Search

In this paper, we study how research topics and trends have evolved in the field of the science of team science (SciTS). Over the past 12 years, the International Science of Team Science conference has been making efforts to understand and enhance the processes and outcomes of collaborative team science. We argue that the sessions and papers in academic conferences are the best way to reflect the latest research trends. Based on the panel sessions and submitted papers in conference programs during 2010–2019, this study tracks the featured topics and how they have evolved in the field. We extracted terms from the titles of the sessions and papers, and visualized the research hotspots, research topics, and how they have evolved for analysis. We found that the research hotspots are constantly changing, and the research topics present evolutionary characteristics, such as continuation, split, and fusion. Additionally, we examined the models and case studies of team science, the characteristics and dynamics of teams, the interdisciplinary research dynamics in team science, team science education and training, and how team science is measured and evaluated. These results summarize the major research trends and opportunities in the SciTS field.

We present a continuous theory of global impact measures. Such measures combine inequality (like the Lorenz theory) with productivity, leading to the notion of global impact and its measurement.

This paper investigates different uses of the Journal Impact Factor in national journal rankings and discusses the merits of supplementing metrics with expert assessment. Our focus is national journal rankings, where a cross-country comparison is used as evidence to support decisions about the distribution of institutional funding or career advancement. The seven countries under comparison are: China, Denmark, Finland, Italy, Norway, Poland, and Turkey—and the region of Flanders in Belgium. With the exception of Italy, top-tier journals used in national rankings include those classified at the highest level, or according to tier, or points implemented. A total of 3,565 (75.8%) out of 4,701 unique top-tier journals were identified as having a Journal Impact Factor, with 55.7% belonging to the first Journal Impact Factor quartile. Journal rankings in China, Flanders, Poland, and Turkey classify journals with a Journal Impact Factor as being top-tier, but only when they are in the first quartile of the Average Journal Impact Factor Percentile (AJIFP). Journal rankings that result from expert assessment in Denmark, Finland, and Norway regularly classify journals as top-tier outside the first quartile, particularly in the social sciences and humanities. We conclude that experts, when tasked with metric-informed journal rankings, take into account quality dimensions that are not covered by Journal Impact Factors.

Hobby metal detectorists search for archaeological finds as individuals and within groups, the latter being the focus of this article. Such groups come together as “clubs” and “meetings,” but also as part of large, often commercially run events typically known as “rallies.” All these activities are attractive to detectorists because they provide them with access to land to search, along with the promise of making interesting (even valuable) discoveries, and they have a social dimension. They are common in England and also well established in several countries in northwest Europe, partly due to changing legislation. Although policies and mechanisms are often in place for collaboration with individual detectorists and even local metal-detecting clubs, larger events (not least, the large-scale commercial rallies increasingly occurring in England) present challenges for professional archaeologists, specifically in relation to the capacity to properly record finds and manage potential damage to the historic environment. To respond appropriately to these changes, a greater understanding of detectorists’ events is needed. For this reason, we explore and define the scale, nature, and diversity of group events, relating them to different legislative and cultural contexts in Flanders (Belgium), England (and Wales), and Finland. Subsequently, we outline challenges associated with group events and identify possible ways forward.

University heritage includes all the results of the academic, research, and extension activities of the university community, bequeathed in values, knowledge, and modes of action of a higher level education institution. The Universidad de Oriente, the second institution of its kind in Cuba, treasures an extensive collection of its heritage bequeathed by its researchers, teachers, and students; however, inefficiencies are detected that limit the use of heritage assets and documents in undergraduate and postgraduate courses, despite the institution's extensive trajectory, the extensive existing collection and the historical, architectural and heritage values it possesses are unknown. To this end, in this paper we propose and present a cultural heritage management platform that, in addition to disseminating the institution's heritage values, promotes the use of the results of research on the nation's cultural heritage in the training processes in different degree courses, research, and relations with institutions in the cultural sector. Theoretical methods, empirical techniques, the Extreme Programming software development methodology and the use of expert criteria and heuristic evaluation for its validation has been applied to assess its impact.

This article focuses on the debates held in Belgian Jewish society on philanthropy during the interwar period. From the end of the nineteenth century, Belgium’s Jewish community underwent a process of rapid demographic growth and dramatic religious, cultural, and political transformation after successive ‘waves’ of Eastern European Jewish immigrants settled in the country. Jewish philanthropy, previously the prerogative of the Belgian Jewish elite, became a more diversified field as immigrant actors became involved. This inevitably resulted in conflicting visions about the goals of, and methods used in, Jewish philanthropic work. However, providing support for the poor also held out the possibility for Jews from different ideological and socioeconomic backgrounds to work together, thus creating the conditions to bridge divides and allowing for the emergence of new political and communal frameworks. This article examines the historical developments in Jewish philanthropic work in Antwerp and Brussels, the main ‘Jewish cities’ in Belgium.

The West African countries adopted in 2012 a five-year STI policy document that should have helped States to master all science fields required for the emergence of a scientific community able to compete and exchange with the best research teams worldwide. This paper aims at measuring the scientific productivity of West Africa after the first regional science, technology and innovation policy and compared to the period 2001-2010. West African countries’ scientific data were collected from Web of Science and analysed with regard to the annual production, the total production, growth rate, relative growth index, growth index, international collaboration rate, partner countries and their shares. Over the decade 2011-2020, the region produced more than three times its output over the decade 2001-2010. The international collaboration rate is still higher. The major partner countries are the same as over the previous decade, either in the world or on the African continent. Nigeria is still the local giant with more than half of the regional output; it is followed by Ghana, Senegal and Burkina Faso. The dynamics of production are not the same at country level. West African scientific production is growing more rapidly than the one of the World. Within the region, not all countries have the same volume of production or the same growth speed. Nigeria by far is the local giant, however Ghana is the one that imparts production speed to the region. Taken into account the skewness of the scientific production per country, the study proposes in-depth analysis of the 15 countries grouped in five clusters as follows: small producers (8 countries), lower intermediate producers (3 countries), upper intermediate producers (2 countries), higher producer (1 country) and highest producer (1 country).

The integration of various technologies in a common goal is carried out in different branches of science. The management of the heritage found in university museums is of vital importance for the culture of students, teaching and the persistence of the historical memory of the institution. The aim of this work is to propose a system that integrates the Internet of Things (IoT) and Augmented Reality (AR) that allows specialists to manage this collection more efficiently with the use of these technologies. To achieve this goal, interviews and data collection on the collection, analysis of the state of the art on the application of these technologies in museums and the possible expected results and the innovative nature of the project have been shown.

For many years, bibliometrics have made their entrance into research evaluation and monitoring of research. The h-index launched in 2005 is one of the most widely used but also most criticized indicators. While its simplicity, ease of calculation and synthetic character stand at the origin of its success, serious questions have been raised around the comparison between disciplines and around the possibility to capture a researcher’s oeuvre into one single indicator. This study leads to several propositions for alternative h-related indexes and a categorization of articles in the function of their position on the citation distribution curve. Publications are categorized in classes of percentiles of the citation distribution, following the financial indexes (Moody’s and S&P), the ‘gh’-rating. Each category is awarded a weighted factor which leads to the fame-index or f²-index. The weighted average of a scientist’s best publications leads to an HF-rating (high fame), composed of two parts: the h-index and the letters referring to the category of those averages. In addition, we defined the h³-index and the compound H-index as an alternative. Finally, following a study of the increase of the h-index over time, I define the ha-index, as the number of publications that have at least ha citations per year. This alternative ha-index offers more stability and allows better recognition of younger researchers. The various proposed variants have been tested on specific applications, principally in the field of management and bibliometrics. A study of the publications in management journals nuances the impact of Chinese research in management studies. A multi-indicator comparative analysis of economic and management journals was realized with the FT50 list, the top 50 journals that are selected by the Financial Times, and 100 other important journals. A study of the evolution of publications in business ethics shows that the most important contribution in this new field of management research has not been performed by top universities or top business schools but was realized in second and third-tier universities. This means that second-tier universities can still excel in niche domains. I extend the notion of probably approximately correct (PAC) to bibliometric indicators and the whole field of bibliometrics, and I conclude that the use of bibliometrics implies ethical issues. Bibliometrics can offer valuable assistance in research assessment when applied fairly and responsibly. Researchers deserve to be evaluated on their scientific merit, the contents of their publications, and their impact on society.

Using different methods to assign disciplines to publications can influence bibliometric analyses. In this study, we test the influence of applying two different types of classification on the disciplinary collaboration rates of researchers from the Social Sciences and Humanities. Two different classification types are contrasted: organisational classification, which assigns discipline(s) based on the discipline of the unit(s) of the authors, and cognitive classification, which considers the discipline(s) assigned to the channel of the publication. The data set is based on a comprehensive local database of SSH research in Flanders, Belgium. Applied to collaboration, the two classification types both show an overall increase in co-authorship in SSH during the studied period. For certain periods, however, they reveal clearly dissimilar trends, especially for publications written by Humanities scholars: while the Humanities according to the cognitive classification have reached a plateau in co-authorship, collaboration rates in the Humanities according to the organisational classification continue to increase. We show that these variations are due to an increase in the proportion of publications of Humanities researchers outside Humanities channels. As such, the comparison of classification types can provide a deeper understanding of disciplinary differences in the evolution of co-authorship.

The increasing use of research metrics in the monitoring and evaluation of research has led to the expansion of research information infrastructure, as indicated by the rising number of national databases for research output and research information systems. At the same time, debates on requirements of national databases for research output are typically guided by simplistic assumptions about what an infrastructure is and how it shapes our understanding of different phenomena. We present an alternative framing of databases wherein infrastructure and context are seen as mutually constitutive. Drawing upon qualitative data on 12 national databases in Europe, we investigate the role that databases for research output play in research metrics and consequently in our understanding of research activities. Specifically, we bring to the surface database features that are typically left implicit and yet are crucial for understanding these databases in context. A key outcome of this study is an identification of two database logics—New Public Management and Enlightenment—that underpin database designs and the organization of database work. These logics do not merely guide practical database work (e.g. by determining the features of highest priority), but through the outcomes of that work they both enact and distribute a particular conception of what research is. In this article, we show how the two logics manifest and how they are related to each other. Situating these findings in the landscape of developments in research information infrastructure, we discuss implications for research evaluation and the understanding of research in general.

A library cannot and should not purchase every book ever published. It should however nurture a collection development policy guided by the needs of the patrons and environment in which it operates. Interlibrary loan offers patrons an affordable, easy and quick way to meet the most pressing needs where hiatuses in the collection are concerned. However, international loan requests for books can be costly and have a high delivery runtime with only a short lending period. Purchasing these titles rather than requesting them can turn out to be more cost- and time effective. In addition, adding requested titles to the collection is a sure way of developing the collection based on actual needs. The University of Antwerp Library implemented a Purchase on Demand pilot in 2018. This paper presents our findings after four years of POD-ILL as an additional acquisition model and partial alternative to international ILL. We provide a short introduction on the concept of POD-ILL and take a closer look at the collection purchased through POD-ILL. As expected, most purchases were made for the faculties of Law and Social Sciences and the departments of History and Literature. As an alternative to international ILL, the main benefit is the extended loan due to an owned versus lent copy. Our yearly budget was more than sufficient to cover the cost, which has provided some leeway in the purchase strategy and parameters. We have recently opted for inclusion of study books that are in high demand.

Article on the work and life of dr. Dirk Callewaert

Boekbespreking Sieger Vreeling, Geen stijl. Een rijkere architectuurgeschiedenis, Hilversum, Verloren, 2022

This article aims to add to the body of indicators used to study collaboration in science. We propose a new indicator to measure balance in collaboration (BIC) which is based on the Gini evenness index for a weighted Lorenz curve. The new indicator of balance builds upon and extends the use of, our previously introduced indicator of relative intensity of collaboration (RIC). We present examples based on the collaboration network between the twenty largest countries contributing to science during 2000-2020.

recensie van: Linda Schmelz, Kochen im Fernsehen.Eine kulturwissenscha"liche Annäherung, Münster-New York, Waxmann, 2018

Recensie van Ulrike Müller, Thuis in een museum. Het verhaal van Henriëtte en Fritz Mayer van den Bergh,Veurne, Hannibal, 2021

Onze universiteiten lijken een bijna onuitputtelijke stroom aan innovaties voort te brengen. Het zoeken naar oplossingen voor echt complexe problemen noodzaakt volgens velen echter het overstijgen van de traditionele disciplinaire opdeling. Eykens en Vanderstraeten vatten de inzichten samen uit een aantal recente bibliometrische analyses waarvan interdisciplinaire uitwisseling het onderwerp was. Zij tonen aan dat toenemende specialisering de disciplinaire indeling niet bestendigt, maar uitdaagt. De manieren waarop ons kennissysteem ontwikkelt worden niet vastgelegd langs de bestaande disciplinaire grenzen, maar breiden deze in plaats daarvan voortdurend verder uit.

In previous work, we introduced the notion of an impact bundle, showing how e.g., the h-index and the g-index can lead to such a bundle. Here we extend the set of impact bundles by a new impact bundle, based on Zhang's e-index. It is, moreover, shown that some other plausible definitions do not lead to an impact bundle. The authors thank Li Li (National Science Library, CAS) for drawing the figures in this article. They also thank anonymous reviewers for their comments, leading to some clarifications in the submitted text.

When quantifying the level of interdisciplinarity for scientific research, most established indicators employ a three-element diversity framework, namely variety, balance, and disparity, each of which captures a distinct but insufficient element. Among three, disparity, i.e. how different (dissimilar) the categories within a system are, is the most challenging one due to its calculation cost and conceptual ambiguity. The discriminative power for disparity is found to be weakened in more fine-grained science classification schemes. To address this issue, this paper proposes a new method for quantifying disparity by applying Node2vec on the discipline citation network and retrieving distance between disciplines using embeddings vectors. Compared to cosine-based dissimilarity for disparity, our proposed method exhibited broader distribution and less skewness for disparity values, which could potentially lead to higher discriminative power of interdisciplinarity. A case study for Linguistics is also conducted to show the capability of detecting variations in disparity of the proposed method.

The databases of Web of Science (WoS) have rapidly expanded their coverage of scientific journal during the past few decades. For the providers of WoS, this growth strategy has been a way to reduce existing biases in the coverage of these databases, especially in geographical regard. We look into the consequences of this strategy at the level of disciplines, and discuss its underlying rationales. Our analyses particularly focus on the SSCI. We first highlight interdisciplinary inequalities in the coverage of this database, and discuss why disciplines, such as Economics and Management, which are hierarchically-structured and whose journals have high impact factors in WoS, have benefited most from the growth of WoS. Their relative weight in the SSCI has grown at the expense of other disciplines. We also argue that changes in the coverage of this database have performative effects. There are winners and losers of the editorial expansion strategy of WoS in the real academic world. In the concluding section, we suggest that the providers of WoS reconsider the coverage of their databases in order to reflect and protect the interdisciplinary diversity in the world of science.

Purpose We aim to extend our investigations related to the Relative Intensity of Collaboration (RIC) indicator, by constructing a confidence interval for the obtained values. Design/methodology/approach We use Mantel-Haenszel statistics as applied recently by Smolinsky, Klingenberg, and Marx. Findings We obtain confidence intervals for the RIC indicator Research limitations It is not obvious that data obtained from the Web of Science (or any other database) can be considered a random sample. Practical implications We explain how to calculate confidence intervals. Bibliometric indicators are more often than not presented as precise values instead of an approximation depending on the database and the time of measurement. Our approach presents a suggestion to solve this problem. Originality/value Our approach combines the statistics of binary categorical data and bibliometric studies of collaboration.

This short paper has drawn attention to a new source for libcitation analyses: libcitations from local public libraries. We have used a catalogue of local public libraries to calculate public libcitation scores for all books written by Flemish SSH scholars. An exploratory analysis of SSH books with a presence in local libraries has shown that non-scholarly SSH books are more likely to appear in local public libraries. It also shows that the books written by SSH scholars that appear in local public libraries are more likely to be written in Dutch. Rather than being indicators of scholarly impact, public libcitations are a tool that can be used specifically to gauge the impact of books that are not peer-reviewed and that are written in a local language. This study has shown that it is possible to perform libcitation studies with local public libraries. However, a few drawbacks have to be noted. Firstly, the analysis depends on a cataloguing system specific to the country or region under study rather than an international catalogue where all data can be retrieved in one go. Cross-country comparisons would have to take into account the differences between the public library catalogues and on a broader level also depend on the availability of data about local public libraries. The results with regard to libcitation scores have also shown that while the number of books written by local SSH scholars and present in public libraries is not negligible, it is also not very great. Thus, the public libcitation score can only be used for a limited number of books. Lastly, it is important to stress a few limitations of this study. Some important issues with libcitation analyses (that also apply to public libcitations) were raised by Biagetti and Biagetti, Iacono and Trombone. The libcitation scores as ‘citation scores by librarians’ suggests that librarians decide on the acquisition of individual books. In practice, however, books are often bought in bulk. Donations can also play a role. A second major issue is the prevalence of online books. As books become more and more available – and read – online, the interpretation of the libcitation score becomes more complex. The current study did not take into account the library acquisition policy. This could help in gaining an understanding into the extent to which bulk buying may influence the result, but also which books are seen as relevant to librarians. In future research, we will investigate these issues, in order to better assess the potential and limitations of (public) libcitation scores as an indicator of broader impact.

This study compares publisher ratings to the visibility and impact of individual books, based on a 2017 data set from three Nordic performance-based research funding systems (PRFS) (Denmark, Norway, and Finland). Although there are Journal Impact Factors (JIFs) for journals, there is no similar indicator for book publishers. National publisher lists are used instead to account for the general “quality” of books, leading to institutional rewards. But, just as the JIF is not recommended as a proxy for the “citedness” of a paper, a publisher rating is also not recommended as a proxy for the impact of an individual book. We introduce a small fish in a big pond versus big fish in a small pond metaphor, where a “fish” is a book and “the pond” represents its publishing house. We investigate how books fit on this metaphorical fish and pond continuum, using WorldCat holdings (visibility) and Google Scholar citations (impact), and test other variables to determine their predictive value with respect to these two indicators. Our statistics show that publisher levels do not have predictive value when other variables are held constant. This has implications for PRFS and book evaluations in general, as well as ongoing developments related to a newly proposed international publisher registry.

The availability of Open Access journals in the various fields of knowledge in Clarivate Analytics’ Web of Science is hypothesized to present strong inequalities, thus affecting the choice of journals by researchers wishing to publish their research results in Open Access. The first objective of this research was to contrast this hypothesis, by crossing the list of journals available at WoS with the lists of the Directory of Open Access Journals. The availability of OA journals presents strong inequalities, ranging from 5 to 40% depending on the field of knowledge. At the level of universities, such disparity in the availability of Open Access journals is an important factor regarding their accomplishment of Open Access mandates considering their specialization profiles. In this work, as the second objective, the publications available on the Web of Science (from 2016 to 2020) of the universities belonging to the YERUN Network (Young European Research Universities) are studied in order to identify their specialization profiles, their Open Access types (and evolution) and the possible interactions between their specialization and the availability of Open Access journals and their respective fields of specialization. A general overview of the volumes of funded research and the different proportions of Open Access and non-Open Access in funded and non-funded research is also provided. The indicator “Open Access Likelihood” is introduced and applied as a proxy for the likelihood of Open Access publications taking into account the fields of specialization of the YERUN universities. The results of its application underline the need to take into consideration both, specialization and Open Access availability when designing feasible Open Access mandates. Future research includes the study of the availability of Open Access journals by tiers of impact actors. Resumo A disponibilidade de periódicos de Acesso Aberto nos vários campos do conhecimento na Web of Science da Clarivate Analytics apresenta a hipótese de apresentar fortes desigualdades, afetando, assim, a escolha de periódicos por pesquisadores que desejam publicar seus resultados em Open Access. O primeiro objetivo desta pesquisa foi contrastar essa hipótese, cruzando a lista de periódicos disponíveis na WoS com as listas do Directory of Open Access Journals. A disponibilidade de periódicos Open Access apresenta fortes desigualdades, variando de 5% a 40% dependendo da área do conhecimento. No nível das universidades, essa disparidade na disponibilidade de periódicos de acesso aberto é um fator importante em relação ao cumprimento dos mandatos de acesso aberto, considerando seus perfis de especialização. Como segundo objetivo deste trabalho, foram estudadas as publicações disponibilizadas na Web of Science entre 2016 e 2020 de universidades pertencentes à Rede YERUN (Young European Research Universities) a fim de identificar os seus perfis de especialização, seus tipos de Open Access (e sua evolução) e as possíveis interacções entre a sua especialização e a disponibilidade de revistas Open Access em seus campos de especialização. Uma visão geral dos volumes de pesquisas financiadas e as diferentes proporções de Open Access e não Open Access em pesquisas financiadas e não financiadas também é apresentada. O indicador OAL (Open Access Likelihood) é desenvolvido e aplicado como um proxy para a probabilidade de publicações Open Access levando em consideração as áreas de especialização das universidades YERUN. Os resultados da sua aplicação sublinham a necessidade de levar em consideração tanto a especialização como a disponibilidade de Open Access ao conceber mandatos de Open Access viáveis. Pesquisas futuras poderão incluir o estudo da disponibilidade de periódicos Open Access por níveis de fator de impacto.

PurposeFollowing the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), many forms of bottom-up civic action emerged as ways to collectively “flatten the curve” and tackle the crisis. In this paper, the authors examine to what extent local online and offline social integration contributes to civic participation, above and beyond typical predictors such as news consumption and civic talk.Design/methodology/approachAn online survey was administered among 7,137 users of the online neighbourhood network (ONN) Hoplr in Flanders (i.e. the Dutch-speaking part of Belgium) from 8 May to 18 May 2020. Regression analyses were used to examine how local social integration, in addition to news consumption, civic talk and political antecedents, predict different types of civic participation.FindingsThe results show consistent positive associations between news consumption, civic talk and civic participation during the COVID-19 pandemic. Moreover, the role of political antecedents varied across different forms of civic participation. Further, the results point to the importance of both offline and online local social integration in explaining civic participation.Originality/valueThis study provides much-needed insight in the societal and democratic consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic. The results confirm the importance of local social integration in explaining civic participation, while also advancing theoretical understanding of more established predictors of civic participation, such as news consumption and interpersonal communication.Peer reviewThe peer review history for this article is available athttps://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-08-2020-0379.

Purpose This article aims to determine the percentage of “Sparking” articles among the work of this year’s Nobel Prize winners in medicine, physics, and chemistry. Design/methodology/approach We focus on under-cited influential research among the key publications as mentioned by the Nobel Prize Committee for the 2020 Noble Prize laureates. Specifically, we extracted data from the Web of Science, and calculated the Sparking Indices using the formulas as proposed by Hu and Rousseau in 2016 and 2017. In addition, we identified another type of igniting articles based on the notion in 2017. Findings In the fields of medicine and physics, the proportions of articles with sparking characteristics share 78.571% and 68.75% respectively, yet, in chemistry 90% articles characterized by “igniting”. Moreover, the two types of articles share more than 93% in the work of the Nobel Prize included in this study. Research limitations Our research did not cover the impact of topic, socio-political, and author’s reputation on the Sparking Indices. Practical implications Our study shows that the Sparking Indices truly reflect influence of the best research work, so it can be used to detect under-cited influential articles, as well as identifying fundamental work. Originality/value Our findings suggest that the Sparking Indices have good applicability for research evaluation.

Temporary and permanent disconnection from digital devices, platforms, or tools has gained traction from users and, subsequently, in academic discourse. A rapidly growing body of research focuses on so-called digital disconnection practices. However, the literature is highly scattered, with limited comprehensive work and consensus on essential foundations for this field. This study provides a systematic review of the digital disconnection literature following the PRISMA flow and Cochrane guidelines. We investigated 112 articles based on the following eight themes of digital disconnection: (1) definitions, (2) measurements, (3) prevalence, (4) motives, (5) strate-gies, (6) consequences/effectiveness, (7) relapsing, and (8) interventions. The review shows that research on this topic suffers from conceptual ambiguity and lacks consensus on terminology, definition, and measurement. As a first step to solving these lacunae, we provide a working definition, describing digital disconnection as a deliberate form of non-use of devices, platforms, features, interactions and/or messages that varies in frequency and duration with the aim of restoring or improving one's perceived overuse, social interactions, psychological well-being, productivity, privacy and/or perceived usefulness. Moreover, we discuss the identified empir-ical and theoretical shortcomings and provide recommendations for future research.

In this piece we share our discovery process as action researchers in an online, global change initiative that emerged during the first lockdown of the Covid-19 pandemic, 2020. In the spirit of sharing our work "in the making" we aim to make visible our own reflection process and the questions that surface from it. In particular, we share and explore our realization that in order to fully serve the transformational intention of the initiative and the research itself, we needed to expand our research framework mid-process. The framework that best serves the emergent and transformative nature of the initiative is one that both supports awareness-based action and generates widely applicable knowledge; that integrates a variety of perspectives on social phenomena (first-, second-, and third-person); and that aims to bring systematic inquiry both to the observable phenomena and the deeper underlying dimensions. The approach requires us to make visible our assumptions and to integrate and validate different epistemologies, including relational, intuitive and aesthetic knowing. As such, the approach to research we suggest here can be thought of as an epistemological framework itself.

The Yule-Simpson paradox refers to the fact that outcomes of comparisons between groups are reversed when groups are combined. Using Essential Sciences Indicators, a part of InCites (Clarivate), data for countries, it is shown that although the Yule-Simpson phenomenon in citation analysis and research evaluation is not common, it isn't extremely rare either. The Yule-Simpson paradox is a phenomenon one should be aware of, otherwise one may encounter unforeseen surprises in scientometric studies. ispartof: SCIENTOMETRICS vol:126 issue:4 pages:3501-3511 ispartof: location:Switzerland status: published

Le programme de formation en archivistique mis en place au début des années 1980 en République du Bénin s’est inspiré du modèle élaboré au lendemain de la Révolution française et longtemps mis en oeuvre par l’École nationale des chartes. Une évaluation récente a révélé trois absences fondamentales dans l’enseignement : 1) compétences en gestion des documents actifs ; 2) normes de description archivistique ; et 3) outils d’indexation matière. En réponse, un nouveau programme de formation a été conçu.L’article décrit les difficultés rencontrées dans la gestion des archives dans l’administration et dans les entreprises au Bénin, et la solution qu’apporte l’Université d’Abomey-Calavi., The archival training program implemented in the early 1980s in the Republic of Benin was inspired by the model developed in the aftermath of the French Revolution and long implemented by the École nationale des chartes. A recent evaluation revealed three fundamental gaps in teaching : 1) skills in active records management ; 2) archival description standards ; and 3) subject indexing tools. In response, a new training program has been developed.The article describes the difficulties encountered in the management of archives in government and businesses in Benin, and the solution provided by the University of Abomey-Calavi.

Open Science is an umbrella term that encompasses many recommendations for possible changes in research practices, management, and publishing with the objective to increase transparency and accessibility. This has become an important science policy issue that all disciplines should consider. Many Open Science recommendations may be valuable for the further development of research and publishing, but not all are relevant to all fields. This opinion paper considers the aspects of Open Science that are most relevant for scientometricians, discussing how they can be usefully applied.

Despite the centrality of disciplinary classifications in bibliometric analyses, it is not well known how the choice of disciplinary classification influences bibliometric representations of research in the social sciences and humanities (SSH). This is especially crucial when using data from national databases. Therefore, we examine the differences in the disciplinary profile of an article along with the absolute and relative number of articles across disciplines using five disciplinary classifications for journals. We use data on journal articles (2006–2015) from the national bibliographic databases VABB-SHW in Flanders (Belgium) and Cristin in Norway. Our study is based on pairwise comparisons of the local classifications used in these databases, the Web of Science subject categories, the Science-Metrix, and the ERIH PLUS journal classifications. For comparability, all classifications are mapped to the OECD Fields of Research and Development classification. The findings show that the choice of disciplinary classification can lead to over- or underestimation of the absolute number of publications per discipline. In contrast, if the focus is on the relative numbers, the choice of classification has practically no influence. These findings facilitate an informed choice of a disciplinary classification for journals in SSH when using data from national databases.

PurposeThis study aims to assess the relative importance of the argument strength, argument sidedness, writing quality, number of arguments, rated review usefulness, summary review rating and number of reviews in determining the perceived usefulness and credibility of an online review. Additionally, the authors use insights from the elaboration likelihood model (ELM) to explore the effect of consumers' product category involvement on the cues' relative importance.Design/methodology/approachA conjoint analysis (N = 287) is used to study the relative importance of the seven previously mentioned attributes. A balanced orthogonal design generated eight cards that correspond to individual reviews. Respondents scored all eight cards in a random order for perceived usefulness and credibility.FindingsOverall, argument strength is the most important cue, while summary review rating and the number of reviews are the least important for perceived review usefulness and credibility. The number of arguments is more important for people who are more highly involved with the product, while writing quality and rated review usefulness are relatively more important for the low-involvement group.Originality/valueThis study provides a comprehensive test of how consumers perceive online reviews, as it the first to the authors’ knowledge to simultaneously investigate a large set of cues using conjoint analysis. This method allows for the implicit valuation (utility) of the individual cues, revealing the cues' relative importance, in a setting that comes close to a real-life context. Besides, insights of the ELM are used to understand how the relative importance of cues differs depending on the level of review readers' product category involvement.

To date, there has been little agreement in the literature on what exactly constitutes radical drug innovation and how to properly measure this important construct. Without a validated measure, our ability to understand radical drug innovations, explain their origins, and demonstrate their implications for management and health policy is limited. This paper addresses the problem of radical drug innovation measurement, provides evidence of the limitations associated with the current state of the art, and offers a new method based on German health technology assessments (HTA). Data was obtained for 147 drugs authorized by the European Medicines Agency from 2011 to 2016. The innovativeness of these drugs was assessed using current measures of radical drug innovation compared with the newly developed measure. Findings indicate that current measures of radical drug innovation are associated with very inconsistent outcomes and do not appear to measure what they purport to measure. This study argues that assessing therapeutic value (as measured by the German HTA) is particularly important, given that drug novelty alone does not conclusively indicate whether a drug will deliver therapeutic value.

Purpose In this contribution we provide two new co-authorship indicators based on fractional counting. Design/methodology/approach Based on the idea of fractional counting we reflect on what should be an acceptable indicator for co-authorship between two entities. From this reflection we propose an indicator, the co-authorship score, denoted as cs, using the harmonic mean. Dividing this new indicator by the classical co-authorship indicator based on full counting, leads to a co-authorship intensity indicator. Findings We show that the indicators we propose have many necessary or at least highly desirable properties for a proper cs-score. It is pointed out that the two new indicators can be used for countries, but also for institutions and other pairs of entities. A small example shows the feasibility of the co-authorship score and the co-authorship intensity indicator. Research limitations The indicators are not yet tested in real cases. Practical implications As the notions of co-authorship and collaboration have many aspects, we think that our contribution may help policy management to take yet another aspect into account as part of a multi-faceted description of research outcomes. Originality/value The indicators we propose cover yet another aspect of co-authorship.

Purpose This paper presents an overview of different kinds of lists of scholarly publication channels and of experiences related to the construction and maintenance of national lists supporting performance-based research funding systems. It also contributes with a set of recommendations for the construction and maintenance of national lists of journals and book publishers. Design/methodology/approach The study is based on analysis of previously published studies, policy papers, and reported experiences related to the construction and use of lists of scholarly publication channels. Findings Several countries have systems for research funding and/or evaluation, that involve the use of national lists of scholarly publication channels (mainly journals and publishers). Typically, such lists are selective (do not include all scholarly or non-scholarly channels) and differentiated (distinguish between channels of different levels and quality). At the same time, most lists are embedded in a system that encompasses multiple or all disciplines. This raises the question how such lists can be organized and maintained to ensure that all relevant disciplines and all types of research are adequately represented. Research limitation The conclusions and recommendations of the study are based on the authors’ interpretation of a complex and sometimes controversial process with many different stakeholders involved. Practical implications The recommendations and the related background information provided in this paper enable mutual learning that may feed into improvements in the construction and maintenance of national and other lists of scholarly publication channels in any geographical context. This may foster a development of responsible evaluation practices. Originality/value This paper presents the first general overview and typology of different kinds of publication channel lists, provides insights on expert-based versus metrics-based evaluation, and formulates a set of recommendations for the responsible construction and maintenance of publication channel lists.

Situated within the debate that has taken place in the recent years on how Digital Humanities can break down barriers between countries of the Global North and South (Intersectionality in Digital Humanities Conference, 2016), and how materials in minority langauges can have presence in the network for the generation of new knowledge (Thieberger, 2017; Rodríguez-Ortega and Cruces Rodríguez, 2018), the objective of this article is to explain how (and if) digitalization and Digital Humanities can facilitate research in the Philippines, as well as make it visible, and how this can be facilitated by cooperation projects, citing the example of the project Philperiodicals, carried out by the University of Antwerp and the University of the Philippies. What opportunities and difficulties were encountered upon proposing a project with such characteristics? What problems (ethical, at times) do we encounter when subsidizing projects in the South from the North? We shall address these questions based on the current status of digitalization and Digital Humanities in the country. Lastly, we offer a series of good practices concluded from debates and experiences from the project Philperiodicals, in the hopes that our previous difficulties and discussions may be of use for the development of similar projects in what has been called the Global South.

Researchers propose that the convoy of care model should be used to study care networks of frail, older individuals. Care convoys are defined as the evolving collection of individuals who may or may not have close personal connections to the recipient or to one another, but who provide care, including help with activities of daily living (ADLs) and instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs), socio-emotional care, skilled health care, monitoring, and advocacy. This study reports on community-dwelling older adults' experiences of their care convoy, how care convoys change over time, and perceived (positive) outcomes. A qualitative analysis among 65 semi-structured interviews with frail, community-dwelling older adults demonstrates a great variety in the composition of care convoys. Participants were often actively involved in their care convoy and valued the social/relational aspect of care. Care and support covered a wide range of activities, with some activities being provided by specific types of caregivers. Participants expressed the adequacy of their care convoy in terms of satisfaction and sufficiency. Noteworthy, participants who were satisfied with their care convoy did not necessarily receive sufficient help. Policies and practice should recognize the relational aspect of care, the complex interplay between all actors, and the dynamic character of care convoys. ispartof: QUALITATIVE HEALTH RESEARCH vol:30 issue:4 pages:583-597 ispartof: location:United States status: published

This study explores if there exists a European space of social sciences and humanities (SSH) scholarship in terms of journal use by focusing on journals that explicitly position themselves as Europe-oriented or internationally oriented. We analyze the prevalence of publications in Europe-oriented journals and to what extent the same scholarly journals are used in the SSH across different European countries. We analyze bibliographic metadata of 8,101 SSH journal articles collected from 5 research-intensive universities in Finland, Flanders (Belgium), Norway and Spain for the period 2014-2015. We compare the results overall as well as at the level of SSH disciplines to find out to what extent a shared European journal space is emerging between the national and the international level. The results of the analyses of language use are in line with previous studies. Differences between broad fields and individual disciplines, as well as the institutions are found. With regard to journal sharing, the results are partially negative in the sense that we did not find extensive shared journal spaces. In this limited shared journal space Europe-oriented journals are of considerable importance. We include reflections on what the value of comprehensive bibliographic data would be for research into the European SSH.

This article presents an analysis of the uptake of the GPRC label (Guaranteed Peer Reviewed Content label) since its introduction in 2010 until 2019. GPRC is a label for books that have been peer reviewed introduced by the Flemish publishers association. The GPRC label allows locally published scholarly books to be included in the regional database for the Social Sciences and Humanities which is used in the Flemish performance-based research funding system. Ten years after the start of the GPRC label, this is the first systematic analysis of the uptake of the label. We use a mix of qualitative and quantitative methods. Our two main data sources are the Flemish regional database for the Social Sciences and Humanities, which currently includes 2,580 GPRC-labeled publications, and three interviews with experts on the GPRC label. Firstly, we study the importance of the label in the Flemish performance-based research funding system. Secondly, we analyse the label in terms of its possible effect on multilingualism and the local or international orientation of publications. Thirdly, we analyse to what extent the label has been used by the different disciplines. Lastly, we discuss the potential implications of the label for the peer review process among book publishers. We find that the GPRC label is of limited importance to the Flemish performance-based research funding system. However, we also conclude that the label has a specific use for locally oriented book publications and in particular for the discipline Law. Furthermore, by requiring publishers to adhere to a formalized peer review procedure, the label affects the peer review practices of local publishers because not all book publishers were using a formal system of peer review before the introduction of the label and even at those publishers who already practiced peer review, the label may have required the publishers to make these procedures more uniform.

The article presented is a partial result of a doctoral research entitled “Valuing documentary heritage at the Universidad de Oriente” developed within the framework of the p4 Vlir international cooperation project “Safeguarding cultural heritage. Tools and practices for its integrated management in Santiago de Cuba and the eastern region of the country”, which is part of the Flemish Interuniversity Program for International Cooperation with the Universidad de Oriente (VLIR-UOS). The objective of this article is to provide an exploratory approach to the state and conservation of the documentary heritage of the Universidad de Oriente, to contribute to its recognition and management. Scientific research methods such as: historical-logical, analysis-synthesis, inductive-deductive and documentary analysis were used. The derived conclusions indicate that it is urgent to address the management of documentary heritage at the Universidad de Oriente to value the institutional historical memory.