Search

We examined the latest decade of Australian sociology PhD completions for differences in the number and quality of research outputs students published during doctoral enrolment. There was no evidence of a statistically significant difference between Go8 PhD students and their non-Go8 PhD counterparts in terms of either the quantity of research publications achieved, or the quality of these publications as measured by high-impact journals. There was also insufficient evidence statistically to conclude that Go8 men and Go8 women differed from one another, or that non-Go8 men and non-Go8 women differed from one another in overall quantity of outputs and publishing in high-impact journals. However, publishing success of men and women, when combined, regardless of whether they were at elite Go8 or non-Go8 institutions, showed gender had a marginally significant effect on publication productivity, men outperforming women, in both publication counts and in publishing in high-impact journals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years, concern has grown about the inappropriate application and interpretation of P values, especially the use of P<0.05 to denote "statistical significance" and the practice of P-hacking to produce results below this threshold and selectively reporting these in publications. Such behavior is said to be a major contributor to the large number of false and non-reproducible discoveries found in academic journals. In response, it has been proposed that the threshold for statistical significance be changed from 0.05 to 0.005. The aim of the current study was to use an evolutionary agent-based model comprised of researchers who test hypotheses and strive to increase their publication rates in order to explore the impact of a 0.005 P value threshold on P-hacking and published false positive rates. Three scenarios were examined, one in which researchers tested a single hypothesis, one in which they tested multiple hypotheses using a P<0.05 threshold, and one in which they tested multiple hypotheses using a P<0.005 threshold. Effects sizes were varied across models and output assessed in terms of researcher effort, number of hypotheses tested and number of publications, and the published false positive rate. The results supported the view that a more stringent P value threshold can serve to reduce the rate of published false positive results. Researchers still engaged in P-hacking with the new threshold, but the effort they expended increased substantially and their overall productivity was reduced, resulting in a decline in the published false positive rate. Compared to other proposed interventions to improve the academic publishing system, changing the P value threshold has the advantage of being relatively easy to implement and could be monitored and enforced with minimal effort by journal editors and peer reviewers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is a growing acceptance of open access funding models among academic publishers and a growing adoption of open access publishing agreements among academic libraries. In this context, libraries are taking on new roles and new processes to ensure the successful implementation of open access funding initiatives. This article will examine some of the key issues and considerations in the area of open access workflows, and discuss how one research-intensive library in the United States has approached these new functions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research data sharing has become an expected component of scientific research and scholarly publishing practice over the last few decades, due in part to requirements for federally funded research. As part of a larger effort to better understand the workflows and costs of public access to research data, this project conducted a high-level analysis of where academic research data is most frequently shared. To do this, we leveraged the DataCite and Crossref application programming interfaces (APIs) in search of Publisher field elements demonstrating which data repositories were utilized by researchers from six academic research institutions between 2012–2022. In addition, we also ran a preliminary analysis of the quality of the metadata associated with these published datasets, comparing the extent to which information was missing from metadata fields deemed important for public access to research data. Results show that the top 10 publishers accounted for 89.0% to 99.8% of the datasets connected with the institutions in our study. Known data repositories, including institutional data repositories hosted by those institutions, were initially lacking from our sample due to varying metadata standards and practices. We conclude that the metadata quality landscape for published research datasets is uneven; key information, such as author affiliation, is often incomplete or missing from source data repositories and aggregators. To enhance the findability, interoperability, accessibility, and reusability (FAIRness) of research data, we provide a set of concrete recommendations that repositories and data authors can take to improve scholarly metadata associated with shared datasets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This review departs from the perception that children's geographies are theoretically 'stuck', by showing how the field's growing decolonial scholarship pushes its boundaries. Decoloniality involves delinking from Western constructs and developing pluralistic theoretical frameworks firmly grounded in the realities of marginalised childhoods. Organised around the themes of decolonial theory, praxis, and conceptualisations of childhood, the review focuses on embracing historical geographies of non-Western childhoods, developing relational and place-based methodologies, centring on childhoods on the margins of global knowledge production, addressing the interlinked marginalisation of children through colonial violence and adult dominance, and challenging the Anglo-centric modes of academic publishing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Online assessments of learning, or online exams, have become increasingly widespread with the rise of distance learning. Online exams are preferred by many students and are perceived as a quick and easy tool to measure knowledge. On the contrary, some students are concerned about the possibility of cheating and technological difficulties in online exams. As a result, students' perspectives on online exam acceptance and preferences differ. Therefore, various studies have been conducted on students' views to reveal the factors affecting students' acceptance of and preferences regarding online exams. At this point, this research aims to better understand students' acceptance of and preferences regarding online exams by systematically analyzing the existing literature. Data consisted of 94 academic studies published in the period of 2002–2023. Synthesis results of the first theme include 4 categories about students' acceptance of online exams: namely, (i) factors affecting students' acceptance, (ii) effects of factors, (iii) methods for increasing the level of acceptance, and (iv) effects of gender differences. The synthesis results of the second theme outline students' preferences towards online exams in terms of (i) feedback, (ii) questions, (iii) location, (iv) disciplines, (v) exam security methods, and (vi) exam duration. Thus, these results can contribute to those who want to take into account the factors affecting students' acceptance of and preferences regarding online exams and the factors that drive students' preferences. The paper also highlights several directions for future studies that have emerged from the findings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Key points: The expansion of open access entails a responsibility for supporting this public access with a guide to why, in an 'Age of Misinformation', research may be trustworthy.Such a guide can also provide a check on predatory journals, a fear of which may be unduly limiting researchers tapping into the expanding global scale of research activity.Journal publishing platforms offer opportunities for automating the gathering and presenting of relevant data for assessing journal adherence to scholarly standards.Industry organizations, such as ORCID, Crossref, and DOAJ, offer trust and verification networks that can be employed to further strengthen scholarly publishing integrity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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: The ORCID DE project, from 2016 to 2022, promoted ORCID in Germany through a project‐driven approach.The project promoted the dissemination of ORCID in Germany. The number of IDs registered for Germany increased from approximately 44,000 in 2016 to 300,070 in 2023.The linkage of ORCID with the bibliographic Gemeinsame Normdatei (GND; translated: Integrated Authority File) standard in German‐speaking countries has contributed to the success of ORCID in Germany.The promotion of ORCID in Germany was based on six central areas: information, consortium, standardization, implementation, monitoring, and networking.The ORCID DE Monitor captures and analyses the development of ORCID on a national and international level.The ACTION principles highlight crucial measures in promoting a standard, such as ORCID. ACTION stands for Awareness, ConnectiviTy, IntegratiOn, and Networking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Key points: Publish in English or perish is becoming a reality in many non‐Anglophone countries.Non‐Anglophone journals are facing a dilemma: losing appeal to authors/reviewers if published in local languages or losing linguistic/cultural identity if published in English.This article analyses language policies those journals may use and positions them on a capital‐identity matrix to highlight their advantages and disadvantages.The article elaborates on two emerging language policies (bilingual publishing and extended English summary), both helping preserve their identity and take advantage of the capital of the English language.The article provides insights into the pros and cons of different language policies and how to select policies that best support journal survival and development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Post qualitative inquiry is an immanent approach to research that I engaged during a study on TikTok with my 11-year-old daughter. In this article, I reflect on how its experimental style enabled a provisional escape from the hierarchy of adult/child through lines of flight. I also reflect on how binary thinking that disparages children's knowledge permeated our post qualitative inquiry through my authority as a parent making decisions about my child's social media use and as a university researcher making choices about academic theorizing, writing, and publishing. Rather than view these shifts as dualistic and contradictory, I suggest that post qualitative inquiry involves continuous, inseparable flows of blockage and rupture that create transformation. My TikTok education thus comprised learning about a social media application that matters to my daughter, but also attuning myself to moments of movement and stasis that heightened my desire to slip the confines of the adult/child hierarchy in parenting and research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This editorial discusses the experiences of doctoral students at an academic conference in New Zealand, specifically regarding academic writing and publishing. The students expressed frustration with the strict rules and uniformity of academic publishing, as well as the dominance of the English language in the field. The editorial draws parallels to Franz Kafka's story "Before the Law" to highlight the students' perception of academic publishing as a non-negotiable regime with gatekeepers. The authors argue against the myth that there is only one correct way to write academically and advocate for pluralism and functional forms of scholarly activity and writing. They express concern about the convergence of academic writing formats and the potential for artificial intelligence to further standardize academic papers. The authors encourage authors to continue pushing the boundaries of academic genres and regimes. [Extracted from the article]

This study examines the publication pattern of open access (OA) and paywalled scholarly works, determines the citations and views impact of publications published through the different forms of OA, and disaggregates the scholarly outputs and impact across the different types of OA in sub-Saharan African countries, in order to assess whether the types of OA matter in research impact in sub-Saharan Africa. Data from the SciVal database, utilising bibliographic, citation, and views data drawn from Scopus, formed the foundation of this study. The research scope encompassed documents published over a decade, from 2012 to 2021. Research output, quantified as the number of publications papers), constituted the primary focus, while citation-based and views-based metrics were utilised as proxies for measuring research impact. The findings underscore a steady rise in OA scholarly publications, indicating a growing inclination and uptake of OA scholarship within sub-Saharan African nations. Across most sub-Saharan African countries, OA publications comprised over 50% of the total publications. The study discerns a preference hierarchy for OA models: Green OA emerged as the foremost choice, trailed by Gold OA, and Bronze OA, while Hybrid-Gold OA registered as the least favoured model. Notably, publication counts exhibited robust associations with citation and viewing figures, displaying varying strengths in correlation with other citation and viewing metrics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This is the first study to design and assess a research capacity building (RCB) specifically tailored for clinical and nonclinical andrology practitioners worldwide. We appraised: 1) the barriers and enablers to research among these practitioners; 2) attendees’ satisfaction with the webinar; and 3) research knowledge acquisition as a result of the webinar (before/after quiz). Materials and Methods: A online RCB webinar was designed, comprising two presentations in research design and systematic review/meta-analysis (SR/MA). An online survey using validated published questionnaires assessed the three above-stated objectives. Paired t-test compared the means of the pre- and post-webinar scores. Subgroup analysis was performed on the participants’ professional background, sex, and number of years in practice. Results: A total of 237 participants attended the webinar, of which 184 completed the survey and are included in the current analysis. Male participants were about double the females and 60.9% were from Asian countries. The most common research enablers were to publish scientific papers (14.8%) and to develop research (14.7%) or new skills (12.7%). The most common barriers were the lack of training in research (12.4%), training in research software (11.8%), and time for research (11.8%). Satisfaction with the webinar was considerably high (86.3%–88.4%) for the different features of the webinar. Compared to the pre-webinar knowledge level, there were significant improvements in participants’ research knowledge acquisition after the webinar in terms of the total score for the quiz (13.7±4.31 vs. 21.5±4.7), as well as the scores for the study design (7.12±2.37 vs. 11.5±2.69) and SR/MA sessions (6.63±2.63 vs. 9.93±2.49) (p<0.001 for each). Conclusions: Clinical and non-clinical andrology webinar attendees recognized the importance of research and exhibited a range of research skills, knowledge and experience. There were significant improvements in the participants’ knowledge and understanding of the components of scientific research. We propose an RCB model that can be implemented and further modeled by organizations with similar academic research goals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This study aims to investigate basic/core principles and practical tools behind successful manuscript writing for education journals. Drawing on the insights of journal editors and related literature, this paper seeks to clarify the craft of preparing quality manuscripts to meet the expectations of academic journals. Design/methodology/approach: This paper uses an interpretivist framework by incorporating a qualitative analysis of the literature with the authors' experiences to identify key principles and issues in academic publishing. These narratives provide an empirical basis for understanding the mechanics and essence of effective manuscript crafting. The study integrates theoretical knowledge with actionable strategies, focusing on identifying the objectives and processes of writing, determining common challenges and directing readers toward comprehensive resources for guidance in article writing. Findings: This study reveals that manuscript rejections often transcend technical shortcomings. Issues that are central to nonacceptance include misalignment with a journal's thematic focus, absence of a coherent and persuasive argument, methodological weaknesses and insufficient evidence underpinning the assertions. Successful publication depends not just on data presentation and adherence to submission norms but also on developing a narrative that enriches the prevailing scholarly discourse. Our findings advocate for manuscripts that strike an appropriate balance between lucidity and analytical rigor, avoid superfluous technical language and express a mix of assertiveness and scholarly modesty. Originality/value: Although there is literature on academic writing, very few recent articles have been uncovered that probe the intricacies of crafting education manuscripts and point to resources. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The comparisons between sporting legal systems and the general law are generally insightful and thought-provoking and should be of interest regardless of whether the reader is a sports fan (although having an interest in sport will inevitably make the book more accessible). Whilst the book is primarily aimed at a legal audience, it should prove of interest for philosophers of sport as an opportunity to reflect on how different sports and legal systems deal with some of the ethical problems that arise. It is also fair to say that this book falls into a space between typical sports law and sports ethics textbooks. The central premise of the book draws on the familiar observation that sport and state based legal systems are both rule governed practices that share a great deal in common: as the authors put it, 'sports and games are, in a clear and recognizable sense, legal systems'. [Extracted from the article]

Scientific knowledge is produced in multiple languages but is predominantly published in English. This practice creates a language barrier to generate and transfer scientific knowledge between communities with diverse linguistic backgrounds, hindering the ability of scholars and communities to address global challenges and achieve diversity and equity in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM). To overcome those barriers, publishers and journals should provide a fair system that supports non-native English speakers and disseminates knowledge across the globe. We surveyed policies of 736 journals in biological sciences to assess their linguistic inclusivity, identify predictors of inclusivity, and propose actions to overcome language barriers in academic publishing. Our assessment revealed a grim landscape where most journals were making minimal efforts to overcome language barriers. The impact factor of journals was negatively associated with adopting a number of inclusive policies whereas ownership by a scientific society tended to have a positive association. Contrary to our expectations, the proportion of both open access articles and editors based in non-English speaking countries did not have a major positive association with the adoption of linguistically inclusive policies. We proposed a set of actions to overcome language barriers in academic publishing, including the renegotiation of power dynamics between publishers and editorial boards. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Social work education prioritizes the use of research to inform practice. As university students, prospective social workers have a wealth of research available to them as well as librarians to help them find, evaluate, and use that information. However, access to much of this research ends once the student graduates--at a time when it is most needed to inform their professional practice. To address this challenge, a librarian and a social work faculty member worked with one class of students in their final semester of a bachelor's degree in social work program to promote awareness of information privilege and barriers to access, to expand their understanding of authority to include marginalized voices, and to utilize an open pedagogy assignment as a means of proactively addressing these challenges. This article describes what was learned from this effort, including the results of surveys conducted with students before and after instruction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

"Social Media Marketing for Book Publishers" by Miriam J. Johnson and Helen A. Simpson is a book that provides guidance for book publishers on utilizing social media as a marketing tool. The authors emphasize the importance of social media for communicating with potential readers and fostering author-publisher and author-reader dialogue. While the book primarily focuses on marketing trade fiction, the concepts and strategies can be adapted for scholarly, academic, and nonfiction works. The book covers topics such as developing author brands, creating a social media strategy, generating creative ideas, utilizing paid media, building communities, working with influencers, and measuring success. Overall, "Social Media Marketing for Book Publishers" offers actionable guidance for publishers looking to effectively utilize social media in their marketing efforts. [Extracted from the article]

ChatGPT, an artificial intelligence large language model, took the world by storm in November 2022. Its launch was met with excitement, and it garnered over 1 million users within the first five days of its release, surpassing social media giants like Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and even the top search engine, Google. Having been trained on volumes of data, ChatGPT has displayed the ability to produce human-like responses to questions. Concerns have been raised among members of the academic and research community regarding the ethical usage of ChatGPT and language models in education and academic/scientific research. This paper examines the development and rise of ChatGPT and similar AI tools, their pros and cons, their impact on academic research and possible intellectual property conflicts. It concludes that ChatGPT and language models are here to stay and makes recommendations for its ethical usage to prevent and detect plagiarism and protect intellectual property rights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An editorial is presented by the new Editor-in-Chief (EIC) of MIS Quarterly, Susan Brown. Topics include steps necessary to further minimize time to publication in the journal, the EIC Open Door approach to allow for community access to the journal’s editor, and displaying integrity in all of the journal’s work.

The reports submitted by the sefirs (ambassadors) assigned by the Ottoman State to establish relations with other states since its establishment were called sefâretnâme. Sefâretnâmes were written about many different countries and are important documents that give information about Ottoman foreign policy. The meticulousness in the selection of ambassadors and the appointment of experienced statesmen to the post have increased the importance of these reports in terms of being a source for scientific studies. The sefâretnâmes, which have rich observations and comments about the country visited, have included developments in education, economy, technology, art and administration. Thus, it also contributed to the development and modernization of the Ottoman State. On the other hand, these reports have been important historical sources for European historians. Sefâretnâmes have been published in various forms such as articles, books, book chapters and graduate theses. In this study, the manuscript copy of Derviş Mehmed Efendi's 1755 dated Russia Sefâretnâmesi in Fatih Millet Library, numbered 829, is evaluated. The aforementioned sefâretnâme has not been analyzed and published as a separate work before. The original images and the transcribed text of the Sefâretnâme are also included in our article. Thus, it is aimed to contribute to academic studies by publishing another sefâretnâme. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Predatory journals are a blemish on scholarly publishing and academia and the studies published within them are more likely to contain data that is false. The inclusion of studies from predatory journals in evidence syntheses is potentially problematic due to this propensity for false data to be included. To date, there has been little exploration of the opinions and experiences of evidence synthesisers when dealing with predatory journals in the conduct of their evidence synthesis. In this paper, the thoughts, opinions, and attitudes of evidence synthesisers towards predatory journals and the inclusion of studies published within these journals in evidence syntheses were sought. Focus groups were held with participants who were experienced evidence synthesisers from JBI (previously the Joanna Briggs Institute) collaboration. Utilising qualitative content analysis, two generic categories were identified: predatory journals within evidence synthesis, and predatory journals within academia. Our findings suggest that evidence synthesisers believe predatory journals are hard to identify and that there is no current consensus on the management of these studies if they have been included in an evidence synthesis. There is a critical need for further research, education, guidance, and development of clear processes to assist evidence synthesisers in the management of studies from predatory journals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article explores the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in scholarly publishing and the potential benefits and challenges it presents. While AI technologies like machine learning and natural language processing can streamline research and publishing, concerns about bias, inaccuracies, and ethical issues arise. The article emphasizes the need for guidance and best practices to ensure responsible use of AI in research and publication, addressing transparency, responsibility, and accountability. It also highlights the importance of addressing data privacy, authorship attribution, intellectual property rights, and plagiarism detection. Access to advanced AI technologies is not uniform worldwide, and ensuring access in scholarly publishing is crucial to prevent disparities in knowledge creation and dissemination. The article concludes by providing recommendations for authors on the use of AI tools in manuscript preparation, emphasizing transparency and accountability. [Extracted from the article]

The purpose of this work is to describe the orkg-Leaderboard software designed to extract leaderboards defined as task–dataset–metric tuples automatically from large collections of empirical research papers in artificial intelligence (AI). The software can support both the main workflows of scholarly publishing, viz. as LaTeX files or as PDF files. Furthermore, the system is integrated with the open research knowledge graph (ORKG) platform, which fosters the machine-actionable publishing of scholarly findings. Thus, the systemsss output, when integrated within the ORKG's supported Semantic Web infrastructure of representing machine-actionable 'resources' on the Web, enables: (1) broadly, the integration of empirical results of researchers across the world, thus enabling transparency in empirical research with the potential to also being complete contingent on the underlying data source(s) of publications; and (2) specifically, enables researchers to track the progress in AI with an overview of the state-of-the-art across the most common AI tasks and their corresponding datasets via dynamic ORKG frontend views leveraging tables and visualization charts over the machine-actionable data. Our best model achieves performances above 90% F1 on the leaderboard extraction task, thus proving orkg-Leaderboards a practically viable tool for real-world usage. Going forward, in a sense, orkg-Leaderboards transforms the leaderboard extraction task to an automated digitalization task, which has been, for a long time in the community, a crowdsourced endeavor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper calls for a paradigm shift in studying academic dependency, toward the paradigm of brokered dependency. Using Chinese academia as an example, I demonstrate how the neocolonial condition of academic dependency is always mediated through blockage-brokerage mechanisms. The two most salient blockage-brokerage mechanisms of dependency in the Chinese context are linguistic barrier and authoritarian malepistemization, and the effects of the latter consist of three layers: institutional, informational, and incorporational. On top of their domestic impacts, those mechanisms jointly exacerbate spectacularized postcoloniality in anglophone-hegemonic global academic publishing. The paradigm of brokered dependency not only represents a more nuanced approach to the study of academic dependency, but also underscores the fact that the dismantling of the neocolonial condition cannot be conceived and pursued in isolation from comprehending and confronting the authoritarian condition, especially when the latter pertains under the disguise of anticolonialism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The third International Conference on Responsible Tourism and Hospitality (ICRTH) took place in Bogor, Indonesia, in August 2023. The conference aimed to raise awareness of tourism as a driver of development and the preservation of culture and natural heritage. It brought together academics, government officials, practitioners, and the public to discuss responsible tourism practices. The conference also emphasized the importance of collaboration and convergence of indicators towards responsible tourism. The event left a positive legacy by engaging with the local community and promoting responsible tourism in Bogor. The conference concluded with the announcement that ICRTH 2024 will be held in Kuching, Malaysia. [Extracted from the article]

The African Journal Partnership Program has developed guidance on the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in scholarly publishing. The guidance emphasizes the responsible and ethical use of AI, highlighting the potential benefits and challenges it presents. It stresses the importance of access to AI technologies in low- and middle-income countries to prevent knowledge disparities. The guidance also addresses issues such as data protection, intellectual property, plagiarism, and ownership of AI-generated content. It provides recommendations for authors, peer reviewers, and editors to ensure the appropriate use of AI in research and publication. [Extracted from the article]

Navigating the academic publishing ecosystem is a crucial skill that requires preparation and experience. Publishing for tenure is a common practice in many institutions, yet as with many disciplines, engaging in the academic publishing world is not often taught in graduate architecture school. By accessing and examining the procedures and expectations needed to successfully publish, this article enables tenure seeking faculty to identify and address the challenges and questions facing academic publication. Topics include understanding open access journals, predatory journals, the role of the editorial board, and other important scholarly communication topics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Journal editors have a large amount of power to advance open science in their respective fields by incentivising and mandating open policies and practices at their journals. The Data PASS Journal Editors Discussion Interface (JEDI, an online community for social science journal editors: www.dpjedi.org) has collated several resources on embedding open science in journal editing (www.dpjedi.org/resources). However, it can be overwhelming as an editor new to open science practices to know where to start. For this reason, we created a guide for journal editors on how to get started with open science. The guide outlines steps that editors can take to implement open policies and practices within their journal, and goes through the what, why, how, and worries of each policy and practice. This manuscript introduces and summarizes the guide (full guide: https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/hstcx). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An examination of American anthropology from 1974 to 2024 shows that the discipline faces novel challenges in today's "meta," or media ecosystem: two challenges facing theory and two facing ethnography. To remain successful, anthropology must meet these challenges. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: In academic publishing, research metrics play a crucial role in assessing the scientific impact and performance of the published literature, as well as of the journals in which they are published. Several journal-level metrics (JLM) such as the h-index of the analysed journals, total citations, total documents, citable documents, references and external citations per document are considered crucial indicators of the importance and reputation of the journals. We hypothesize that journals in the field of Medicine receive more citations than those in Surgical journals like Orthopaedic surgery, and hence have better JLM. This study aims to to assess and compare the JLM of Medical and Surgical journals between two time zones 2017–2019 vs. 2020–2022, i.e., pre and post-COVID-19 pandemic period. Methods: A cross-sectional bibliometric analysis of the top-ranked Orthopaedic, Medical, and Surgical journals was undertaken based on traditional JLM, using the SCImago database from 2017 to 2022. Our analysis focused on identifying trends in the h-index of the analysed journals, total citations, total documents, citable documents, references and external citations per document. Results: Overall Medical journals were found to have higher JLM than the Surgical and Orthopaedic journals. The h-index of Surgical journals, Medical journals and Orthopaedic journals were comparable between the two periods (pre and -post-COVID-19 pandemic); Total Cites (3 years), total documents (2017), total documents (3 years), total references, and citable documents (3 years) of Surgical journals, Medical journals and Orthopaedic journals were significantly higher in the period 2020–2022. Conclusion: There has been a steady increase in the number of publications from post COVID-19 period. Medical journals have higher JLM than Surgical and Orthopaedic journals. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (Am), Annals of Surgery and Diabetes Care were the most published journals in Orthopaedics, General Surgery and Medicine-related topics respectively. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The research article titled "Reconceptualising the Role of Teachers in Education: A Comparative Analysis of Teacher Education Policies in Australia and Japan" by Gert Biesta, Keita Takayama, Margaret Kettle, and Stephen Heimans compares the teacher education policies in Australia and Japan. The authors analyze the policies and discuss the similarities and differences between the two countries, providing insights into the challenges and opportunities for teacher education in both contexts. The article aims to reconceptualize the role of teachers in education and offers a valuable resource for understanding teacher education policies in Australia and Japan. [Extracted from the article]

The objective of this research is to perform a comprehensive evaluation of the top 100 articles concerning university rankings, with the highest number of citations, which were published in academic journals during a period of five years, specifically from 2017 to 2021. This article adheres to the guidelines established by the PRISMA extension for scoping reviews. The selection of the 100 most frequently cited articles on the subject of university rankings is carried out by initially identifying 684 articles and subsequently screening 537 of them. Through an examination of these articles, the prevailing research domains, methodologies, samples, data collection instruments, data analysis techniques, focused variables, and keywords are determined. The abstracts of these articles are subjected to content analysis, resulting in the identification of five key themes: rankings, methodology, analysis, approach, and education. This investigation stands out as one of the pioneering studies in the field of research articles on university rankings. By delineating the boundaries of such studies, it aims to illuminate the path for future researchers by highlighting the existing gaps in the current literature and areas that warrant further exploration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The rapid adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) tools in academic research raises pressing ethical concerns. I examine major publishing policies in science and medicine, uncovering inconsistencies and limitations in guiding AI usage. To encourage responsible AI integration while upholding transparency, I propose an enabling framework with author and reviewer policy templates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study aims to explore the geography of editors-in-chief to demonstrate which countries exercise the highest-level decision-making in scholarly communication. In addition, the study seeks to investigate the potential relationships between the origin and nationality of academic publishers and the geography of editors-in-chief. The analysis involves 11,915 journals listed in Web of Science's Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI) and Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE). These journals employ 15,795 scholars as editors-in-chief. The geographical locations of the institutions the editors-in-chief are affiliated with were identified; then, the data were aggregated at the country level. The results show that most editors-in-chief are located in countries of the Anglosphere, primarily the United States and the United Kingdom. In addition, most academic publishers and professional organizations that publish academic journals were found to be based in the United States and the United Kingdom, where most editors-in-chief are also based. The analysis involves journals indexed in the Web of Science's SCIE/SSCI databases, which are demonstrably biased toward the English language. Furthermore, the study only takes a snapshot of the geography of editors-in-chief for the year 2022, but it does not investigate trends. The study maps the highest-level decision-making in scholarly communication. The study explores and maps the geography of editors-in-chief by using a massive dataset. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

About half of Library and Information Science (LIS) journals continue to charge authors to publish articles open access (OA) or do not offer OA publishing at all. To further investigate the financial and other perceived barriers preventing these LIS journals from transitioning to no-publishing fee OA models, this exploratory project surveyed lead editors for each identified LIS journal. Results indicate most of the journals have not discussed transitioning to a no-publishing fee OA model, and that finances are the main barrier. Most also indicated a lack of awareness of their journal's budget. The most popular no-publishing fee OA model was Subscribe to Open. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Library publishers have an important role in building an equitable and open scholarly publishing ecosystem. As library publishers' services mature, it is critical to understand how noncommercial journals operate and organize their daily activities to ensure the journals' success, longevity, and sustainability. To inform these efforts, the authors interviewed managing editors/editors-in-chief of fifteen Canadian, noncommercial journals on their organizational structures and relationships with external organizations (e.g., associations, libraries, etc.). The authors found that the journals operated collaboratively, often relied on a core team to handle their main activities, and varied in how they harnessed external relationships. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This qualitative study examines perceptions of open access from focus groups including thirty-eight faculty who identify as Black, Indigenous, and People of Color (BIPOC). In responses, BIPOC faculty reflect on the culture and support of open access within their departments, institutions, and professional associations. It was at a time of increased discussion about knowledge equity, the impact of access to research during the 2020 pandemic, and a precursor to the 2022 U.S. Office of Science and Technology Policy Memo to expand access to data and publications sponsored by all federal funding agencies. In general, BIPOC faculty face compounded risks with open access and inequities in scholarly publishing. However, participants believe open publishing processes allow more flexibility and connection to communities. The investigators use the grounded theory method for analysis, provide themes as well as direct quotes from the data, and discuss practical applications for supporting BIPOC scholars with engagement in open access. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Funders, publishers, scholarly societies, universities, and other stakeholders need to be able to track the impact of programs and policies designed to advance data sharing and reuse. With the launch of the NIH data management and sharing policy in 2023, establishing a pre‐policy baseline of sharing and reuse activity is critical for the biological and biomedical community. Toward this goal, we tested the utility of mentions of research resources, databases, and repositories (RDRs) as a proxy measurement of data sharing and reuse. We captured and processed text from Methods sections of open access biological and biomedical research articles published in 2020 and 2021 and made available in PubMed Central. We used natural language processing to identify text strings to measure RDR mentions. In this article, we demonstrate our methodology, provide normalized baseline data sharing and reuse activity in this community, and highlight actions authors and publishers can take to encourage data sharing and reuse practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

"What should we be doing as a public institution when it comes to open access and transformative publishing agreements?" Most large US research institutions are facing this question, including the University of Maryland, College Park. This article explores this issue by looking at the University's publishing landscape from a high level. It then dives deeper into three recent transformative agreements the University library has entered, investigating pricing, usage, and publishing data for a nonprofit society publisher, a for-profit commercial publisher, and, finally, a university press. The goal is to better understand how these agreements intersect with university-sponsored scholarship, library budgets, and the implications for the academic publishing landscape. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the past decade, the phenomenon of "fake" peer reviews has caused growing consternation among scholarly publishers. Yet despite the significant behind-the-scenes impact that anxieties about fakery have had on peer review processes within scholarly journals, the phenomenon itself has been subject to little scholarly analysis. Rather than treating fake reviews as a straightforward descriptive category, in this article, we explore how the discourse on fake reviews emerged and why, and what it tells us about its seeming antithesis, "genuine" peer review. Our primary source of data are two influential adjudicators of scholarly publishing integrity that have been critical to the emergence of the concept of the fake review: Retraction Watch and the Committee on Publication Ethics. Via an analysis of their respective blog posts, Forum cases, presentations, and best practice guidance, we build a genealogy of the fake review discourse and highlight the variety of players involved in staking out the fake. We conclude that constant work is required to maintain clear lines of separation between genuine and fake reviews and highlight how the concept has served to reassert the boundaries between science and society in a context where they have increasingly been questioned. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A variety of real-world situations take the form of repeated principal-agent problems with binary evaluation. I evaluate the principal's optimal evaluation effort and quality threshold for acceptance in the setting of dynamic agency with binary evaluation, focusing specifically on the evaluation by a top academic journal of papers submitted by economists. In the baseline model, the journal should statistically discriminate in favour of high-status economists, by setting an acceptance threshold that declines with their prior estimate of the economist's quality, while evaluation effort should likely increase with perceived author quality, as this provides incentives for authors to exert more effort, which is particularly valuable from the highest-quality authors. However, if a first good publication is more valuable than subsequent publications by the same economist, acceptance thresholds will tend to increase after publication success, relative to the threshold that would have followed a rejection. • Considers repeated principal-agent problem with binary evaluation. • Specifically, evaluation by a top academic journal of papers submitted by economists. • Journal should statistically discriminate in favour of high-status economists. • Acceptance threshold declines with prior estimate of economist's quality. • But threshold could increase after publication if first publication is most valuable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There are ample national, transnational, and international geopolitical conflicts around the world, the two most prominent likely being the current ongoing Russo-Ukrainian war, and the conflict between Taiwan (the Republic of China) and China (the People's Republic of China). To avoid criticism or the label of political bias, academics might refrain from using the term Taiwan or might not refer to it as a country. Similarly, they might not know whether they should refer to Crimea or the Donbas as being Ukrainian or Russian. Authors currently have little guidance and are somewhat left to their own devices when it comes to referring to these and other locations and territories, uncertain of the names that should be used to indicate them. They might also observe disclaimers on publishers' websites, in the footer of editorial board pages, or even as a small notice in their own manuscripts placed there by the publisher that distance the publisher from geopolitical conflicts and/or territorial claims, claiming neutrality, independent of whether those papers mention those conflicts, or not. Such disclaimers might be perceived as self-serving, placing the onus of responsibility of the choice of territorial term on authors' shoulders, so publishers should offer clearer advice to authors and editors on how to better handle this issue, that is, how to accurately name locations in geopolitically sensitive areas. There is a risk that papers that are insufficiently sensitive to such issues may be labelled as erroneous, and subjected to correction or retraction, or the authors may be subjected to public criticism or humiliation, so resolving this issue falls within the realm of academic publishing ethics. Currently, very little advice exists for geopolitical issues in the Committee on Publication Ethics and International Committee of Medical Journal Ethics ethics-related publishing guidelines. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While academic librarians have been encouraged to collaborate with writing experts to improve students' academic writing and research competence, their collaboration is perhaps far from satisfactory due to the lack of mutual understanding. This study, therefore, interviewed writing experts to investigate their understanding of information literacy as a basis for meaningful collaboration. Findings reveal that writing experts have a simple and rough understanding of information literacy, cannot explain information literacy as a scholarly construct, and highlight the textual dimension of information literacy. Based on these findings, I suggest formal communication of information literacy theories and co-development of a text-based rubric of information literacy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Learning organizations create a phenomenal amount of scholarly knowledge as part of their academic discourse and research activities. This scholarly knowledge must be preserved and made accessible to other members. The absence of tools and strategies to facilitate the storage and accessibility of knowledge and information resources poses lots of challenges for the growth of learning organizations, particularly, learning organizations in Ghana. This study, therefore, sought to assess the deployment of knowledge repositories in learning organizations toward effective knowledge creation, use, sharing, retention, and retrieval. The study employed the triangulation design and online survey research. The triangulation helped in the collection of quantitative data followed by qualitative instruments (interviews) to find answers to pertinent questions and issues that were insufficiently addressed in the questionnaire responses. Nine (9) learning organizations in Ghana participated in this study. The study established that knowledge repositories and technology played critical roles in managing knowledge in learning organizations. However, the knowledge repositories were not user-friendly and fully utilized or accessible for knowledge management practices at the learning organizations. Also, the absence of fully integrated ICT Tools and Infrastructure inhibited the effective promotion of knowledge management initiatives at the learning organizations. The study concludes by developing a knowledge repository architecture for knowledge management in learning organizations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Accepted by: Aris Syntetos Can mathematical research from a business school professor that is published in academic journals also substantially improve actual industrial practice in global supply chains? Yes. Can mathematics and operations management help improve fairness in access to organ transplants? Yes, again. Can mathematics developed for business applications facilitate the development of new types of quantum hardware? Also, yes. I have three main messages in this invited essay: (1) free yourself from self-imposed constraints and explore a wider range of new problems and arcane mathematics; (2) be bold and imaginative in developing novel solutions and (3) implement your ideas in practice, scaling them with a channel partner. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]