Search

This analysis deals with the methods of searching for, discovering and accessing scholarly information in a group of early career humanists, theologians and scientists-artists. It is part of the findings of the Polish continuation of an international study that examined scientific communication in the Harbingers cycle, conducted in 2016-2022 among representatives of science, natural sciences and social sciences in eight countries on all continents. The study was conducted using the longitudinal interview method with the same main part of the questionnaire, which allows for various comparative analyses between different time points and between countries. This article presents a qualitative analysis of the responses given by Polish respondents to several questions on the methods of seeking, finding and discovering scholarly information. Young representatives of Polish humanities, theology and art were a diverse group: the information search methods included the use of search engines, alternative services as well as searching the resources of local libraries. It was found that the role of libraries is appreciated and that monographs are highly popular, mainly among the respondents from humanities, theology and art, which distinguishes them from scientists in other fields. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This paper presents the Polish researchers' opinions on success perception in science and examines the role of bibliometric and altmetric indices/metrics. It also provides respondents' statements on how their work is evaluated at Polish universities. Methods: The data come from in-depth interviews (spring 2023) with early career researchers in Linguistics, Literary Studies, History, Philosophy, Polish studies, Theology, Arts, Music, Plastic/Fine Arts, and Film. Results: The respondents' attachment to indices used in the periodical evaluation of scholars at Polish universities, such as the number of publications, ministerial score points, and external grants, was observed. The respondents were critical of citations as the determinant of success. They were generally not very interested in altmetrics. Value: The importance of this research (National Science Centre grant No 2022/45/B/HS2/00041), which is the Polish continuation of the two international projects (2016-2022), lies mainly in providing a platform to researchers in art and humanities, not included in earlier studies devoted to the sciences and social sciences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This paper describes the impact of external crises, i.e. the pandemic, the war in Ukraine, inflation and the reform of science and higher education on the work of early career researchers. Methods: The respondent group comprised early career researchers in humanities, theology and art. A qualitative analysis of free statements provided in the first round of in-depth interviews was performed. The Polish project (2023-) is a continuation of two international Harbingers projects, which included longitudinal interviews with early career researchers and dealt with changes in technology (2016-2018) and the pandemic (2020-2022). Results: Quotations from the interviews conducted in spring 2023 were used to describe the impact of external crises on the work of early career researchers in the three fields of science. The interviewees usually mentioned being overworked, sometimes - undervalued and, less frequently - the feeling of professional burnout. Financial problems of the young generation of Polish scientists were also brought up. Value: An attempt was made to characterise the conditions of work of Polish early career researchers in art, humanities and theology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The problem of self-perceived employability, the concept connected with personal knowledge and information management in the context of students was described. The self-perceived employability can be defined as the ability to keep the job and as the ability to get the job one desires. And highly educated young people in variety of European Union countries, including Poland, are often unsatisfied with his or her first job. The empirical studies were conducted among the Polish and German students of various majors. A special scale was used which consisted of 19 statements regarding five components: 1) student's perception of university, 2) field of study, 3) self-belief, 4) state of the external labour market and 5) personal knowledge and information management. The last component, that is the PKIM-personal knowledge and information management, is strongly connected to information literacy, well known in the library and information science literature. The findings of these studies were compiled using statistical methods: descriptive and inferential statistics and compared with the findings of other studies in this scope. Limitations were discussed as well as the implications for the future research of this problematic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose/Thesis: The aim of this study is to identify the changes in scholarly communication based on the analysis of attitudes and behaviors of junior researchers. Approach/Methods: The study is being conducted in seven countries over a three-year period from 2016 to 2018 using a deep interview method. During the first year of the study, 116 early-career researchers have participated, including 10 participants from the University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, Poland. Results and conclusions: The majority of respondents from all countries have drawn attention to the fact that they were overwhelmed with their professional duties and unstable work environment. Their focus on publishing papers in highly-ranked journals was noticeable. Originality/Value: It was first longitudinal and international study on changes in the scholarly communication among junior researchers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study explored knowledge sharing practices in Polish informal scholarly communication. The informal channels of communication include discussion, conversation, information exchange in both forms: face to face and via information and communication technologies. The study was carried out among the Polish academic community using a structured online questionnaire, which contained 88 questions (closed and partly open). Respondents consisted of academics: PhD, PhD with Habilitation, and Professors, employed in several types of universities and academia located throughout the country. A total of 1558 academics responded to the survey, representing all academic disciplines -- humanities, social sciences, technical and life sciences. The Polish academic community created rather homogenous networks, generally limited to their own disciplines. The favourite platform to share knowledge was unofficial talks during conferences and seminars. The preferable form of knowledge sharing practices was face to face talks, despite the development of modern information and communication technologies. The biggest barrier to knowledge sharing was the lack of time for free conversations. The most important motivator could be the interest of colleagues. Polish researchers commonly used only electronic mail and rarely used social media and blogs to share knowledge. This is the first national survey about knowledge sharing practices in Polish academic environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction. This article addresses the following research questions: How do Polish and German surveyed students perceive the self-assessment of management of personal knowledge and information? What are the differences between both groups of respondents regarding demographic variables (sex and status: Bachelor and Master)? Method. A structured questionnaire was used consisting of thirty statements, and the respondents indicated their agreement/disagreement with each of them via the 5-point Likert scale. Analysis. T-test and analysis of variance were used along with the qualitative interpretation of numerical results. The average self-assessments (in the 1-5 scale) of knowledge and information gathering, organizing, selecting, sharing and creating in both groups of respondents are presented in tables. Results. The comprehensive average from all thirty statements in the questionnaire among German students was 3.41 and Polish students 3.68, which is statistically significantly higher. The majority of differences between the two were observed in two sections: knowledge and information organizing and selecting. The assessment of the usefulness of skills and knowledge gained during their studies was relatively high in both groups of respondents (3.91, 3.79), suggesting that the curriculum satisfied the German and Polish respondents' needs. Conclusions. Almost the same number of similarities and differences between both groups was observed. Both majors curriculum satisfied the respondents' needs, but the Polish information studies programme seems to be more effective in development of knowledge and information skills and competences than the culture and technology, and the environmental studies programmes in the German institution. Nevertheless, more comparative studies and deep analysis of study programmes would be necessary to obtain more reliable conclusions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Personal knowledge and information management (PKIM) as an integrated approach of three concepts – personal knowledge management, personal information management and information literacy – is an appropriate and comprehensive approach to these issues with overlapping and supplementary areas of interests. The theoretical basis and results of pioneering empirical studies in the PKIM field, carried out in an academic environment, are presented in this exploratory study. The development and validation of the PKIM scale are characterized. An analysis of the subject literature, discussions with experts and students, and statistical methods used in creation of the PKIM scale, which is an original instrument for measuring a self-assessment of knowledge and information skills of students, are reported. The PKIM self-assessment of Polish students of information science majors and related specializations was high, but not as high as expected. Master’s students reported higher level of PKIM self-assessment than Bachelor’s students. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Purpose – This paper seeks to organize the extensive field and to compile the complete list of information limits. Design/methodology/approach – A thorough analysis of literature from the field beginning with the 1960s up to the present has been performed. Findings – A universal typology of information limits has been proposed. A list of barriers mentioned in the literature of the subject has been compiled. Research limitations/implications – The term "information limits" is not commonly used. Originality/value – The complete list of information limits with bibliographical hints (helpful for future research) is presented. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Polish Library Anxiety Scale (P-LAS) was developed and validated using as bases Bostick's Library Anxiety Scale (LAS) and three other scales: Multidimensional LAS (MLAS), Hebrew-LAS (H-LAS), and Kuwait-LAS (K-LAS). P-LAS consists of six components: barriers related to staff, personal affect, technology, library knowledge, library comfort, and resources. The research to develop this instrument took place in two empirical stages. Initial research using P-LAS concluded that about 40% of surveyed Polish students may be affected by some form of library anxiety. The general level of library anxiety among Polish respondents was relatively low. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

In this, the second iteration of our continuing 'Harbingers of Change' project, over 160 early career researchers (ECRs) from eight countries were questioned about their scholarly communications. Three repeat in‐depth interviews were conducted over 2 years of the pandemic to chart changes in attitude and behaviour. This paper provides interview findings (and an extensive literature review) regarding the role played by social media platforms. It was prompted by an initial review of the data that highlighted significant changes in the attitudes and behaviour of Malaysian ECRs, especially in respect to WhatsApp. Data were provided from several open‐ended interview questions about social media, a few interviewer prompts for individual platform names, and, indirectly, from 'mentions' of individual platforms in answers to a range of questions about scholarly communications. Findings were: (1) 15 platforms were mentioned in respect to a range of scholarly activities, most notably visibility and reach; (2) Twitter (now X) was the most mentioned, by half the ECRs; (3) 'churn' is a notable observation, with large gains and losses in mentions occurring between interviews; (4) large differences between countries, with Malaysian ECRs very much leading on the adoption of social media and largely responsible for the rise of WhatsApp, French ECRs showing little interest, and China a different space where WeChat reigns supreme and foreign platforms are blocked. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The research paper investigates doctoral students' information literacy (IL), a demographic often overlooked in IL studies. Focusing on the unique context of Polish doctoral schools, the paper explores the competences of young researchers. The methodological and descriptive objectives of the study include creating and validating the ILDoc tool and evaluating the self-efficacy in terms of information competences of doctoral students. The research employs the Computer Assisted Web Interview (CAWI) technique, targeting doctoral students from five Polish universities (Jagiellonian University, University of Gdańsk, Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, and University of Warsaw). Through Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), and Structural Equation Modeling (SEM), the study refines the ILDoc model, identifying four latent factors: Information Access, Information Retrieval, Reference Management, and Information Analysis. The findings highlight the critical importance of IL in academic librarianship, particularly underscoring gaps in advanced searching and reference management skills. While gender and age appear to have no significant impact, the year of study and successful midterm evaluations do influence IL self-efficacy. Additionally, the field of study affects students' abilities in information access and analysis. The study advocates for customized IL training and support for doctoral students. It also calls for ongoing IL training that aligns with the evolving research processes of doctoral students, emphasizing the collaborative role of librarians and faculty. The application of the ILDoc tool in this study yields significant benefits, offering academic institutions, libraries, and educators valuable insights for improving support strategies, thereby enriching the information literacy journey of doctoral students. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Investigates whether junior researchers believe that the scholarly communication system is changing in a significant way, whether they have contributed to the changes they envisaged, whether the pandemic has fast‐forwarded change and what they thought a transformed system might look like. The data are drawn from the Harbingers‐2 project, which investigated the impact of the pandemic on the scholarly communications attitudes and behaviours of early career researchers (ECRs), employing repeat interviewing with around 170 science and social science junior researchers from eight countries. The article focuses on the findings of the last of three rounds of interviews, with comparisons made with the first round, held 18 months earlier, when the pandemic was most active. A majority of ECRs thought that there had been significant changes in the scholarly system, and a large minority thought that the pandemic was responsible. Most of them wanted a system that was more open in terms of open access and open data, with a third taking personal action to bring about change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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]

Explores science and social science early career researchers' (ECRs) perceptions and experiences of peer review, seeking also to identify their views of any pandemic-associated changes that have taken place. Data are drawn from the Harbingers-2 project, which investigated the impact of the pandemic on scholarly communications. Peer review, one of the activities covered, is singled out as it proved to be the activity of greatest concern to ECRs. Findings are obtained from interviews, which covered around 167 ECRs from China, France, Malaysia, Poland, Russia, Spain, UK and US, supplemented by an international survey that took the data out to a bigger and wider audience for confirmation and generalisation. Results obtained are enhanced by comparisons with pre-pandemic evidence yielded by Harbingers-1, the forerunner of the present study, and anchored in an extensive review of the literature. Main findings are: 1) most ECRs were experienced in peer review, both as reviewers and authors, but few had formal training; 2) half the ECRs had a lot or some reservations as to whether peer review vouches for the trustworthiness of research; 3) inadequate reviewers and slow processes were the main peer review associated problems; 4) there was a strong feeling that some kind of compensation, whether monetary or reputational, could help in dealing with these problems; 5) the pandemic impacted most on the speed of processing, with the majority of ECRs saying it had slowed the process; 6) nearly everyone thought that any pandemic-induced impacts would be temporary. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

After two‐years of repeat interviewing early career sciences/social sciences researchers from around the world about their work life and scholarly communications in pandemic‐times, the Harbingers‐2 project is in a position to release quantitative data on the pandemic's overall impact. The data comes from around 50 questions asked in the third and final round of interviews with 147 early career researchers (ECRs), which had a codifiable element to them (such as yes, no, do not know). The 19 scholarly topics covered include: pandemic‐related research; research funding; changes to the workplace/working from home; pandemic‐incurred stress and anxiety; teaching; employment security; career progression; mentoring; assessment (including metrics); collaboration; searching/finding information; ethics; networking; informal communication; publishing; sharing; pre‐prints; outreach; and scholarly transformations. The main findings are that in six broad aspects of ECRs' work‐life and scholarly behaviour, more than 50% of ECRs were impacted by the pandemic, with remote teaching having the greatest impact. By way of comparison, in another six aspects there was little change, least of all when it came to sharing activities. Among the countries studied, Malaysia stood out as being the most impacted, and of the disciplines it was the medical sciences and the soft social sciences most impacted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Key points: 170 early career researchers interviewed three times over 2 years, have uniquely contributed towards a stress test of scholarly communications and cracks have been identified.The perfect storm created by the convergence of millennial values and the pandemic appears to have fast‐forwarded the cracking process, perhaps, for the good.The cracks in question are: (1) peer review; (2) reputational assessment; (3) unethical/questionable practices; (4) collaboration; (5) networking. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Presents findings from a study into the attitudes and practices of pandemic‐era early career researchers (ECRs) in regard to obtaining access to the formally published scholarly literature, which focused on alternative providers, notably ResearchGate and Sci‐Hub. The study is a part of the Harbingers project that has been exploring the work lives and scholarly communication practices of ECRs in pre‐pandemic times and during the pandemic, and utilizes data from two rounds of interviews with around 170 ECRs from the sciences and social sciences in eight countries. Findings show that alternative providers, as represented by ResearchGate and Sci‐Hub, have become established and appear to be gaining ground. However, there are considerable country‐ and discipline‐associated differences. ECRs' country‐specific level of usage of the alternative providers is partly traceable to the adequacy of library provisions, although there are other factors at play in shaping ECRs' attitudes and practices, most notably convenience and time saving, as well as the fact that these platforms have become embedded in the scholarly dashboard. There is a dearth of evidence of the impact of the pandemic on ECRs' ways of obtaining scholarly papers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: As part of the Harbnger-2 project, this study aimed to discover the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on junior researchers' work-life, career prospects, research and publishing practices and networking. Methods: An online international survey of 800 early career researchers (ECRs) was conducted in 2022. A questionnaire was developed based on three rounds of interviews and distributed using multiple channels including publishers, social media, and direct email to ECRs. Results: The impact of the pandemic on career prospects, morale, job security, productivity, ability to network and collaborate, and quality and speed of peer review has on the whole been more negative than positive. A quarter of ECRs shifted their research focus to pandemic-related topics and half of those who did, benefited largely due to increased productivity and impact. The majority worked remotely/from home and more than two-thirds of those who did so benefitted from it. While virtual or hybrid conferences have been embraced by the majority of ECRs, around a third still preferred face-to-face only conferences. The use of library online platforms, Sci-Hub, ResearchGate, Google Scholar and smartphone to search and access full-text papers increased. ECRs prioritised journals with fast submission procedures for the publishing of their papers and spent more time on increasing the visibility of their research. Fees were a problem for publishing open access. Conclusion: Although, generally, the pandemic negatively impacted many aspects of ECRs' work-life, certain research areas and individuals benefited from being more appreciated and valued, and, in some cases, resulted in increased resources, better productivity and greater impact. Changes, such as the use of digital technologies and remote working created new opportunities for some ECRs. While continuing work flexibility and hybrid conferences might benefit some ECRs, institutions should also take measures to help those ECRs whose career and productivity have been adversely impacted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Around 170 early career researchers (ECRs) from 8 countries were interviewed about the whole range of their scholarly communication attitudes/behaviours during pandemic times and this paper analyses what they said about predatory journals in a wide range of scholarly communication contexts. Because of the delicacy of the topic there was just one question exclusively directed at predatory journals, which asked about policies rather than actions, which yielded nevertheless wide-ranging comments on the topic. ECRs also volunteered information on predatory journals in another half dozen questions, most notably including one on questionable research practices. The source of data was mainly the final interview of three undertaken, with some comparisons made to rounds one and two. Findings disclose the existence of a whole raft of formal and informal assessment policies/codes that direct ECRs to legitimate journals and away from predatory ones. Despite being junior, ECRs are very accultured to the criteria of what is considered as prestige and quality and believe predatory publishing is not even conceivable. They are far more concerned about low-quality research, preprints and borderline 'grey' journals. The pandemic has increased the level of questionable practices and low-quality research, but predatory journals were only singled out by a relatively small number of ECRs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Presents early data from an investigation of the work lives and scholarly communication practices of 177 early career researchers (ECRs) from eight countries. Utilizing mainly coded and textual data from interviews, the paper reports on the findings that pertain to publishing papers in peer reviewed journals. We examine which factors are taken into account when choosing the journal to publish their research in, identifying similarities/differences by country, age, academic status and discipline. Also, explored is whether the pandemic has changed decision‐making. Main findings are that the aim for ECRs is to publish in the 'best' journals, variably measured by prestige, impact factor, standards of peer review and indexation. Appropriateness of audience is the only factor unrelated to the quality of the journal that figures highly among the factors that guide ECRs in the process of selecting a journal. The pandemic has made little difference to the majority of ECRs when they decide on a journal for publishing their research. However, there is a greater awareness of the need for a faster turnover rate, brought on by the importance accorded to speedy publication during the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

After two-years of talking to around 170 early career science/social science researchers from China, France, Malaysia, Poland, Russia, Spain, UK and US about their work life and scholarly communications during the pandemic, the Harbingers-2 project is in possession of a mountain of verbatim data. The purpose of this paper is to highlight the kinds of comments ECRs are raising, with a focus on those that provide a particular interesting and illuminating take on ECRs' experiences under difficult times. Comments, for instance, that might challenge the established order of things or that presage big changes down the line. The selection of comments presented here were made by the national interviewers shortly after the completion of the last of three rounds of interviews (two interviews in the case of Russia). The understandings, appreciations and suggestions thus raised by the ECRs are insightful and constructive, which is what we might have expected from this cohort who are very much at the forefront of the research enterprise and veritable research workhorses. Sixteen broad scholarly topics are represented by quotes/comments, with the main focus of the comments on a subset of these: research performance and assessment, scholarly communication transformations, networking and collaboration, social media and access to information/libraries, which suggests, perhaps, where the action, concerns and interest mainly lie. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

After two-years of repeat interviewing around 170 early career science/social science researchers from China, France, Malaysia, Poland, Russia, Spain, UK and US about their work life and scholarly communications in pandemic-times, the Harbingers project is now in possession of a mountain of data on what constitutes a very important academic topic. The purpose of the paper is to share the early highlights of the data, with a focus on the main and lasting impacts of the pandemic. The data presented comes from the national interviewers, who had conducted 3 rounds of interviews with their 20 or so early career researchers (ECRs) over two years and, thus, knew them well. They were asked to provide an ‘aerial view’ by identifying the most important impacts they had detected while things were still fresh in their minds. The main findings are that: 1) ECRs, the research workhorses, have generally proved to be resilient and perseverant and some have prospered; 2) the pandemic has fast-tracked researchers to a virtual and remote scholarly world, with all the advantages and disadvantages that comes with it. The data, however, is nuanced, with significant differences occurring between countries, especially China and France. The paper also updates a literature review on the topic previously published in this journal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In order to take account of the impact of the pandemic on the already changing scholarly communications and work-life of early career researchers (ECRs), the 4-year long Harbingers study was extended for another two years. As a precursor to the study (featuring interviews and a questionnaire survey), currently underway, an analytic review of the pertinent literature was undertaken and its results are presented here. The review focuses on the challenges faced by ECRs and how these compare to the ones more senior researchers have to tackle. In the examination of the literature three general questions are posed: Q1) What are the identifiable and forthcoming impacts of the pandemic-induced financial pressures felt in the Higher Education sector on ECRs' employment and career development prospects? Q2) What are the identifiable and forthcoming pandemic-associated disruptions in the pace/focus/direction of the research undertaking? Have any disruptions been predicted to exert an impact on ECRs' research activities, and if so, with what scholarly consequences? Q3) How is the work-life of ECRs shaping up under the virus-dictated rules of the 'new normal' in the research undertaking? What challenges, if any, arise from the changes in practices identified, and what might their potential consequences be for ECRs? The broad conclusion of the study is that the literature leaves little room for doubt: junior researchers are already disproportionally affected by and bear the burden of the ongoing pandemic-incurred hardships and they are likely to remain similarly impacted when more trials, still unfolding, materialise. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study explores early career researchers' (ECRs) appreciation and utilisation of open access (OA) publishing. The evidence reported here results from a questionnaire-based international survey with 1600 participants, which forms the second leg and final year of a four year long, mixed methods, longitudinal study that sought to discover whether ECRs will be the harbingers of change when it comes to scholarly communications. Proceeding from the notion that today's neophyte researchers, believed to hold millennial values of openness to change, transparency and sharing, may be best placed to power the take-up of OA publishing, the study sought to discover: the extent to which ECRs publish OA papers; the main reasons for their doing or not doing so; and what were thought to be the broader advantages and disadvantages of OA publishing. The survey data is presented against a backdrop of the literature-based evidence on the subject, with the interview stage data providing contextualisation and qualitative depth. The findings show that the majority of ECRs published in OA journals and this varied by discipline and country. Most importantly, there were more advantages and fewer disadvantages to OA publishing, which may be indicative of problems to do with cost and availability, rather than reputational factors. Among the many reasons cited for publishing OA the most important one is societal, although OA is seen as especially benefiting ECRs in career progression. Cost is plainly considered the main downside. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article describes an international study informed by a 3‐year‐long qualitative longitudinal project, which sought to discover the scholarly communication attitudes and behaviour of early career researchers (ECRs). Using a combination of small‐scale interviews and a larger‐scale survey, ECRs were questioned on their searching and reading behaviour, publishing practices, open data, and their use of social media. Questionnaire invitations were sent out via publisher lists, social media networks, university research networks, and specialist ECR membership organizations. One‐thousand and six‐hundred responses were received, with many coming from China, Russia, and Poland. Results showed that ECRs are adopting millennial‐facing tools/platforms, with Google, Google Scholar, social media, and smartphones becoming embedded in their scholarly activities. Open data sharing obtains widespread support but somewhat less practice. There are some differences in attitudes and behaviour according to age and subject specialism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In order to take account of the impact of the pandemic on the already changing scholarly communications and work-life of early career researchers (ECRs), the 4-year long Harbingers study was extended for another two years. As a precursor to the study (featuring interviews and a questionnaire survey), currently underway, an analytic review of the pertinent literature was undertaken and its results are presented here. The review focuses on the challenges faced by ECRs and how these compare to the ones more senior researchers have to tackle. In the examination of the literature three general questions are posed: Q1) What are the identifiable and forthcoming impacts of the pandemic-induced financial pressures felt in the Higher Education sector on ECRs’ employment and career development prospects? Q2) What are the identifiable and forthcoming pandemic-associated disruptions in the pace/focus/direction of the research undertaking? Have any disruptions been predicted to exert an impact on ECRs’ research activities, and if so, with what scholarly consequences? Q3) How is the work-life of ECRs shaping up under the virus-dictated rules of the ‘new normal’ in the research undertaking? What challenges, if any, arise from the changes in practices identified, and what might their potential consequences be for ECRs? The broad conclusion of the study is that the literature leaves little room for doubt: junior researchers are already disproportionally affected by and bear the burden of the ongoing pandemic-incurred hardships and they are likely to remain similarly impacted when more trials, still unfolding, materialise. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A study from the Harbingers research project provides a comprehensive assessment of the main features of the scholarly communications system as viewed by early career researchers (ECRs) in the final year of the study (2018). Aspects covered are: discovery and access, authorship practices, peer review, publishing strategies, open access publishing, open data, sharing, collaboration, social media, metrics, impact, reputation, libraries, publishers, and scholarly transformations. Nearly 120 science and social science researchers from seven countries were questioned about these 16 aspects. It was found that some scholarly features work well for ECRs, and in this category can be included: discovery and access, authorship practices, sharing, collaboration, and publishers. Reputation, publishing strategies, and impact are more problematical, and they, in turn, cause tensions regarding some other factors – social media, open access, and open data. Of the rest, libraries are largely invisible, and ECRs have conflicting views concerning ethical behaviour. Few envisage that transformational change will take place in the next 5 years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reports on the findings on the open science attitudes and behaviours of early career researchers (ECRs) from the Harbingers research project, which sought to determine whether they are the agents of change when it comes to scholarly communications. Nearly 120 science and social science researchers from 7 countries were questioned, longitudinally over a period of three years. The ECR findings are run against the received wisdom on open science emanating from relevant European Union institutions and funders and it was found that some confusion reigns and that there is a significant disconnect between what the institutions promulgate and what ECRs say and do, and, this, is largely because of reputational concerns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article provides the final results of a 3‐year study that sought to discover whether early career researchers (ECRs) were the harbingers of change with respect to scholarly communications. Over a hundred science and social science ECRs from seven countries, spanning three continents, were depth‐interviewed annually for 3 years (2016–2018) about their attitudes and behaviours with respect to 23 scholarly issues and activities (aspects). In order to provide an accessible overarching assessment of an extremely large and complex dataset, the interview data were categorized according to the strength and direction of change exhibited and the trends and points of interest raised. Results show that all ECRs have changed in one way or another, and a small minority has changed greatly in both attitude and practice and that collaboration and research impact are the scholarly aspects where most changes have occurred, and the greatest cause of change is not so much new technology as a change of jobs. [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]

Key points Early career researchers (ECRs) consider journals the central form of communication – but are concerned about pressure to publish. ECRs want to share but currently accept the closed publishing system because of the need to build a traditional reputation. ECRs know – and appear to care – little about publishers but trust them as publishing and reviewing facilitators. Editors are criticized for not managing peer review with better selection of reviewers. Megajournals are not seen as the future journal form and criticized for lack of selectivity. ECRs want open access/science in principle but are circumspect about their contribution to it. ResearchGate is a key force for change as ECRs consider it a mainstay communication and reputation platform. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this article is twofold: a) to describe and compare methods of early career researcher (ECR) assessment/appraisal; b) to explain how ECRs build, showcase, and monitor their reputation in an era of novel developments in scholarly communications. In all, 116 ECRs from China, France, Malaysia, Poland, Spain, the UK, and the US were questioned about appraisal and reputation in structured in-depth interviews. Desk research supplemented the interview data. It was found that ECRs are assessed very traditionally, largely on journal papers, and cannot (although some would like to) see this state of affairs changing. Mainly, they would prefer that less weight be given to the volume of papers published and more weight given to the quality of their research and its impact on the body of knowledge in their field. Unavoidably, then, ECRs' efforts to build, showcase, and monitor their reputation are still very much associated with research achievements. Nevertheless, online scholarly communities, and ResearchGate in particular, are gaining ground among ECRs, with increase in visibility and citations, and therefore a maximization of research impact, considered to be their main reputational benefits. Metrics are regarded as ‘a rule of the game' that has to be accepted, although ECRs have minimal interest in altmetrics. [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]

This study presents findings from the first year of the Harbingers research project, a 3-year longitudinal study of early career researchers ( ECRs), which sought to ascertain current and changing habits in scholarly communication. The study recruited 116 science and social science ECRs from seven countries who were subject to in-depth interviews, and this paper reports on findings regarding publishing and authorship practices and attitudes. A major objective was to determine whether ECRs are taking the myriad opportunities proffered by new digital innovations, developing within the context of open science, open access, and social media, to publish their research. The main finding is that these opportunities are generally not taken because ECRs are constrained by convention and the precarious employment environment they inhabit and know what is best for them, which is to publish (in high impact factor journals) or perish. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Early career researchers ( ECRs) are of great interest because they are the new (and biggest) wave of researchers. They merit long and detailed investigation, and towards this end, this overarching paper provides a summary of the first-year findings of a 3-year, longitudinal study of 116 science and social science ECRs who have published nearly 1,200 papers and come from 7 countries and 81 universities. ECRs were interviewed in their own languages face-to-face, by Skype, or telephone. The study focused on the attitudes and behaviours of ECRs with respect to scholarly communications and the extent to which they are adopting new and disruptive technologies, such as social media, online communities, and Open Science. The main findings include: publishing in high-impact factor journals is the only reputational game in town; online scholarly communities, and ResearchGate in particular, are gaining ground; social media are beginning to have an impact, especially in the dissemination arena; outreach activities have become more important; libraries are becoming increasingly invisible to ECRs; Open Science is not gaining traction; and more transformational ideas are being expressed, especially in the US and UK. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article presents findings from the first year of the Harbingers research project started in 2015. The project is a 3-year longitudinal study of early career researchers ( ECRs) to ascertain their current and changing habits with regard to information searching, use, sharing, and publication. The study recruited 116 researchers from seven countries ( UK, USA, China, France, Malaysia, Poland, and Spain) and performed in-depth interviews by telephone, Skype, or face-to-face to discover behaviours and opinions. This paper reports on findings regarding discovery and access to scholarly information. Findings confirm the universal popularity of Google/Google Scholar. Library platforms and web-scale discovery services are largely unmentioned and unnoticed by this user community, although many ECRs pass through them unknowingly on the way to authenticated use of their other preferred sources, such as Web of Science. ECRs are conscious of the benefits of open access in delivering free access to papers. Social media are widely used as a source of discovering scholarly information. ResearchGate is popular and on the rise in all countries surveyed. Smartphones have become a regularly used platform on which to perform quick and occasional searches for scholarly information but are only rarely used for reading full text. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]