Search

This article analyzes the nature and temporal change of conceptual contributions in marketing scholarship with two complementary studies. First, based on a computer-aided text analysis of 5,922 articles published in the four major marketing journals between 1990 and 2021, the authors analyze how conceptual contributions have changed over time using the MacInnis (2011) framework. Results indicate that over the past three decades, theorizing efforts have strongly favored "envisioning" and "explicating" at the expense of "relating" and "debating," with this imbalance increasing over time. Second, the authors draw on 48 in-depth interviews with editors, department heads, and authors to validate these patterns and uncover the underlying mechanisms. The findings indicate that a prevalent thought style has developed in the field—defined by the research ideals of novelty, clarity, and quantification—that shapes the collective view of how marketing scholars, in their roles as authors, reviewers, and mentors, can make a valuable contribution to marketing scholarship. This thought style favors envisioning and explicating contributions and disfavors relating and debating contributions. Jointly, the two studies point to several rebalancing options that can reinvigorate relating and debating contributions while preserving the current strengths of the marketing field. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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

An editorial is presented which discusses the journal's decision to broaden its publication scope to incorporate methodological articles, as approved by the Academy of Management (AOM) board of governors. Four new editors with specialized proficiency centered on methodological articles will be joining the journal's editorial team.

Healthy lifestyle technologies (HLT) have gained popularity in young people's daily lives, but the long-term effect of these technologies on their physical activity (PA) participation and health learning is unclear. This systematic review (a) explores the effect of HLT use on the PA participation and health learning of young people (aged 13–18), and (b) determines whether the effects were long-term and/or sustainable. Literature searches were conducted in five databases to identify studies published in academic journals in English between 2011 to 2022 which explored young people's use of HLT to support their PA participation and health learning. Twenty-six studies were identified. The reported impact of these technologies focused on three dimensions: behavior change, psychological responses, and facilitators and barriers to HLT use. This review concluded that HLT can have positive short-term effects on young people's PA participation and health learning, but the long term or sustainable influence remains inconclusive. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The academic publishing process is fraught with challenges, inconsistencies, and the absence of clearly articulated guidelines and recommendations, particularly for doctoral students and other newcomers. Our goal is to overview key information that authors may consider and decisions they will need to make when determining authorship and preparing manuscripts for submission. Specifically, we discuss how authors can consider (a) the ongoing discussion of authorship, (b) identifying a target journal, and (c) submitting a manuscript for review. We draw influence from how processes are conducted relative to the Journal of Teaching in Physical Education in approaching our commentary as a point of reference. Nevertheless, while acknowledging differences in journal style and submission formats, many of the considerations discussed are relevant across publication outlets. Common threads across the discussion impress the importance of being intentional, proactive, and adaptive when engaging in authorship conversations and identifying target journals for submission. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An editorial is presented by the editors of the Academy of Management Journal to aid authors intending to publish research on novel phenomena to expand management knowledge. Topics include core-periphery knowledge structures for positioning research which includes determining the level of novelty as well as methods alignment and theory elaboration.

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

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

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

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

Macao's academic book publishing industry has a rich history and has grown significantly over the past two decades. This study employs a semi‐structured in‐depth interview to evaluate the current and prospective state of Macao's academic book publishing industry. The SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) analysis and the PEST (Political, Economic, Social, and Technological) analysis are used in this study. The strengths of Macao's academic book publishing industry include that requesting an ISBN in Macao is easy and quick under the principle of 'One Country, Two Systems' and financial support from the Macao SAR government. However, the industry faces several weaknesses, including an underdeveloped cultural industry, a small seller market and a talent shortage, and less copyright output. Opportunities for the industry exist through constructing a Culture‐based Bay Area in the Guangdong–Hong Kong–Macao Greater Bay Area and developing an international hub for digital trade in the Guangdong–Macao In‐Depth Cooperation Zone–Hengqin. However, Macao's academic book publishing industry is threatened by emerging Internet technologies, such as augmented reality, the metaverse, and ChatGPT. This paper also proposes strategies for future practice, such as taking the initiative to encourage a group of top‐tier publishers to establish branches in Macao and improve publications' cultural elements. The findings of this study provide valuable insights into the strategic management of Macao's academic book publishing industry and will be of interest to publishers, academic researchers, and policymakers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

An editorial is presented on best practices for publishing multi-method research in the Academy of Management Journal (AMJ). Topics include a brief discussion of deductive and inductive scientific reasoning, five archetypes of multi-method research most commonly published in AMJ, as well as tips on what to avoid and what to strive for when conducting this type of research.

Academic publishing has faced numerous ethical challenges, but reviewer conflict of interest (COI) and potential associated coercive citation requests present an under-explored area of concern. Although we expect most reviewers to act ethically, the drive for academics to increase their citation counts creates a potential incentive for reviewers to seek citations of their own work, presenting a potential reviewer COI. With citation counts serving as an important part of most university and journal rankings, the integrity of the research review process has far-reaching implications. This study analyzes journals' communication to reviewers regarding coercive citation requests and COIs in general, with 205 survey responses from editors of major management or marketing journals, and an assessment of a randomly selected subset of 30 leading journal websites. The majority of journals did not discuss reviewer coercive citation requests or COIs, nor have any obvious processes to screen for it. We discuss the factors that foster an environment conducive to coercive citation requests and identify easily adoptable changes to review formats to address the problem. We also discuss the need to examine the triad of relationships among authors, reviewers, and editors, taking a systems approach. We encourage attention to balance of power and cocreation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This omnibus paper brings together a number of esteemed editors and associate editors in order to share a variety of perspectives on academic publishing within the marketing discipline. Together, they provide glimpses into current thinking on some of the most pressing and current debates which we are struggling with, for example: impact, originality, bias, alienation, and the need for communities of thought. Polyvocally, this omnibus reflects on the many failures of our discipline and provides some routes forward in reframing our field's epistemic assumptions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Following the onset of COVID-19, research production in economics and finance (measured by the posting of working papers) increased by 29 |$\%$|⁠. Production increases were widespread across geographies, job titles, departments, and ages with larger increases in top departments and for people under the age of 35. Men and women both experienced production increases with the exception of women between the age of 35 and 49, who experienced no production gains despite large increases for men in the same age group. COVID-19 increased reliance on past coauthorship networks, with larger production gains for authors that are more central to the network. Authors have furnished an Internet Appendix , which is available on the Oxford University Press Web site next to the link to the final published paper online. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Introduction Medical undergraduate students receive limited education on scholarly publishing. However, publishing experiences during this phase are known to influence study and career paths. The medical bachelor Honours Program (HP) at Utrecht University initiated a hands-on writing and publishing course, which resulted in nine reviews published in internationally peer reviewed academic journals. We wanted to share the project set-up, explore the academic development of the participating students and determine the impact of the reviews on the scientific community. Methods Thirty-one out of 50 alumni completed a digital retrospective questionnaire on for example, development of skills and benefit for their studies and career. Publication metrics of the HP review papers were retrieved from Web of Science. Results This hands-on project provides a clear teaching method on academic writing and scholarly publishing in the bachelor medical curriculum. Participants were able to obtain and improve writing and publishing skills. The output yielded well-recognized scientific papers and valuable learning experiences. 71% of the participating students published at least one additional paper following this project, and 55% of the students indicated the project influenced their academic study and/or career path. Nine manuscripts were published in journals with an average impact factor of 3.56 and cited on average 3.73 times per year. Discussion This course might inspire other medical educators to incorporate similar projects successfully into their curriculum. To this end, a number of recommendations with regard to supervision, time investment and group size are given.

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

While writing involves interactions between writers and readers as each considers the other in creating and interpreting texts, research interest in written interaction is a fairly recent development. This paper uses a bibliometric analysis to trace the growing interest in written interaction over the past 30 years from its origins in philosophy, conversation analysis and sociocultural language pedagogy. To do so, we analyzed all 918 articles mentioning writing and interaction in the social science citation index since 1990, dividing the corpus into two periods following the massive increase in interest after 2005. We identify which topics have been most prevalent and which authors, publications, journals and countries most influential over time. The results indicate the growing importance of identity, genre, discipline, metadiscourse and stance, particularly drawing on corpus methods. We also note the participation of authors from more countries in publishing interaction research with the growth of authors from China becoming particularly visible. These findings may interest those working in written discourse analysis and scholarly publishing.

Background There is increasing concern about the quality, integrity, and accessibility to research published in the developing world. This study explores the editorial practices and editors’ perspectives to gain insight into the standard of scholarly publishing in Libya. Methods Between 21 st January and 12 th February, 2022, the editors-in-chief (EC) of Libyan academic journals were invited to complete a questionnaire on editorial practices, degree of satisfaction with submitted and published manuscripts, review processes, and journal performance, as well as challenges facing the journals. Journal websites were examined for quality, and indexation coverage and citations were assessed. We examined the number of citations in Google Scholar for all 2019 articles published in each journal. Descriptive statistics were used to quantitatively summarize the data and thematic analysis was used for the narrative text. Results 48 EC completed the questionnaire. The EC was affiliated with the institution that owns the journal in 92% of cases. Most EC (83%) were satisfied with the peer-review quality, 69% believed that most of their published papers add new ideas or findings, and 96% were satisfied with their journal’s performance. However, despite the high degree of satisfaction, only one journal was indexed in Web of Science or Scopus and only 17% of the journals were indexed in Google Scholar. A qualitative assessment of journal websites revealed shortcomings in publishing practices in a large proportion of the journals. Conclusions The discordance between the satisfaction of the journal editors and the journal quality indicators points to a break in the quality system of Libyan academic publishing. Similar expedient publishing practices might exist in other countries as well. A comprehensive action plan led by academic institutions to enforce high standards for scholarly publishing is needed to advance research and high-quality scholarly publications in developing countries.

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

This study investigates the scholarly publishing practices among LIS lecturers in Nigerian higher education institutions, focusing on their publishing outlets, perceived barriers, and necessary skills for successful publishing. Utilizing a descriptive survey design, the study gathered data from 362 LIS educators across Nigerian institutions through a questionnaire, analyzed using descriptive statistics. The study reveals that LIS lecturers in Nigerian higher education institutions have positive perceptions of scholarly publishing, recognizing its importance for professional growth and career advancement. Furthermore, the findings indicate that while academic journals are the primary outlet for communicating research findings, LIS lecturers also utilize a range of other channels, including conference proceedings, books, social media, and collaborative research projects, highlighting a diverse approach to scholarly dissemination. The findings emphasize the paramount importance of skills required to navigate the scholarly publishing process effectively. The study recommended that higher institutions of education should implement mentorship and training programs specifically designed to support lecturers in developing the skills needed for scholarly publishing.

Background There is increasing concern about the quality, integrity, and accessibility to research published in the developing world. This study explores the editorial practices and editors’ perspectives to gain insight into the standard of scholarly publishing in Libya. Methods Between 21st January and 12th February, 2022, the editors-in-chief (EC) of Libyan academic journals were invited to complete a questionnaire on editorial practices, degree of satisfaction with submitted and published manuscripts, review processes, and journal performance, as well as challenges facing the journals. Journal websites were examined for quality, and indexation coverage and citations were assessed. We examined the number of citations in Google Scholar for all 2019 articles published in each journal. Descriptive statistics were used to quantitatively summarize the data and thematic analysis was used for the narrative text. Results 48 EC completed the questionnaire. The EC was affiliated with the institution that owns the journal in 92% of cases. Most EC (83%) were satisfied with the peer-review quality, 69% believed that most of their published papers add new ideas or findings, and 96% were satisfied with their journal’s performance. However, despite the high degree of satisfaction, only one journal was indexed in Web of Science or Scopus and only 17% of the journals were indexed in Google Scholar. A qualitative assessment of journal websites revealed shortcomings in publishing practices in a large proportion of the journals. Conclusions The discordance between the satisfaction of the journal editors and the journal quality indicators points to a break in the quality system of Libyan academic publishing. Similar expedient publishing practices might exist in other countries as well. A comprehensive action plan led by academic institutions to enforce high standards for scholarly publishing is needed to advance research and high-quality scholarly publications in developing countries.

An editorial is presented on the topic of theory-building process and how the editorial team of Academy of Management Review (AMR) can aid potential AMR authors in writing conceptual articles that will be accepted for publication. An overview of how the demystification process was implemented at AMR is discussed.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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