Search

Publication in 'reputable', peer-reviewed and indexed journals has become a key requirement for promotion and career advancement in African universities. There is little research into how bibliometric measures of journal reputation are shaping the publishing strategies and practices of Africa-based researchers. This study, drawing on 43 in-depth interviews, explored the publishing choices, tactics and discourses of early-career academics at two different public universities in Ghana. Most participants felt under constant pressure to publish, and more than half invoked the 'publish or perish' aphorism unprompted in conversation. They were also very aware that one could 'publish and perish' by choosing the 'wrong' journals, such as those not on university-approved lists or in the main global citation indexes. Some regretted the journal choices they had made at the start of their careers, and had since learnt to make every publication 'count'. Many invoked a moral and spatial dichotomy of low-quality 'local' journals versus reputable 'international' journals. Most participants felt that more training, supervision and mentorship would help them make the 'right' publishing choices. In a global research economy that sustains geographical inequalities and reputational hierarchies, journals published from Africa are increasingly viewed as the 'wrong' choice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The importance of academic journals in second language (L2) research is evident on at least two levels. Journals are, first of all, central to the process of disseminating scientific findings. Journals are also critical on a professional level as most L2 researchers must publish articles to advance their careers. However, not all journals are perceived as equal; some may be considered more prestigious or of higher quality and may, therefore, achieve a greater impact on the field. It is therefore necessary that we understand the identity and quality of L2 research journals, yet very little research (e.g., Egbert, 2007; VanPatten & Williams, 2002) has considered these issues to date. The current study sought to explore L2 journal identity and quality, and the relationship between these constructs. In order to do so, a database was compiled based on three different types of sources: (1) a questionnaire eliciting L2 researchers’ perceptions of the quality and prestige of 27 journals that publish L2 research (N = 327); (2) manual coding of different types of articles (e.g., empirical studies, review papers), data (quantitative, qualitative, mixed), research settings, and authorship patterns (K = 2,024) using the same 27 journals; and (3) bibliometric and submission data such as impact factors, citation counts, and acceptance rates. Descriptive statistics were applied to explore overall quality and prestige ratings as well as publication trends found in each journal. The relationships between those patterns and subjective ratings were also examined. In addition, regression models were built to determine the extent to which perceptions of journal quality and prestige could be explained as a function of journal and article features. We discuss the findings of the study in terms of on-going debates concerning publication practices, study quality, impact factors, journal selection, and the “journal culture” in applied linguistics.

Open access (OA) publishing has become the dominant form of scientific communication. According to an earlier research, the share of OA in the total number of internationally visible papers by Croatian authors is 74 %. This study investigates the attitudes and publication practices of Croatian authors towards OA through a survey conducted among members of the znanstvenici.hr mailing list in early 2023. The survey aimed to determine their support for OA publishing, recognition of its positive and negative aspects, motives for choosing OA publishing, funding sources, and preferences for certain OA publishers. A total of 1,041 participants responded to the survey, with 763 fully completing the questionnaire. The majority of respondents (over 60 %) were active in the fields of sciences, social sciences, and engineering. Analysis of their publication output during the 2021-2022 period revealed that 43.6 % of respondents did not publish a single article in a Croatian journal, with the highest proportion (71 %) observed in the sciences. In contrast, 9.7 % did not publish in foreign journals, with 32 % of these respondents coming from the humanities. Among those who published in foreign journals, approximately 50 % published at least one paper in subscription journals, and the same proportion published in fully open access journals with article processing charge (APC) payments. One-fifth of the authors published their papers for free in fully open access journals, either through invitation or by utilizing coupons for free publication. Coupons were the most commonly used source for APC payments. The majority of respondents (75 %) expressed support for OA publishing and acknowledged its advantages in scientific research and the educational process. Over 80 % of respondents agreed that OA facilitates faster and more efficient dissemination of new knowledge, and increases readership, and enhances the visibility of research papers. However, when selecting a journal for publication, respondents were primarily motivated by the journal’s reputation and impact rather than its open access status. Nearly one-third of the surveyed authors believed that OA increases the commercialization of scientific publishing and that the rising number of publications diminishes the quality of peer review. Attitudes towards publishing in fully open access journals operating exclusively with the APC financing model varied among respondents. Those with a positive attitude were motivated by the speed of peer review and publication process, while those with a negative attitude believed that publishers of APC-charging OA journals prioritize profit over the quality of published articles. Additionally, some respondents mentioned that they could not afford to pay APC, or chose not to pay due to their opposition to any obstacles hindering the publication of scientific results. The survey results indicate that Croatian authors, even when lacking sufficient means, are more inclined to pay publication costs rather than ensuring open access through archiving their papers in public digital repositories. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The huge workload on doctors especially residents, who are the main health care providers in public hospitals, in addition to the vanishing incomes and lack of personal safety during the decade-long Syrian crisis, led to further hurdles in the focus on research. Postgraduate students in the medical and paramedical fields must conduct original research projects as part of their graduation requirements. However, this does not reflect on research publications coming from Syria. Methods: This is a nation-wide cross-sectional study targeting medical, dental, and pharmacy postgraduate students who are at the phase of planning for their required projects. The questionnaire aimed to capture their attitudes toward research, perceived barriers, and previous research experiences in order to suggest evidence-based recommendations. Results: The sample consisted of 429 residents representing about 22% of the target population. Nearly all the participants had positive opinion toward the important role of medical research and the significance of their participation. Agreement was also clear regarding perceived barriers, including the lack of adequate training and research facility. Seventy-one percent of the participants were not involved in any research before the time of their master theses, less than 13% of them had submitted an article for publication, and less than 5% had submitted more than one paper. Despite that, high-quality internet connectivity and rich English writing skills were associated with further research experiences. Additionally, mentors' support and self-paced learning of research skills had significant positive impact on students' research contributions with odds ratios of 2.04 [[95% Confidence Interval]: 1.02–4.06] and 2.68 [1.48–4.84], respectively. Conclusion: Lack of training and mentorship, in addition to several common barriers to medical research, hampered residents' capacity of conducting and publishing research despite their positive attitudes toward it. Nevertheless, the variance within our sample exposed a promising window for implementing low-cost institutional and individual solutions such as peer-run self-paced training opportunities and long-distance mentoring.

The use of bibliometric indicators in research evaluation has a series of complex impacts on academic inquiry. These systems have gradually spread into a wide range of locations and disciplines, including the humanities. The aim of this study is to examine their effects as perceived by philosophy and ethics researchers in Spain, a country where bibliometric indicators have long been used to evaluate research. The study uses a mixed approach combining quantitative and qualitative data from a self-administered questionnaire completed by 201 researchers and from 14 in-depth interviews with researchers selected according to their affiliation, professional category, gender, and area of knowledge. Results show that the evaluation system is widely perceived to affect university researchers in significant ways, particularly related to publication habits (document type and publication language), the transformation of research agendas and the neglect of teaching work, as well as increasing research misconduct and negatively affecting mental health. Although to a lesser extent, other consequences included increased research productivity and enhanced transparency and impartiality in academic selection processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many studies on research productivity and performance suggest that men consistently outperform women. However, women and men are spread unevenly throughout the academy both horizontally (e.g., by scientific field) and vertically (e.g., by academic position), suggesting that aggregate numbers (comparing all men with all women) may reflect the different publication practices in different corners of the academy rather than gender per se. We use Norwegian bibliometric data to examine how the "what" (which publication practices are measured) and the "who" (how the population sample is disaggregated) matter in assessing apparent gender differences among academics in Norway. We investigate four clusters of indicators related to publication volume, publication type, authorship, and impact or quality (12 indicators in total) and explore how disaggregating the population by scientific field, institutional affiliation, academic position, and age changes the gender gaps that appear at the aggregate level. For most (but not all) indicators, we find that gender differences disappear or are strongly reduced after disaggregation. This suggests a composition effect, whereby apparent gender differences in productivity can to a considerable degree be ascribed to the composition of the group examined and the different publication practices common to specific groups. We argue that aggregate figures can exaggerate some gender disparities while obscuring others. Our study illustrates the situated nature of research productivity and the importance of comparing men and women within similar academic positions or scientific fields—of comparing apples with apples—when using bibliometric indicators to identify gender disparities in research productivity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A growing number of PhD scholars graduated from Western universities are returning to China, and this raises a range of research topics for scholars. Previous studies of these returnee scholars have mainly focused on the challenges of publishing in English but have ignored their difficulties in choosing between international and/or local academic communities. Academic publishing is regarded as a social practice in this study. Based on the data collected from 102 Chinese returnee scholars in the humanities and social sciences and drawing on the concept of discourse community, it is found that these volunteers' publication practices are shaped by the culturally specific academic norms established in particular academic communities. This study highlights the differences between international and local discourse communities and identifies factors influencing Chinese returnee scholars' publication practices. The ways in which they seek to exercise agency and strategies for publishing in the international and local academic communities are considered. The complexity of these returnee scholars' publication practices is revealed through their lived experiences, adding depth and detail to current research into returnee scholars across the globe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Science is self-correcting, or so the adage goes, but to what extent is that indeed the case? Answering this question requires careful consideration of the various approaches to achieve the collective goal of self-correction. One of the most straightforward mechanisms is individual self-correction: researchers rectifying their own mistakes by publishing a correction notice. Although it offers an efficient route to correcting the scientific record, it has received little to no attention from a metascientific point of view. We aim to fill this void by analysing the content of correction notices published from 2010 until 2018 in the three psychology journals featuring the highest number of corrections over that timespan based on the Scopus database (i.e. Psychological Science with N = 58, Frontiers in Psychology with N = 99 and Journal of Affective Disorders with N = 57). More concretely, we examined which aspects of the original papers were affected (e.g. hypotheses, data-analyses, metadata such as author order, affiliations, funding information etc.) as well as the perceived implications for the papers’ main findings. Our exploratory analyses showed that many corrections involved inconsequential errors. Furthermore, authors rarely revised their conclusions, even though several corrections concerned changes to the results. We conclude with a discussion of current policies, and suggest ways to improve upon the present situation by (i) preventing mistakes, and (ii) transparently rectifying those mistakes that do find their way into the literature.

Abstract Objective To analyse retraction notices from 2016 and compare their quality to the 2008 notices. Results From 146 retractions retrieved, only 123 were included, of which, a clear reason for retraction was available for 122 (99.2%) and no reason was given for one (0.8%). The main reasons for retraction were mistakes 26.0% (n = 32), fraud 26.0% (n = 32), plagiarism 20.3% (n = 25), and overlap 8.1% (n = 10). In 100 (81.3%) cases, a mention of retraction was available on the original paper, in 15 (12.2%) there was no mention of retraction, and 8 (6.5%) papers were deleted. Compared to the previous cohorts, management of retraction has improved because 99.2% provided a clear reason, and 81.3% of original articles were available with a mention of the retraction.

Open access publication rates have been steadily increasing over time. In spite of this growth, academics in low income settings struggle to gain access to the full canon of research literature. While the vast majority of open access repositories and funding organizations with open access policies are based in high income countries, the geographic patterns of open access publication itself are not well characterized. In this study, we developed a computational approach to better understand the topical and geographical landscape of open access publications in the biomedical research literature. Surprisingly, we found a strong negative correlation between country per capita income and the percentage of open access publication. Open access publication rates were particularly high in sub-Saharan Africa, but vastly lower in the Middle East and North Africa, South Asia, and East Asia and the Pacific. These effects persisted when considering papers only bearing authors from within each region and income group. However, papers resulting from international collaborations did have a higher percentage of OA than single-country papers, and inter-regional collaboration increased OA publication for all world regions. There was no clear relationship between the number of open access policies in a region and the percentage of open access publications in that region. To understand the distribution of open access across topics of biomedical research, we examined keywords that were most enriched and depleted in open access papers. Keywords related to genomics, computational biology, animal models, and infectious disease were enriched in open access publications, while keywords related to the environment, nursing, and surgery were depleted in open access publications. This work identifies geographic regions and fields of research that could be priority areas for open access advocacy. The finding that open access publication rates are highest in sub-Saharan Africa and low income countries suggests that factors other than open access policy strongly influence authors’ decisions to make their work openly accessible. The high proportion of OA resulting from international collaborations indicates yet another benefit of collaborative research. Certain applied fields of medical research, notably nursing, surgery, and environmental fields, appear to have a greater proportion of fee-for-access publications, which presumably creates barriers that prevent researchers and practitioners in low income settings from accessing the literature in those fields. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Internet is rapidly changing the way the results of academic research are communicated within communities and with the wider public. In a push to accelerate change and make the results of research immediately and freely available online for all to read and use, the European Commission, with support from a group of high-profile funders, has proposed a plan to influence the way academic research is published. Here, we discuss the likely impact of this plan on the publishing landscape, the potential benefits, and some possible unintended consequences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

AccessLabs are workshops with two simultaneous motivations, achieved through direct citizen-scientist pairings: (1) to decentralise research skills so that a broader range of people are able to access/use scientific research, and (2) to expose science researchers to the difficulties of using their research as an outsider, creating new open access advocates. Five trial AccessLabs have taken place for policy makers, media/journalists, marine sector participants, community groups, and artists. The act of pairing science academics with local community members helps build understanding and trust between groups at a time when this relationship appears to be under increasing threat from different political and economic currents in society. Here, we outline the workshop motivations, format, and evaluation, with the aim that others can build on the methods developed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This Editorial describes PLOS Biology's experiment with contextualised publication, whereby potentially controversial studies are published with an Editor’s Note and an accompanying Primer in which the Academic Editor guides the reader, dissects the study, and lays out the thinking behind the decision to publish. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The open access availability of publications by Catalonia’s CERCA research centres was analysed to determine the extent to which authors use open access journals, repositories, social networks and other websites to disseminate their research results. A sample of 3,730 journal articles published by authors from CERCA research centres between 2011 and 2015 and available on Web of Science (out of a total output of 44,423) was analysed to identify how many were available in open access, full-text format. The results revealed that 75,8% of the total (2,828 articles) had at least one version available in open access, but just 52% (1,940 articles) had at least one version available in either journals (whether pure or hybrid open access journals or those with embargo periods) or repositories, a finding that highlights the powerful role played by academic social networks in the sharp increase in open access availability. Of the 2,828 articles for which at least one open access version was found, a total of 9,868 copies were located. With respect to versions, the publisher’s final version, i.e. the type formatted for publication by journal publishers, was found in 75,3% of cases. The number of articles published in open access journals (567) was very close to the number of articles published in hybrid journals or journals with embargo periods (624). Only 40,4% of the articles in the sample were located in repositories, being the subject repositories the heaviest used. Fifty percent of the articles (1,881 publications) were posted on academic social networks, the most popular of which were ResearchGate and Academia. According to thematic areas, all six areas (science, life sciences, medical and health sciences, engineering and architecture and humanities) exceeded 70% of articles in open access. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The need for replication of initial results has been rediscovered only recently in many fields of research. In preclinical biomedical research, it is common practice to conduct exact replications with the same sample sizes as those used in the initial experiments. Such replication attempts, however, have lower probability of replication than is generally appreciated. Indeed, in the common scenario of an effect just reaching statistical significance, the statistical power of the replication experiment assuming the same effect size is approximately 50%—in essence, a coin toss. Accordingly, we use the provocative analogy of “replicating” a neuroprotective drug animal study with a coin flip to highlight the need for larger sample sizes in replication experiments. Additionally, we provide detailed background for the probability of obtaining a significant p value in a replication experiment and discuss the variability of p values as well as pitfalls of simple binary significance testing in both initial preclinical experiments and replication studies with small sample sizes. We conclude that power analysis for determining the sample size for a replication study is obligatory within the currently dominant hypothesis testing framework. Moreover, publications should include effect size point estimates and corresponding measures of precision, e.g., confidence intervals, to allow readers to assess the magnitude and direction of reported effects and to potentially combine the results of initial and replication study later through Bayesian or meta-analytic approaches. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The extent to which a good person-environment (PE) interest fit between student and study program leads to better study results in higher education is an ongoing debate wherein the role of the study program environment has remained inadequately studied. Unanswered questions include: how diverse study programs are in the interests of their student populations, and how this program interest diversity influences study results, in comparison to individual PE fit? The present study addressed these questions in students (N = 4,635) enrolled in open-access university education. In such an open access system, students are allowed to make study choices without prior limitations based on previous achievement or high stakes testing. Starting from the homogeneity assumption applied to this open access setting, we propose several hypotheses regarding program interest diversity, motivation, student-program interest fit, and study results. Furthermore, we applied a method of measuring interest diversity based on an existing measure of correlational person-environment fit. Results indicated that interest diversity in an open access study environment was low across study programs. Results also showed the variance present in program interest diversity was linked to autonomous and controlled motivation in the programs’ student populations. Finally, program interest diversity better explained study results than individual student fit with their program of choice. Indeed, program interest diversity explained up to 44% of the variance in the average program’s study results while individual student-program fit hardly predicted study success at all. Educational policy makers should therefore be aware of the importance of both interest fit and interest diversity during the process of study orientation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Open biomedical repositories, such as PubMed Central (PMC), are a means to make research discoverable and permanently accessible. Assessing the potential interest of key stakeholders in an Australasia PubMed Central was the objective of this research. The investigation is novel, assisting in the development of open science infrastructure through its systematic analysis of the potential interest in, and viability of a biomedical repository for managing openly accessible research outputs for the Australasia region. The research adopted a qualitative approach based on semi-structured interviews and a focus group. Forty-four stakeholders located throughout Australia and New Zealand participated in the research. Participants expanded upon their experience of PubMed, MEDLINE, PMC and their use of information resources for research and clinical practice. The Evidence Based Healthcare (EBHC) pyramid was the theoretical model adopted to explain open biomedical repository processes. A strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) analysis identified support for exploring membership of an international PMC system, in particular Europe PMC. Lessons learnt from PMC US, Europe PMC and PMC Canada (collectively known as PubMed Central International) informed the investigation. A major strength identified was that PubMed Central International has been able to achieve high levels of compliance way beyond that of most institutional repositories. A great threat faced is overcoming the difficulties of working together with other major world bodies and financially sustaining an Australasia PMC. Improving Australasian biomedical knowledge management processes may be possible from adopting a PMC for retrieving and transferring research, linked to the data underlying the research. This in turn could help put regional research under a brighter spotlight, potentially leading to improvements in research quality. There is an opportunity for a potential Australasia PMC to harvest biomedical research from the National Library of Australia’s aggregator database, Trove and work closely with Europe PMC to avoid duplication of effort. Overall, establishment of an Australasia permanent biomedical digital open repository is perceived as important, with significant potential flow-on benefits to healthcare, industry and society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Currently, there is a growing interest in ensuring the transparency and reproducibility of the published scientific literature. According to a previous evaluation of 441 biomedical journals articles published in 2000–2014, the biomedical literature largely lacked transparency in important dimensions. Here, we surveyed a random sample of 149 biomedical articles published between 2015 and 2017 and determined the proportion reporting sources of public and/or private funding and conflicts of interests, sharing protocols and raw data, and undergoing rigorous independent replication and reproducibility checks. We also investigated what can be learned about reproducibility and transparency indicators from open access data provided on PubMed. The majority of the 149 studies disclosed some information regarding funding (103, 69.1% [95% confidence interval, 61.0% to 76.3%]) or conflicts of interest (97, 65.1% [56.8% to 72.6%]). Among the 104 articles with empirical data in which protocols or data sharing would be pertinent, 19 (18.3% [11.6% to 27.3%]) discussed publicly available data; only one (1.0% [0.1% to 6.0%]) included a link to a full study protocol. Among the 97 articles in which replication in studies with different data would be pertinent, there were five replication efforts (5.2% [1.9% to 12.2%]). Although clinical trial identification numbers and funding details were often provided on PubMed, only two of the articles without a full text article in PubMed Central that discussed publicly available data at the full text level also contained information related to data sharing on PubMed; none had a conflicts of interest statement on PubMed. Our evaluation suggests that although there have been improvements over the last few years in certain key indicators of reproducibility and transparency, opportunities exist to improve reproducible research practices across the biomedical literature and to make features related to reproducibility more readily visible in PubMed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An editorial is presented which discusses the collaborative writing with multiple authors which has additional challenges including varied levels of engagement of coauthors, provision of fair credit through authorship or acknowledgements and acceptance of diversity of work styles. Also discussed are the 10 simple rules for collaboratively writing a multi-authored paper which include to build a writing team wisely; to create a data management plan and to jointly decide on authorship guidelines.

As we celebrate our anniversary, the PLOS Biology editors discuss recent initiatives taken by the journal (meta-research, complementary research policy, preprint posting, short reports, methods and resources, data policy, protocols.io) and look ahead to the next fifteen years. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many analyses of fishery recovery have demonstrated the potential biological and economic benefits of management reform, but few have compared these to the associated costs of management upgrades, which can be substantial. This study aims to determine if the projected economic benefits of management reform outweigh the increases in management costs required to achieve those benefits. To answer this question, we developed a database of country-level fisheries management costs and use those to estimate the country-level costs of management changes. We use this framework to compare estimates of future costs of management upgrades against their economic benefits in terms of profit. Results indicate that for most nations, including the top 25 fishing nations, management upgrades outweigh their associated costs. This result is robust to a number of alternative assumptions about costs. Results also suggest that stronger reforms such as rights-based management, although sometimes more expensive to implement, can lead to greater net economic benefits compared to alternatives. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The European & Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership (EDCTP), like many other research funders, requires its grantees to make papers available via open access (OA). This article investigates the effect of publishing in OA journals and international collaboration within and between European and sub-Saharan African countries on citation impact and likelihood of falling into the top 1% and top 10% most cited papers in poverty-related disease (PRD) research. Methods: Disease-specific research publications were identified in the Web of Science™ and MEDLINE using Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) terms. Data on the open accessibility of scientific literature were derived from 1science oaFindr. Publication data, including relative citation counts, were extracted for 2003–2015. Regression models were applied to quantify the relationship between relative citations and presence in the 1% and top 10% most cited papers versus OA and international collaboration. Results: The results show that since 2003 papers on PRDs have become increasingly available in OA. Among all PRD areas, malaria research is most frequently published in OA and in international collaboration. The adjusted regression analyses show that holding other factors constant, publishing research in OA and in international collaboration has a significant and meaningful citation advantage over non-OA or non-international collaborative research. Publishing papers as part of a European-wide or European- sub-Saharan African collaboration increases research impact. In contrast, such collaboration advantage is not observed for research output involving sub-Saharan Africa only which seems to decrease research impact. Conclusions: Our results indicate that there is a real, measurable citation advantage for publishing PRD research in OA and international collaboration. However, the international collaboration advantage seems to be region-specific with increased research impact for European-wide and European-sub-Saharan African collaborations but a decrease in research impact of collaborations confined to sub-Saharan African research institutions. Further research is required to further verify this finding and to understand the underlying factors related to this observed decrease in research impact. To target future research capacity building activities in sub-Saharan Africa it is important to assess whether the observed decreased impact reflects the scientific competencies and geographic distribution of individual researchers or institutional-, national- or funder-specific research requirements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this Perspective, a group of national funders, joined by the European Commission and the European Research Council, announce plans to make Open Access publishing mandatory for recipients of their agencies' research funding. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper empirically studies the effect of Open Access on journal CiteScores. We have found that the general effect is positive but not uniform across different types of journals. In particular, we investigate two types of heterogeneous treatment effect: (1) the differential treatment effect among journals grouped by academic field, publisher, and tier; and (2) differential treatment effects of Open Access as a function of propensity to be treated. The results are robust to a number of sensitivity checks and falsification tests. Our findings shed new light on Open Access effect on journals and can help stakeholders of journals in the decision of adopting the Open Access policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An important hallmark of science is the transparency and reproducibility of scientific results. Over the last few years, internet-based technologies have emerged that allow for a representation of the scientific process that goes far beyond traditional methods and analysis descriptions. Using these often freely available tools requires a suite of skills that is not necessarily part of a curriculum in the life sciences. However, funders, journals, and policy makers increasingly require researchers to ensure complete reproducibility of their methods and analyses. To close this gap, we designed an introductory course that guides students towards a reproducible science workflow. Here, we outline the course content and possible extensions, report encountered challenges, and discuss how to integrate such a course in existing curricula. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A variety of alternative mechanisms, strategies, and "ways of doing" have been proposed for improving the rigor and robustness of published research in the psychological sciences in recent years. In this article, we describe two existing but underused publication models-registered reporting (RR) and results-blind reviewing (RBR)-that we believe would contribute in important ways to improving both the conduct and evaluation of psychological research. We first outline the procedures and distinguishing features of both publication pathways and note their value for promoting positive changes to current scientific practices. We posit that a significant value of RR and RBR is their potential to promote a greater focus on the research process (i.e., how and why research is conducted) relative to research outcomes (i.e., what was observed or concluded from research). We conclude by discussing what we perceive to be five common beliefs about RR and RBR practices and attempt to provide a balanced perspective of the realities likely to be experienced with these systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Women comprise a minority of the Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics, and Medicine (STEMM) workforce. Quantifying the gender gap may identify fields that will not reach parity without intervention, reveal underappreciated biases, and inform benchmarks for gender balance among conference speakers, editors, and hiring committees. Using the PubMed and arXiv databases, we estimated the gender of 36 million authors from >100 countries publishing in >6000 journals, covering most STEMM disciplines over the last 15 years, and made a web app allowing easy access to the data (). Despite recent progress, the gender gap appears likely to persist for generations, particularly in surgery, computer science, physics, and maths. The gap is especially large in authorship positions associated with seniority, and prestigious journals have fewer women authors. Additionally, we estimate that men are invited by journals to submit papers at approximately double the rate of women. Wealthy countries, notably Japan, Germany, and Switzerland, had fewer women authors than poorer ones. We conclude that the STEMM gender gap will not close without further reforms in education, mentoring, and academic publishing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Wikipedia is a gateway to knowledge. However, the extent to which this gateway ends at Wikipedia or continues via supporting citations is unknown. Wikipedia’s gateway functionality has implications for information design and education, notably in medicine. This study aims to establish benchmarks for the relative distribution and referral (click) rate of citations—as indicated by presence of a Digital Object Identifier (DOI)—from Wikipedia, with a focus on medical citations. DOIs referred from the English Wikipedia in August 2016 were obtained from . Next, based on a DOI’s presence on a WikiProject Medicine page, all DOIs in Wikipedia were categorized as medical (WP:MED) or non-medical (non-WP:MED). Using this categorization, referred DOIs were classified as WP:MED, non-WP:MED, or BOTH, meaning the DOI may have been referred from either category. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. Out of 5.2 million Wikipedia pages, 4.42% (n = 229,857) included at least one DOI. 68,870 were identified as WP:MED, with 22.14% (n = 15,250) featuring one or more DOIs. WP:MED pages featured on average 8.88 DOI citations per page, whereas non-WP:MED pages had on average 4.28 DOI citations. For DOIs only on WP:MED pages, a DOI was referred every 2,283 pageviews and for non-WP:MED pages every 2,467 pageviews. DOIs from BOTH pages accounted for 12% (n = 58,475). The referral of DOI citations found in BOTH could not be assigned to WP:MED or non-WP:MED, as the page from which the referral was made was not provided with the data. While these results cannot provide evidence of greater citation referral from WP:MED than non-WP:MED, they do provide benchmarks to assess strategies for changing referral patterns. These changes might include editors adopting new methods for designing and presenting citations or the introduction of teaching strategies that address the value of consulting citations as a tool for extending learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examines the completeness and overlap of coverage in physics of six open access scholarly communication systems, including two search engines (Google Scholar and Microsoft Academic), two aggregate institutional repositories (OAIster and OpenDOAR), and two physics-related open sources (arXiv.org and Astrophysics Data System). The 2001–2013 Nobel Laureates in Physics served as the sample. Bibliographic records of their publications were retrieved and downloaded from each system, and a computer program was developed to perform the analytical tasks of sorting, comparison, elimination, aggregation and statistical calculations. Quantitative analyses and cross-referencing were performed to determine the completeness and overlap of the system coverage of the six open access systems. The results may enable scholars to select an appropriate open access system as an efficient scholarly communication channel, and academic institutions may build institutional repositories or independently create citation index systems in the future. Suggestions on indicators and tools for academic assessment are presented based on the comprehensiveness assessment of each system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Open peer review (OPR) is a cornerstone of the emergent Open Science agenda. Yet to date no large-scale survey of attitudes towards OPR amongst academic editors, authors, reviewers and publishers has been undertaken. This paper presents the findings of an online survey, conducted for the OpenAIRE2020 project during September and October 2016, that sought to bridge this information gap in order to aid the development of appropriate OPR approaches by providing evidence about attitudes towards and levels of experience with OPR. The results of this cross-disciplinary survey, which received 3,062 full responses, show the majority (60.3%) of respondents to be believe that OPR as a general concept should be mainstream scholarly practice (although attitudes to individual traits varied, and open identities peer review was not generally favoured). Respondents were also in favour of other areas of Open Science, like Open Access (88.2%) and Open Data (80.3%). Among respondents we observed high levels of experience with OPR, with three out of four (76.2%) reporting having taken part in an OPR process as author, reviewer or editor. There were also high levels of support for most of the traits of OPR, particularly open interaction, open reports and final-version commenting. Respondents were against opening reviewer identities to authors, however, with more than half believing it would make peer review worse. Overall satisfaction with the peer review system used by scholarly journals seems to strongly vary across disciplines. Taken together, these findings are very encouraging for OPR’s prospects for moving mainstream but indicate that due care must be taken to avoid a “one-size fits all” solution and to tailor such systems to differing (especially disciplinary) contexts. OPR is an evolving phenomenon and hence future studies are to be encouraged, especially to further explore differences between disciplines and monitor the evolution of attitudes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 1961, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) began to circulate biological preprints in a forgotten experiment called the Information Exchange Groups (IEGs). This system eventually attracted over 3,600 participants and saw the production of over 2,500 different documents, but by 1967, it was effectively shut down following the refusal of journals to accept articles that had been circulated as preprints. This article charts the rise and fall of the IEGs and explores the parallels with the 1990s and the biomedical preprint movement of today. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay considers changes in the publication process in sociology journals over the last thirty years. Decisions of accept or conditional accept on the first submission have almost disappeared, and the use of revise and resubmit decisions has expanded to cover a wide range of papers. Other important changes have been an increase in the typical number of reviewers and a less active role for editors. The changes have resulted in an improvement of the quality of published papers, but have also had some negative consequences. One is a slowdown in the process. Another is a dominance of one kind of publication — the full-scale research paper — and a decline of other types, including comments, research notes, and essays. The paper concludes by discussing some changes that might encourage a wider variety of publication types and facilitate commentary and debate on published papers

Open scholarship, such as the sharing of articles, code, data, and educational resources, has the potential to improve university research and education as well as increase the impact universities can have beyond their own walls. To support this perspective, I present evidence from case studies, published literature, and personal experiences as a practicing open scholar. I describe some of the challenges inherent to practicing open scholarship and some of the tensions created by incompatibilities between institutional policies and personal practice. To address this, I propose several concrete actions universities could take to support open scholarship and outline ways in which such initiatives could benefit the public as well as institutions. Importantly, I do not think most of these actions would require new funding but rather a redistribution of existing funds and a rewriting of internal policies to better align with university missions of knowledge dissemination and societal impact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We identify the ways the policies of leading international bioethics journals limit the participation of researchers working in the resource-constrained settings of low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in the development of the field of bioethics. Lack of access to essential scholarly resources makes it extremely difficult, if not impossible, for many LMIC bioethicists to learn from, meaningfully engage in, and further contribute to the global bioethics discourse. Underrepresentation of LMIC perspectives in leading journals sustains the hegemony of Western bioethics, limits the presentation of diverse moral visions of life, health, and medicine, and undermines aspirations to create a truly “global” bioethics. Limited attention to this problem indicates a lack of empathy and moral imagination on the part of bioethicists in high-income countries, raises questions about the ethics of bioethics, and highlights the urgent need to find ways to remedy this social injustice. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background: Iron deficiency anemia (IDA) is a common extra-intestinal manifestation of celiac disease (CD). Little is known about the frequency with which primary care physicians (PCPs) test for CD in patients with IDA. We aimed to describe how PCPs approach testing for CD in asymptomatic patients with IDA. Methods: We electronically distributed a survey to PCPs who are members of the American College of Physicians. Respondents were asked whether they would test for CD (serologic testing, refer for esophagogastroduodenoscopy [EGD], or refer to GI) in hypothetical patients with new IDA, including: (1) a young Caucasian man, (2) a premenopausal Caucasian woman, (3) an elderly Caucasian man, and (4) a young African American man. These scenarios were chosen to assess for differences in testing for CD based on age, gender, and race. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors of testing. Results: Testing for CD varied significantly according to patient characteristics, with young Caucasian men being the most frequently tested (61% of respondents reporting they would perform serologic testing in this subgroup (p<0.001)). Contrary to guideline recommendations, 80% of respondents reported they would definitely or probably start a patient with positive serologies for CD on a gluten free diet prior to confirmatory upper endoscopy. Conclusions: PCPs are under-testing for CD in patients with IDA, regardless of age, gender, race, or post-menopausal status. The majority of PCPs surveyed reported they do not strictly adhere to established guidelines regarding a confirmatory duodenal biopsy in a patient with positive serology for CD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

There is an urgent need to quantify the impacts of artisanal fisheries and define management practices that allow for the recovery and conservation of exploited stocks. The extent of illegal catch is particularly critical as a driver of overexploitation in artisanal fisheries. However, the lack of data at proper spatial scales limits the evaluation of illegal fishing and effectiveness of management practices. We used a catch curve analysis to estimate total instantaneous mortality as a proxy of fishing pressure in the artisanal benthic fishery in central Chile. We compared the patterns of total mortality in fishing grounds under the well-studied territorial use rights for fisheries system (TURF) immersed in a landscape of open access areas (OAA; no access restriction), and from these patterns determined the extent of illegal fishing in open access areas focusing on the two most frequently extracted resources: locos (Concholepas concholepas) and keyhole limpets (Fissurella spp.). The beauty of this seascape is the presence of the no-take (NT) area of Las Cruces as control (no fishing), allowing us to estimate natural mortality. Loco exploitation is banned in OAAs. However, loco mortality in OAAs was 92% higher than in the NT, and 42% higher than in TURFs. Keyhole limpet mortality was similar between TURFs and the NT, but doubled in OAAs. We also found strong differences in mortality among fishing grounds with the same level of protection (i.e. TURFs), and over time. Our results highlight (a) the high level of illegal fishing that may occur in artisanal fisheries under traditional management regimes, and (b) that TURFs can be effective to reduce fishing mortality. However, large variability among TURFs suggests the need for a deeper understanding of the drivers of success of TURFs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Fishing is a major source of human impact, reducing density and size of a wide range of exploited species in comparison to areas exhibiting strong regulations (no-take and partially protected areas, including Territorial Use Rights for Fisheries, TURFs). Since size and density might have important consequences on reproduction, and therefore natural re-seeding, we monitored adult size, density and potential fecundity of the keyhole limpet (Fissurella latimarginata) and the red sea urchin (Loxechinus albus) in areas under two fishing regimes (TURFs and Open Access Areas, OAAs). Analyzing the distribution of suitable habitats, we predict spatial patterns of potential egg production, to identify reproductive hotspots along the central coast of Chile. The current system of TURFs in central Chile showed higher potential egg production of F. latimarginata and of L. albus than expected under a complete OAAs scenario (67 and 52% respectively). Potential egg production showed more than a twofold reduction when the complete TURFs scenario was compared against complete OAAs condition in both species. Individual size and density explained between 60% and 100% of the variability in potential egg production, suggesting the importance of the enhancement of both biological variables in TURFs in Chile. Potential egg production for both species in the northern part of the studied domain was higher due to the combined effect of (a) suitable habitat and (b) concentration of TURFs. Our results suggest that partially protected areas, such as TURFs can significantly enhance the production of propagules that could seed exploited areas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The debate about the value of biomedical publications led to recommendations for improving reporting quality. It is unclear to what extent these recommendations have been endorsed by journals. We analyzed whether specific recommendations were included in author instructions, which journal characteristics were associated with their endorsement, how endorsement of the domains changed and whether endorsement was associated with change of impact factor between 2010 and 2015. Methods: We considered two study samples consisting of “Hematology” and “Oncology” journals of the Journal Citation Report 2008 and 2014, respectively. We extracted information regarding endorsement of the (1) recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, of (2) reporting guidelines, (3) requirement for trial registration and (4) disclosure of conflicts of interest. Data extraction was done by reading the author instructions before conducting a text search with keywords. We calculated a global generalized linear mixed effects model for endorsement of each of the four domains followed by separate multivariable logistic regression models and a longitudinal analysis. We defined endorsement as the author instructions saying that they approve the use of the recommendations. Results: In 2015, the ICMJE recommendations were mentioned in author instructions of 156 journals (67.5%). CONSORT was referred to by 77 journals (33.3%); MOOSE, PRISMA, STARD and STROBE were referred to by less than 15% of journals. There were 99 journals (42.9%) that recommended or required trial registration, 211 (91.3%) required authors to disclose conflicts of interest. Journal impact factor, journal start year and geographical region were positively associated with endorsement of any of the four domains. The overall endorsement of all domains increased between 2010 and 2015. The endorsement of any domain in 2010 seemed to be associated with an increased impact factor in 2014. Conclusion: Hematology and oncology journals endorse major recommendations to various degrees. Endorsement is increasing slowly over time and might be positively associated with the journals’ impact factor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Several administrative polices have been implemented in order to reduce the negative impacts of fishing on natural ecosystems. Four eco-social models with different levels of complexity were constructed, which represent the seaweed harvest in central-northern Chile under two different regimes, Management and Exploitation Areas for Benthic Resources (MAEBRs) and Open Access Areas (OAAs). The dynamics of both regimes were analyzed using the following theoretical frameworks: (1) Loop Analysis, which allows the local stability or sustainability of the models and scenarios to be assessed; and (2) Hessian´s optimization procedure of a global fishery function (GFF) that represents each dynamics of each harvest. The results suggest that the current fishing dynamics in MAEBRs are not sustainable unless the market demand presents some type of control (i.e. taxes). Further, the results indicated that if the demand changes to a self-negative feedback (self-control) in MAEBRs, the stability is increased and, simultaneously, a relative maximum for the GFF is reached. Contrarily, the sustainability of the model/system representing the harvest (principally by cutting plants) in OAAs is not reached. The implementation of an “ecological” tax for intensive artisanal fisheries with low operational cost is proposed. The network analysis developed here is proposed as a general strategy for studying the effects of human interventions in marine coastal ecosystems under transient (short-term) dynamics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article offers information related to neglected tropical diseases (NTDs). It discusses how NTDs affect over one billion people, and cause 170,000 deaths each year, as of April 2017. It reports that NTDs primarily occur in rural and poor urban areas of low-income and middle-income countries. It mentions the elimination of visceral leishmaniasis.

The aim of this study, as a disciplinary review, is to question the changing disciplinary practices of Turkish physical geography in a historical and empirical context. Four data sets (performances of physical geography publications in geography journals in Turkey, number of Ph.D. thesis made in physical geography, performances of geomorphology articles in the local earth science journals, performances of Turkish physical geography articles in the SCI-SSCI data base) are used in this study. Results show that, on one hand, Turkish physical geography dominated the whole discipline until the mid-1990s but afterwards the sub-discipline gradually became the small partner of geography in Turkey. On the other hand, Turkish physical geography practices simply ignored the quantitative revolution developed firstly in the Anglo-American geography by the time of 1960s, and reproduced its descriptive, pure empiricists and map-making practices onwards. While Turkish physical geography has had a very low publication records in local earth science journals as well as international journals, by 2005; it has been observed a relatively sharp upward trend in the rate of international publication records of Turkish physical geography since that time. This trend, however, is mostly actor-depended and does not indicate any institutional restructuring occurred in the discipline. The study concludes that, apart from its Anglo-American counterparts, Turkish physical geography has its own disciplinary context. Such a context shows that physical geography has been getting smaller in the discipline and also has not renewed its institutional structure considerably and also its international publication records depend mostly on the national/international collaboration in which Turkish partners take a small part. Such a complex disciplinary pattern clearly shows that Turkish geography, now, is represented by non-physical geographers locally while international disciplinary representation is made by physical geographers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper we present the first comprehensive bibliometric analysis of eleven open-access mega-journals (OAMJs). OAMJs are a relatively recent phenomenon, and have been characterised as having four key characteristics: large size; broad disciplinary scope; a Gold-OA business model; and a peer-review policy that seeks to determine only the scientific soundness of the research rather than evaluate the novelty or significance of the work. Our investigation focuses on four key modes of analysis: journal outputs (the number of articles published and changes in output over time); OAMJ author characteristics (nationalities and institutional affiliations); subject areas (the disciplinary scope of OAMJs, and variations in sub-disciplinary output); and citation profiles (the citation distributions of each OAMJ, and the impact of citing journals). We found that while the total output of the eleven mega-journals grew by 14.9% between 2014 and 2015, this growth is largely attributable to the increased output of Scientific Reports and Medicine. We also found substantial variation in the geographical distribution of authors. Several journals have a relatively high proportion of Chinese authors, and we suggest this may be linked to these journals’ high Journal Impact Factors (JIFs). The mega-journals were also found to vary in subject scope, with several journals publishing disproportionately high numbers of articles in certain sub-disciplines. Our citation analsysis offers support for Björk & Catani’s suggestion that OAMJs’s citation distributions can be similar to those of traditional journals, while noting considerable variation in citation rates across the eleven titles. We conclude that while the OAMJ term is useful as a means of grouping journals which share a set of key characteristics, there is no such thing as a “typical” mega-journal, and we suggest several areas for additional research that might help us better understand the current and future role of OAMJs in scholarly communication. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The growth in scientific production may threaten the capacity for the scientific community to handle the ever-increasing demand for peer review of scientific publications. There is little evidence regarding the sustainability of the peer-review system and how the scientific community copes with the burden it poses. We used mathematical modeling to estimate the overall quantitative annual demand for peer review and the supply in biomedical research. The modeling was informed by empirical data from various sources in the biomedical domain, including all articles indexed at MEDLINE. We found that for 2015, across a range of scenarios, the supply exceeded by 15% to 249% the demand for reviewers and reviews. However, 20% of the researchers performed 69% to 94% of the reviews. Among researchers actually contributing to peer review, 70% dedicated 1% or less of their research work-time to peer review while 5% dedicated 13% or more of it. An estimated 63.4 million hours were devoted to peer review in 2015, among which 18.9 million hours were provided by the top 5% contributing reviewers. Our results support that the system is sustainable in terms of volume but emphasizes a considerable imbalance in the distribution of the peer-review effort across the scientific community. Finally, various individual interactions between authors, editors and reviewers may reduce to some extent the number of reviewers who are available to editors at any point. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The number of contributing reviewers often outnumbers the authors of publications. This has led to apathy towards reviewing and the conclusion that the peer-review system is broken. Given the trade-offs between submitting and reviewing manuscripts, reviewers and authors naturally want visibility for their efforts. While study after study has called for revolutionizing publication practices, the current paradigm does not recognize reviewers' time and expertise. We propose the R-index as a simple way to quantify scientists' contributions as reviewers. We modelled its performance using simulations based on real data to show that early–mid career scientists, who complete high-quality reviews of longer manuscripts within their field, can perform as well as leading scientists reviewing only for high-impact journals. By giving citeable academic recognition for reviewing, R-index will encourage more participation with better reviews, regardless of the career stage. Moreover, the R-index will allow editors to exploit scores to manage and improve their review team, and for journals to promote high average scores as signals of a practical and efficient service to authors. Peer-review is a pervasive necessity across disciplines and the simple utility of this missing metric will credit a valuable aspect of academic productivity without having to revolutionize the current peer-review system.