thematic analysis, we aimed to identify the causes of overburdening of reviewers. First, we show that, across disciplines and roles, stakeholders believed that the reviewing burden is distributed unequally across members of the academic community, resulting in the overburdening of small groups of reviewers. Second, stakeholders believed this to be caused by (i) an increase in manuscript submissions; (ii) inefficient manuscript handling; (iii) lack of institutionalization of peer review; (iv) lack of reviewing instructions and (v) inadequate reviewer recruiting strategies. These themes were assumed to relate to an inadequate incentive structure in academia that favours publications over peer review. In order to alleviate reviewing burden, a holistic approach is required that addresses both the increased demand for and the insufficient supply of reviewing resources. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As the open research movement continues to gather pace, a number of publishers, funders, and institutions are mandating the sharing of underlying research data. At the same time, concerns about introducing extra quality control steps around data availability statements (DAS) are driving a discussion about the best way to make data more open without slowing down publication. This article describes a pilot project to introduce a new Open Data policy to three IOP Publishing (IOPP) journals as part of IOPP's commitment to increasing transparency and support for open science. An investigation was undertaken using an automated workflow monitoring tool to understand the impact of this change on authors and the editorial staff. Changes in revised submission processing times and how often manuscripts were returned to the author were measured. An overall increase in the time editorial staff spent processing manuscripts was found as well as an increase in the number of times manuscripts were returned to authors. Detailed analysis shows that manuscripts in which authors claim in the DAS to have included data within the manuscript were the most strongly affected. Steps to mitigate the effects through improved author communication were found to be effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The systematic review of the research reported in this paper was conducted within the context of efforts to understand and combat predatory publishing, a new but fast‐growing area of research. It synthesizes the trends observed in knowledge production in predatory publishing, with a particular focus on the volume and distribution over time within different journals. It also looks at the composition of the predatory publishing literature in terms of the type of study, methods, topics, field of study, and contexts where research was conducted. Data were extracted from ERIC, Web of Science, and Scopus and identified 228 articles for evaluation published in 171 journals. The results demonstrate that the literature on predatory publishing is new but fast growing, with 88.6% of studies published since 2016. Only 37.3% reported empirical research, and the majority of these were quantitative studies with weak statistical tests. Medical journals carried the most articles. We conclude that scholarship on predatory publishing is in the early stages of development, and it is thinly distributed across journals, fields, and research contexts. It was surprising to find no studies in leading higher education journals, and this study reveals a research area that is still developing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This analysis of 229 editorials and opinion pieces published in science and medical journals explores the affective discourses used to characterise so‐called predatory publishing. Most (84%, n = 193) deploy one or more of three related categories of metaphorical and figurative language (fear, fakery and exploitation) to strengthen their rhetorical case. This paper examines the deployment, co‐occurrence and amplification of this language across the science publishing system, focusing particularly on the role of major science journals in adopting and normalising this emotive discourse. The analysis shows how few editorials offer alternative perspectives on these developments (n = 9), and their relative invisibility in scholarly debates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examines the use of international publishing (i.e. publishing in journals/books indexed by international bibliometrics databases) within academia in Vietnam since Doi Moi (the Renovation) in 1986. Document analysis and in‐depth interviews with 20 Vietnamese scholars were undertaken to address the research objective. The findings revealed three important milestones in academic development in Vietnam: 1986–2008, 2008–2017, and 2017 to the present. Between 1986 and 2008, international publishing was almost non‐existent in actual practice in academia, except among the mathematics community. Since 2008, with the launch of the Foundation for Science and Technology Development, international publishing in Vietnam has become more visible on a broader scope (i.e. at ministerial level). Increasing awareness in the academic community of the role of international publishing contributed to a major increase in research output with an international outlook between 2008 and 2017. The third milestone was the promulgation of two new regulations, one relating to doctoral education in 2017 and another to professorship appointments in 2018, in which international publishing databases have been placed at the centre of these policy agendas. Looking ahead, policymakers and academic leaders in Vietnam are recommended to further use international publishing metrics to enhance international research outputs and quality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Key points: Challenges of the current environment are balanced by opportunities – more digital delivery, more efficient systems, greater collaboration.Consumption has not reduced, but delivery mechanisms need adaptation to ensure the right products in the right media are offered and delivered.Changes to the cost base by redeploying staff and rethinking premises are underway and support improved resource allocation.Leadership is required to accommodate adaptive and flexible remote working.Ensuring access and implementing licences that permit non‐commercial use is both a moral and a practical response. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Key points: Resilience in the publishing industry can be viewed through a framework of assessing five capitals or assets: human, social, physical, financial, and natural capital.A resilient system requires four properties: robustness, redundancy, resourcefulness, and rapidity, and scholarly publishing can be seen to have some element of each.The ability to thrive in adversity and bounce back is not found in all parts of the publishing system, with those in the Global South disproportionately disadvantaged.The positive changes introduced in the past year need to be retained and elements of inequality and exclusion removed to ensure future resilience and sustainability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Despite several initiatives and policies that boost international‐indexed publishing, the outputs of social sciences in general and educational science of Vietnam in international academic databases such as Clarivate Web of Science (WoS) or Scopus are still modest. This study examined the factors affecting international‐indexed publishing among Vietnamese educational researchers. A framework for determining the influential factors was developed comprising three dimensions (policies, capacities, and networking) with 15 sub‐factors, and the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) model was employed to estimate the relative importance of these factors on international publishing. A survey of Vietnamese educational researchers at higher education and research institutes was undertaken, of which 80 returned validated answers, which after analysis were reduced to 49. The study revealed that the most important factors were collaboration with domestic and international peers and receiving support from research assistants or supervisors. A closer investigation revealed differences between senior and junior researchers regarding issues such as the accessibility of scientific documents, research data, and time for research. Key points: There are greater STEM than HSS outputs from Vietnam, although the growth of social science output is growing at a faster rate.Both senior and junior Vietnamese educational researchers agree that local and international networking is a major factor in successful publication within internationally indexed journals.Junior educational researchers identify available time for research as a major limiting factor in international publication where it is not identified as such by senior researchers.Capacity‐related factors for successful publication are perceived as less limiting than policy or networking factors among Vietnamese researchers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aimed to determine the academic publication rate of health sciences graduate theses, as well as the factors that influence researchers to publish. The study took place in Ege University Institute of Health Sciences, Turkey, and used a correlated research model to analyse both qualitative and quantitative data. We obtained data from 159 graduate students selected from 437 who graduated between 1 September 2009 and 31 August 2014. From this group, 76 of the theses were published as 141 items. Of these, 93 (66%) were journal articles, of which 51 (36.2%) were published in journals indexed by Science Citation Index (SCI)/SCI‐Expanded/Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI). In the multiple regression analysis, we found that employment in a university increased the probability of producing publications from theses by 8.54 times (odds ratio [OR], 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.954–18.440) and that encouragement from a supervisor increased the same by 2.79 times (OR, 95% CI = 1.021–7.640). Reasons for not publishing their theses were classified into 11 items, of which thematic analysis showed that the most prominent reasons were lack of time (n = 18, 24.3%) and workload (n = 15, 20.2%). This suggests that interventions targeting these two factors may result in increased publication of theses. Key points: Half of graduates' theses were converted into published items with no significant differences according to gender and graduate programme.Successful publication of items derived from theses is positively influenced by employment in university and receiving encouragement from a supervisors.The main reason for not publishing theses was workload and lack of time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Key points: The role of corresponding author means one thing in the eyes of editors, journals and publishers, but researchers often take it to mean something more.There are two different roles for the corresponding author: pre‐publication corresponding author and post‐publication corresponding author.Journals should explicitly acknowledge these separate roles for corresponding authors in order to increase transparency.The role of the corresponding author should be kept distinct from other responsibilities than those of communication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

University academics face multiple pressures to publish. These pressures emanate from contexts with different, often competing, social norms, which result in academics publishing for reasons that may run counter to accepted scientific practice. This paper asks what decisions are being taken by academics when it comes to their choice of scholarly book publisher. An analysis of books selected from more than 2,500 self‐reported scholarly publications produced by academics at Makerere University in Uganda from 2011 to 2017 shows that 31 scholarly books were published. Of these books, more than half (54%) were published by publishers that do not follow accepted scholarly publishing practice. Findings also show that there was a sharp decline in books published with suspect publishers in the second half of the 7‐year period. The article discusses possible reasons for the selection of suspect publishers and considers four factors that may account for the observable decline: (1) a cyclical downturn, (2) improved research management and reporting, (3) explication of the norms of science, and (4) self‐correction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents an up‐to‐date portrayal of the greatly changed landscape of scholarly journal publishing and identifies the emerging trends characterizing it. We consider the attributes, novelty, and disruptive potential of different models, which range from improvements to the extant model to attempts at reconfiguration and transformation. We propose that journal transition can be seen as falling into three categories. The first is enhanced models of the traditional scholarly journal, which typically afford enriched functionality that breaks the bonds of the printed page whilst otherwise remaining wholly traditional in their offerings. The second category is innovative models of the traditional scholarly journal, which aim at supporting the journal in performing its traditional roles through convention‐altering ways. The third category is the possible alternatives to the traditional journal, which represent a move towards alternative modes of knowledge dissemination. This review shows that each of the models identified makes contributions to enriching the reporting and showcasing of scholarly output. They also make it more effective and more efficient. However, we conclude that none of the possible alternatives being discussed can serve as a full‐fledged alternative to the journal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examines the role of learned societies as publishers in Finland based on bibliographic information from two Finnish databases. We studied the share of learned societies' peer‐reviewed publication channels (serials with ISSNs and book publishers with distinct ISBN roots) and outputs (journal articles, conference articles, book articles, and monographs) in Finland. We also studied the share of learned societies' open access (OA) publications. In 2018, there were 402 peer‐reviewed publication channels in Finland. In 2011–2017, the number of peer‐reviewed publications from scholars working in Finnish universities and published in Finland was 17,724. Learned societies publish around 70% of these channels and publications, mostly in the fields of humanities and social sciences. Learned societies in Finland focus on journal publishing, whereas university presses and commercial publishers focus on book publishing. In 2016–2017, 38.4% of the learned societies' outputs were OA. This study concludes that Finnish learned societies play an integral part in national scholarly publishing. They play an especially important role in journal publishing, as commercial publishers produce only 2.6% of Finnish journals and book series, and only 1.4% of the journal articles from scholars working in Finnish universities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents an analysis of key trends affecting the academic publishing industry. It reviews funding and sales, scholarly collaboration networks, developments in OA, and monograph publishing. These key areas were identified in an earlier article that asked whether academic publishing was evolving or going through a revolution. The review of funding and sales presented here shows a mixed market with growth being challenged as library funds and purchase choices affect expenditure. Scholarly collaboration networks were previously identified as a major threat to traditional publishing, and a review of this area demonstrates that greater sharing of content is empowering librarians and academics to take a stronger stand in publisher negotiations. OA continues to be debated, and a review of responses to Plan S (the most coordinated policy to date) demonstrates conflicting views within academia, funders, and publishers. OA has yet to revolutionize the existing business models. Similarly, monograph publishing remains slow to evolve, although there are increasing initiatives to adopt more open, and online, models. The conclusion of this review is that libraries are likely to be the key promoters of change in the publishing environment and are more influential than other players in forcing evolution. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Key points: The scholarly publishing industry must be prepared to step back, consider our value, reset our relationships, and be prepared to accept and embrace real change.Three areas of focus during these times should be (1) the importance of community; (2) racism, bias, and structural inequities; and (3) openness, transparency, and trust.We need to recognize the importance of the humanities and social sciences, as well as of science, technology, and medicine in addressing the impacts of the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents data regarding the publication of Chinese English‐language journals (CELAJs), building on previously published information to investigate the status, growth, and international penetration of these journals. The article also presents three case studies of CELJs to demonstrate different strategies for achieving internationalization. We find that there has been rapid growth in CELJs between 2006 and 2011 but mostly in the science, technology and medicine disciplines. There are now 435 CELJs, of which 62.3% are published in association with a western publisher. Partnership has been shown to provide immediate benefits to an established successful journal (Cell Research), has helped to relaunch an established title in English (Bamboo and Silk), and has enabled the successful launch of a new journal (Global Health Research and Policy). The authors conclude that there are three criteria for successful international CELJs: increased visibility, good editorial boards, and international publishing partnerships. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Harbinger project was a 3‐year‐long international study of the changing attitudes and behaviours of early career researchers (ECRs). One of the aims of the project was to discover if ECRs were adopting disrupting platforms that, legitimately or illegitimately, promote openness and sharing. It has been alleged that such an adoption appeals to them as Millennials. More than 100 ECRs from seven countries were questioned annually, and questions about Sc‐Hub were raised as part of discussions about discovery and access. Interview data were supplemented by desk research and Google Trends statistics. It was found that Sci‐Hub use was increasing and that a quarter of the ECRs now use it, with French ECRs being the biggest users. However, Sci‐Hub is making little headway with ECRs from the UK, USA, Malaysia, and China, although in China's case, this can be explained by it being banned and the country having its own equivalent, www.91lib.com. Sci‐Hub is used as much for convenience as necessity; use is not connected to the strength of library provision and and it has been suggested that it represents a bigger threat to publishers than ResearchGate, whose star might be waning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are 5,020 scientific, technical and medical (STM) periodicals, including 548 English‐language (E‐L) journals, in China. To quickly increase the international influence of Chinese journals, government management launched significant initiatives for publishers, such as the 'Project for Enhancing International Impact of China STM Journals (PIIJ, 2013–2018)'. This paper investigates the underlying objectives and assumptions made about the value and impact of Chinese E‐L journals and the effect of PIIJ support and international publisher collaboration. The authors conclude that, while the E‐L journals are demonstrating some quantifiable improvements in internationalization, there are no equal pressures or recognition for qualitative quality measures, and this may undermine the ability of Chinese E‐L journals to build sustainable strategic plans. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Key pointsThe relationship between the Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information (KISTI) and Journal of Information Science Theory and Practice (JISTaP) enables both to benefit from the other.KISTI is able to test new systems with its own journal, JISTaP.JISTaP benefits from both financial and technical support of its parent, although this can restrict its ability to make changes and use alternative technologies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents author's views on the aspects of ‘publish or perish’ culture pressure faced by early career researchers (ECRs) in the publishing industry when they are beginning their academic journey. It talks about importance of graduate training programmes offered by various universities and colleges that provide ‘soft skills’ training to ECRs, help in research thesis, paper writing and presentation skills.