Search results

A survey was carried out to determine the ways in which trade journal editors are able to answer the various types of enquiry which they receive, and to discover how far they are willing to do so. Editors of thirty‐five paid‐circulation and five controlled‐circulation journals were interviewed by means of the informal guided (focused) technique, the majority on a personal‐interview basis. The results from the paid‐circulation journals indicated that most of the enquiries received are telephoned, and require trade information. These can be answered most easily by the editors. Technical enquiries can be dealt with successfully by about half of the editors interviewed. Out of the enquiries relating to journal‐published material, those referring to editorial articles are usually handled by the editors concerned, whereas those referring to contributed articles tend to be referred to the contributing authors. Enquiries for marketing information can again be answered by about half of the editors interviewed, usually those whose journals aim to cover the marketing aspects of their fields. Peripheral enquiries tend to be referred to other trade journals. Most of the editors are prepared to spend between fifteen minutes and one hour on an enquiry, if necessary. About half of them are prepared to do research to find out answers to enquiries, and will give detailed answers when they are required. Just under half of the editors interviewed considered that readers' enquiries are very important, and nine of the sample journals provide some type of specialized enquiry service to deal with them. Since editors are up to date and well informed in their fields, they can usually put the enquirer in touch with people who can help. The degree to which an editor will help an enquirer depends largely on his personal attitude (whether he enjoys answering enquiries, for example), and also on the time he has available and whether he thinks the enquirer is ‘genuine’. The results of the interviews with controlled‐circulation journal editors were very similar to those of paid‐circulation journal editors.

This study investigates why contributors to online volunteer organizations reduce activity or discontinue volunteering. First, this analysis, based on a survey of over a 100 English Wikipedia’s volunteers with the highest edit count, identifies a gap in the research on volunteers burnout/dropout, namely the importance of interpersonal conflict as an understudied yet highly significant factor. Second, this analysis has practical implications for the sustainability of the Wikipedia project. Third, this analysis should outline an underrepresented issue that if generalizable, may help other volunteer organizations identify a key area related to their volunteer burnout/dropout.

Given the increasing use of social media and other digital technologies, critical theorists argue that social life has become increasingly structured by neoliberal market logics. Little research has empirically tested these claims.

This study is the first to examine whether the use of digital technologies in the avant-garde literary field is accompanied by neoliberal logics. Developing a cultural logics approach to neoliberalism, which allows for the identification of the independent logics of entrepreneurship, market-faith, profit-maximization, efficiency, and individualism, I draw on archival data and interviews with editors and writers to explore the relationship between digital technologies and neoliberalism.

Editors and writers legitimate some neoliberal logics and reject others. Entrepreneurship and efficiency are strongly legitimated. Profit-maximization is generally rejected. Market-faith and individualism are legitimated differently by editors and writers who occupy different positions within the field, drawing attention to the importance of field position, organizational affiliation, and career exhaustion in the use of digital technologies in the avant-garde literary world. Many of these findings are surprising given the historically non-economic orientation of the field.

Future research should explore neoliberal logics in other aspects of literary production and in other social domains.

This study provides a novel approach to the study of neoliberal logics as well as their relationship to digital technologies. Such an approach complements recent agendas in economic sociology and contributes to debates about the relationship between new technologies and capitalism.

The purpose of this paper is to develop insight into the scholarly communications trends in hospitality and tourism management by looking at the practice of publishing Special Issues (SIs) in top-ranked hospitality and tourism management (HTM) academic journals: examining the relationship of SIs to journal impact as a measurement of quality, identifying some principal topics of SI and the trend of publishing SI as monographs.

This paper consists of an analysis of 22 top-ranked HTM journals from 1995 to 2020, in-depth case studies reviewing studies in two top-ranked HTM journals and an examination of which publishers supplement their revenue by selling their special issues as monographs. This paper includes a substantial review of literature regarding special issue publishing within business academic journals.

There was growth in the publication of HTM SI from 1995 to 2020, both in numbers and as a percentage of total issues. There is no evidence that SI are reducing impact within HTM journals; impact has grown exponentially since the mid-1990s. In one case, there was a significant increase in SI publication as well as in impact. The number of Regular Issues (RI) published increased during the same period but at a marginally lower rate. There is no evidence that SI are negatively affecting RI. The in-depth analysis of the two journals concurred with the above findings and suggested that SI studies discuss topics of the highest impact. SI increased the revenue of the publisher through monograph publishing. This practice also furthered the field by making SI available to be purchased as a monograph by nonsubscribers.

This study provides a deeper understanding of scholarly publishing in top-ranking HTM journals and provides a foundation for future research on HTM publishing practices. Its practical implications extend to practitioners who rely on HTM scholarship for dissemination of vital research that can guide or drive decision-making. This study also informs the critical question as to whether such research is compromised by publishing practices. Other practical implications include providing reassuring information to editors who publish SI that these issues do not appear to contribute to lower journal impact. For researchers who are considering submitting manuscripts to SIs, this study similarly implies that their paper should not be considered of lower value and that there is no indication that its impact will be lessened. Furthermore, the authors hope that this study encourages would-be guest editors to publish SI if they have held back because of quality/impact concerns. Finally, this paper may provide evidence to journal editors who do not regularly publish SI because of quality and impact concerns that they may reconsider this choice. Implications for HTM journal editors and guest editors include adding or increasing SI in their publishing practice will not decrease the journal’s quality, while SI publishing also could contribute to the goals of their publication and increase revenues for the publishers. Researchers who may have been reluctant to publish in SI should be more inclined to submit to them or endeavor to become guest editors to explore avenues of developing their field.

SI publication and impact within the field of hospitality and tourism scholarly communications are rarely discussed. Literature reviews on SI publication in business are also limited. Investigation into publication practices of focused/special issues can help inform researchers, publishers and editors and provide a state of the industry.

This paper aims to determine the gender composition of journal editorial boards in the field of library and information science and to identify trends in the gender composition of different editorial roles and the country of affiliation and occupation of people fulfilling these roles.

In an analysis of 13 selected Library Information Science journals published by the Emerald Publishing group, data relating to 549 editors and editorial board members were obtained from the Open Editors online database. Data were assessed by role, gender, country and continent of their affiliation, and occupation.

Women were found to be under-represented as editors and editorial board members in 10 of the 13 journals. This was most evident in the highest-ranking role of editor or editor-in-chief. The majority of editors and editorial board members were from English-speaking countries located in Europe and the Americas, followed by Asia. The vast majority of editorial personnel belonged to the teaching and learning profession, with relatively few support staff, or researchers taking on these roles.

The findings of this study highlight the gender inequality in prestigious and career-advancing academic roles across multiple research areas. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, no such research has yet been conducted in the field of library and information science.

To add new empirical knowledge to debates about social practices of peer production communities, and to conversations about bias and its implications for democracy. To help identify Wikipedia (WP) articles that are affected by systematic bias and hopefully help alleviate the impact of such bias on the general public, thus helping enhance both traditional (e.g. libraries) and online information services (e.g. Google) in ways that contribute to democracy. This paper aims to discuss the aforementioned objectives.

Quantitatively, the authors identify edit-warring camps across many conflict zones of the English language WP, and profile and compare success rates and typologies of camp edits in the corresponding topic areas. Qualitatively, the authors analyze the edit war between two senior WP editors that resulted in imbalanced and biased articles throughout a topic area for such editorial characteristics through a close critical reading.

Through a large-scale quantitative study, the authors find that winner-take-all camps exhibit biasing editing behaviors to a much larger extent than the camps they successfully edit-war against, confirming findings of prior small-scale qualitative studies. The authors also confirm the employment of these behaviors and identify other behaviors in the successful silencing of traditional medicinal knowledge on WP by a scientism-biased senior WP editor through close reading.

WP sadly does, as previously claimed, appear to be a platform that represents the biased viewpoints of its most stridently opinionated Western white male editors, and routinely misrepresents scholarly work and scientific consensus, the authors find. WP is therefore in dire need of scholarly oversight and decolonization.

The authors independently verify findings from prior personal accounts of highly power-imbalanced fights of scholars against senior editors on WP through a third-party close reading of a much more power balanced edit war between senior WP editors. The authors confirm that these findings generalize well to edit wars across WP, through a large scale quantitative analysis of unbalanced edit wars across a wide range of zones of contention on WP.

The purpose of this paper is to model and implement an extensible markup language (XML)‐based editor for library cataloguing. The editor model should support data input in the form of free text with interactive control of structure and content validity of records specified in the UNIMARC and MARC 21 formats. The editor is implemented in the Java programming language in the form of a software package.

The unified modelling language (UML 2.0) is used for the specification of both the information requirements and the model architecture. The object oriented methodology is used for design and implementation of the software packages, as well as the corresponding CASE tools.

The result is an editor for UNIMARC and MARC 21 cataloguing. The editor is based on the XML technologies by which the two basic characteristics are achieved as follows: a possibility of integrating the editor into different library software systems and, moving to another format requires only the changes of the module for bibliographic record data control.

A basic limitation of the system is related to the subsystem that controls validation of the bibliographic records and its expansion for work with other bibliographic formats. In the proposed solution, a part of the control of data input is included into the implementation itself and it is related to the UNIMARC format. That is, a part of data by which the control is done, such as repeatability of the record elements and the codebooks, is contained in the XML document of the format that is input information in the editor. However, the control that is related to validation of the format of content in record elements cannot be performed for any other format without modification in the implementation. Therefore, the research could be continued by considering the separation of data used for content control as input information for the application. In that way, this segment would also become implementation independent. One of the solutions should be extending the XML document of the format by this data. Some other solution should mean creating a totally separate system for the content validation. Moreover, the proposed editor supports processing of a bibliographic record only in the UNIMARC and MARC 21 formats. Processing of records in other formats requires considerable changes in the model.

The model of a new editor is developed on the basis of the experience and needs of electronic management in city and special libraries. Based on the given model a new editor is implemented and integrated into the BISIS software system used by the mentioned libraries. Testing and verification are performed on the bibliographic records of the public city libraries.

The contribution of this work is in the system architecture that is based on the XML documents and is independent of the bibliographic format. The XML document that contains data about the bibliographic format represents the editor input information. After a bibliographic record is created in this editor, the record is stored into an XML document that represents the editor output information. This XML document can be stored into various software systems for data storage and retrieval.

Editors of employee magazines may be torn between diverging expectations among their stakeholders. The management might be interested in strategically supportive communication, whereas employees might expect objective, independent, or critical coverage. Based on quantitative data, the paper aims to analyze how the editors perceive these expectations, how they see their professional role in this field of tension and how critically the magazines report.

The authors conducted a quantitative survey of 197 editors of employee magazines and a quantitative content analysis of 200 articles of employee magazines.

Editors perceive differences regarding the expectations of management and employees. These discrepancies, in turn, contribute to the experience of role conflicts. Our analysis reveals three types of editors: the voice of the management, the critical observer and the consensus-oriented mediator.

The study addresses the scarcely investigated area of conflict in which editors of employee magazines work. It is one of the first studies to analyze editors' perceived expectations of stakeholders, their professional self-perception and potential role conflicts with a quantitative survey. For the first time, quantitative methods are used to examine the causes of editors' role conflicts.

Describes the case study of MCB University Press, and how the launch of its Literati Club led the company to explore the editor/author relationship and how both editors and authors could become more effective at what they do. Describes how this was achieved, the results and conclusions drawn.

The purpose of this research is to analyze both survey and non‐survey data to draw conclusions about the status of survey‐based research in finance.

The paper surveys editors from 15 core and 35 non‐core finance journals to learn their views about specific issues involving survey research and reviews 49 finance journals over the period 1985‐2005 to identify and classify published survey research.

Editors indicate that survey‐based manuscripts typically go through the same review process as other manuscripts. They view the chief strengths of surveys as producing data unavailable from other sources and suggesting new avenues for future research. The major weaknesses of surveys are the difficulty of generalizing the results and non‐response bias. A review of 49 finance journals shows that 63.3 percent published at least one survey article during this period. The most common topic area for published surveys was financial management.

The paper contains the normal limitations associated with the survey method including potential non‐response bias.

Survey‐based research has a definite place in financial research if such research is done to the same standards as other types of research.

This is the first study to examine the use of survey research in finance by asking journal editors their opinions and by inspecting finance journals' record of publication.