Search

Purpose: Investigation of the correlation between document supply by INIST-CNRS (Institut National de l'Information Scientifique et Technique) and citations of 89 pharmacology and pharmacy periodicals in 1992-2004. Investigation of the influence of electronic periodicals., Methods: Analysis of the cards of document supply-citation correlation for the 89 periodicals during 13 years. Making of four groups of periodicals., Results: The four groups are respectively made of 19, 16, 47 and 7 periodicals from the most supplied and cited (the more expensive and aged) to the less supplied and cited. Their characteristics are analysed taking into account their evolution during 1992-2004. The periodical Thérapie is in the group of periodicals very supplied but less cited., Conclusion: The correlation between document supply and citations decreases during the investigated time and is influenced by the coming of electronic periodicals.

The Harbingers project, which studied the working lives and scholarly communication behaviour of early career researchers (ECRs) over 6 years, found evidence of changing attitudes to questionable (grey) publishing. Thus, whilst predatory publishers have come to be treated with equanimity, as a problem easily dealt with, there was growing concern with the high volume of low-grade research being generated, some of which by 'grey' open access publishers for want of a better name (questionable and non-standard have also been used). With the recent announcement (2023) that the government of Malaysia (a Harbinger case country) is not providing Article Processing Charges (APCs) for articles published by MDPI, Frontiers and Hindawi on quality and cost grounds, we set out to see what lay behind this decision and whether other countries exhibited similar concerns. Information was obtained by asking Harbinger country leads, mostly embedded in research universities, from Australia, China, France, Israel, Malaysia, Poland, Spain, UK, and the US to conduct desk research to establish what is happening. It was found that countries, like ECRs, appear to have formed into two different camps, with China, Poland, France, and Spain joining Malaysia in the camp of those who felt concerned about these publishers and the UK, US, Israel, and Australia belonging to the camp of the unconcerned. Explanations for the split are furnished and whether the Malaysian position will prevail elsewhere is considered. Finally, in this paper, we have aired issues/concerns, rather than provided robust, systematic data. For a systematic study we shall have to wait for the fuller study we are hoping to conduct. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper provides a critical review of the predatory journals phenomenon, which affects the field of scholarly communication in the Open Access era. It offers an analytical account of the debates, the research being done and the methodologies used, and discusses the multidimensional definition of predatory journals and of the new market for lists of 'legitimate' and 'illegitimate' journals. The article identifies the main ethical and scientific issues that predatory journals raise in the Open Access publishing era and reports on the contexts that lead researchers, both young and senior, to publish in these outlets. By linking predatory journals to the field of scholarly communication, the article highlights the main issues and establishes them as research topics. The article concludes with research avenues that contribute to the analysis of mutation in digital scholarly communication. [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]

This paper presents selected findings from the first year of a 3-year longitudinal study of early career researchers ( ECRs), which sought to ascertain current and changing habits in scholarly communication. Specifically, the aims of the paper are to show: (1) how much experience and knowledge ECRs had of peer review - both as authors and as reviewers; (2) what they felt the benefits were and what suggestions they had for improvement; (3) what they thought of open peer review ( OPR); and (4) who they felt should organize peer review. Data were obtained from 116 science and social science ECRs, most of whom had published and were subject to in-depth interviews conducted face-to-face, via Skype, or over the telephone. An extensive literature review was also conducted to provide a context and supplementary data for the findings. The main findings were that: (1) most ECRS are well informed about peer review and generally like the experience, largely because of the learning experiences obtained; (2) they like blind double-peer review, but would like some improvements, especially with regards to reviewer quality; (3) most are uncomfortable with the idea of OPR; and (4) most would like publishers to continue organizing peer review because of their perceived independence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on the third edition of the "Academic Publishing in Europe" conference that was held from January 22-23, 2008, at the Science Academy of Berlin-Brandenburg, Germany. Among the subjects discussed were the free access to information, publishing and its economic models, and the cost of digital scientific data in relation to libraries.

The article discusses the proceedings of the conference "Academic Publishing in Europe" held in the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Science at the famous Gendarmenmarkt in the historical center of Berlin near Humboldt University on January 22-23, 2008. About 230 professionals from 15 countries from The Netherlands, Germany, and Great Britain attended the conference.