Search results

The key purpose of this study is to gain an insight into the quality of the scholarly publishing and refereeing system used by Emerald’s Library and Information Science (LIS) journals from the perspectives of the Arab authors who are publishing in this wide-ranging database. It also tries to provide helpful guidance for authors to fit their authorship for publication.

Of the total 3,846 papers published in Emerald’s LIS journals in the past five years (the beginning of 2011 to the end of 2015), there were only 81 papers (research/technical/conceptual papers and case studies only) authored by Arabs, representing 2.11 per cent of the whole productivity in the discipline of the LIS in Emerald in this period. Corresponding authors (mostly first authors) (n = 73) were contacted to answer the questionnaire of the study. Five of those 73 authors could not be reached because of the lack of validity of their e-mails. Out of the remaining authors (n = 68), 47 returned their valid questionnaires, representing 69.1 per cent of the total number of the Arab authors.

This study revealed that the Arab male authors dominated (78.7 per cent) the publishing in Emerald’s LIS journals in the past five years. Two-thirds of the Arab authors are aged between 36 to 45 years (mostly males with doctoral degrees), followed by those authors (17 per cent) who are aged between 46 to 50 years (mostly males with doctoral degrees) and by those authors (12.8 per cent) aged between 31 to 35 years (all are males and half of them hold a doctorate). The study also found that there was a direct proportionality between the Arab authors’ research experience with the history of publishing in Emerald’s LIS journals because the more research experience they have, the greater the number of their research history of publishing in Emerald. Assistant Professors (44.7 per cent) were found to be the group most frequently publishing in Emeralds’ LIS journals with research experience ranging between 11 and 20 years (mainly with a publishing history of five years), followed by lectures with research experience ranging between 1 and 20 years (mostly with a publishing history of five years) and then associate professors with research experience ranging between 11 and 20 years (mostly with a publishing history of ten years). The findings also found that most Arab authors (80.9 per cent) publishing in Emerald’s LIS journals preferred the sole or single authorship. The co-authorship or co-authored works were not much preferred by many of them. A large number (87.2 per cent) of the Arab authors, who are mainly described as experts and advanced authors in using the Emerald refereeing system, see this system, at least, as good. Regarding the reasons/factors to submit articles to Emerald’s LIS journals, this study revealed that the availability of papers in electronic formats, the journal’s impact factor, the association with the research area, the academic coverage of the journal, abstracting and indexing services, the availability in hard copy, the speed of reviewing, the size of readership, the ease of acceptance and the standing of the editorial board were the most significant reasons and factors to submit articles papers for publication in Emerald. The Arab authors in this study have shown considerable positive attitude and perceptions towards the publishing in Emerald’s LIS journals because all of them, at least, agree that publishing in Emerald can increase the speed of finding information and reduce the use of papers. A very large number of them also showed that such publishing may also help create a wider spread, build confidence, be convenient, secure credibility and be objective. Compared to their positive attitude and perceptions towards the publishing in Emerald’s LIS journals, Arab authors had little negative feelings about the publishing in these journals. A few of them (8.5 per cent) have shown a considerable concern about the time it takes in reviewing their articles because they reported that such publishing requires a long time for the peer review process, and it also needs long communications with the editorial staff; this may affect negatively on the time of the research topic. Not being their first language, a few Arab authors (8.5 per cent) have also shown a considerable concern about the use of English being the publishing language in Emerald, as it requires certain skills needed not only to publish their articles but also to deal with the Emerald system and communicate with editorial staff. Overall, this small percentage did not affect the rest of the authors who described their concerns about this obstacle as modest to some extent. Although there is a lot of enthusiasm for publication in Emerald showed by the Arab authors, there have been also some concerns expressed by them towards that goal. A modest number of the Arab authors suggested that the lack of language skills needed for publishing in Emerald, followed by the lack of patience needed to wait for issuing papers, the technical problems related to the system and its interface and the lack of technical skills needed for publishing, as well as the time needed to be online, were significant to them when looking to publish in Emerald.

The paper investigates the quality of the scholarly publishing and refereeing system used in Emerald’s LIS journals from the perspectives of Arab authors who are publishing in this wide-ranging database. Such topic, to date, has limited previous research, as well as the limited size of the representation of the Arab authors in Emerald’s LIS journals in the past five years, which is due logically to the lack of their research and scientific contributions in this database during this period. Future research could focus on varied contexts or samples, such as other different disciplines and nationalities.

The paper provides valuable insight into the perception about the Emerald’s peer review quality by a very significant client group – academic researchers representing 22 Arab countries.

This study is to be the first one of its kind conducted by one of the Arab authors who has published in Emerald’s LIS journals. Being one of the few studies about the scholarly communication/productivity/collaboration of Arab authors in these journals, this study considers a pioneer one among many studies conducted in scholarly communication, especially with Arab authors.

To test the breadth of appeal of the 2005 Emerald Management Xtra collection of over 100 business and management journals using aggregated usage data gathered from the Emerald web site. To test whether the “80/20 rule”, or Pareto principle, of 80 per cent of the usage by all Emerald customers coming from 20 per cent of the titles in the database is true. To compare the results of this study with those obtained by the Consortium of University Libraries, Catalonia (CBUC) for their usage of database products from Emerald and other publishers.

The analysis was made based on article downloads by all Emerald customers from COUNTER Journal Report 1 Release 1 compliant usage data. The journals were ranked in order of decreasing usage and then accumulated percentage usage was compared with accumulated percentage titles.

That across all Emerald customers 80 per cent of usage came from 47.4 per cent of titles. This result compared well with the CBUC study that found an 80:46.2 relationship for Emerald usage. The CBUC study found an 80:34.5 relationship across all the publishers’ products included in their analysis.

This study found that usage by all Emerald customers of the journals that make up the Emerald Management Xtra database far exceeded the Pareto principle assumption. This was also true for one Emerald consortium customer in Spain.

The study concludes that a subject‐focused “big deal”, such as the Emerald Management Xtra product, represents excellent value for customers. It contains many relevant titles in a package that is deeply discounted and costs far less than purchasing just the most used titles individually.

This is the first study by a publisher that analyses the aggregated usage data for all of its customers. It demonstrates the value and utility of the electronic journal database, or “big deal”.

The purpose of this paper is to draw a comparison of the Web traffic ranking, usage and popularity of websites of databases of reputed publishers, namely, ScienceDirect and Emerald Insight, that provide access on subscription basis with Sci-Hub, on the basis of data obtained from Alexa databank (www.alexa.com). Sci-Hub is a website that provides pirated open-access to the research literature, where piracy, according to The Economic Times (2020), refers to the unauthorized duplication of copyrighted content.

Under present study, the quantitative study of the collected data was carried out with help of descriptive research methodology. The Alexa databank was singled out as the source of data. This study crawled through Alexa databank on 01.12.2019 and collected relevant data regarding Sci-Hub, ScienceDirect and Emerald Insight using the search terms Sci-hub.tw, Sciencedirect.com and Emeraldinsight.com sequentially. Different criteria were taken into consideration, which include global traffic rank, the average number of page views per user, time taken for uploading, bounce rate, percentage of users, the number of in-links and daily time spent on the site.

The results of this study showed that ScienceDirect has the highest traffic rank and in-linking sites among the surveyed databases. But highest number of page visits were recorded for Sci-Hub with fastest downloading speed. It has also been observed that the users spent less time on ScienceDirect and Emerald Insight as compared to Sci-Hub. This study further observed that Sci-Hub has the lowest bounce rate. Users from both the developing and developed economies use the Sci-Hub, though the highest number of visitors belongs to the developing nations.

This study provides an overview of the performance of toll-based publishing databases with pirated database based on different criteria through World Wide Web. Though, this study in no way supports or endorses the unauthorized and illegal access to knowledge, but such data helps in depicting and analyzing how much a particular database is accessed by its users all over the globe and also determines and illustrates the time spent by users while accessing a specific database, thus, providing the user preferences in information seeking activities. This study provides an overall view of adoption of open resources.

In this special “Emerald” issue of the British Food Journal, we present reviews of the wider literature on the subject of food selected from the Emerald Reviews database. Emerald Reviews is a comprehensive database of independently written abstracts of the best 400 journals in management. The abstracts have been broken down into sections that reflect the interest areas of the British Food Journal: food marketing; food retailing; food supply chain and distribution; nutrition; organic food; genetically modified food; food safety; and farming and agriculture. As an introduction, there is a viewpoint by Amanda Donaldson‐Briggs on the topic of preservatives. We hope you find this issue of interest.

This is a case study discussion drawn from scholarly publishers Emerald, formerly MCB University Press. It discusses the unusual “supply circle” phenomenon in scholarly publishing, where authors (suppliers) are often the same people as readers (customers). It addresses this from the standpoint of trying to measure and manage performance in an area where measures are highly subjective – where, like art, performance is typically judged on “I know what I like”. The paper suggests areas for further research, and points to some steps taken by the firm to make the intangible more tangible.

The purpose of this study is to identify the practical implications of Lean, Six Sigma (SS) and Lean SS (LSS) in the public administration sector. Determining the key themes of these practical implications is also an aim of the present study.

A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted based on the databases of six well-known academic publishers, namely, Emerald, Elsevier/Science Direct, Springer Link, Taylor and Francis, Sage and Willey online. The review revealed 56 peer-reviewed journal articles published between 2004 and 2020. The “affinity diagram” was applied to group the practical implications of Lean, SS and LSS into logical themes.

A plethora of practical implications of Lean, SS and LSS in the public administration sector are identified in the literature, examples of which are analytically presented. The analysis showed that the practical implications identified can be grouped into 14 meaningful themes, and these themes in turn into categories, formulating thus, a conceptual framework. The key themes that are supported in the literature by most references are the following: human factors involved in Lean/SS/LSS, Lean/SS/LSS benefits and Lean/SS/LSS implementation issues.

Although several databases were used, some publishers might have been missed out in this SLR. The subjectivity in applying the “affinity diagram” is also a limitation of this study. Based on these limitations, further literature review studies can be designed.

Twofold implications arise from the present study, meaning from the practitioner and the academic perspective. The practical implications identified as well as their meaningful themes revealed constitute useful guidelines for managers and decision-makers wishing to implement Lean/SS/LSS in the public administration sector and bridge their knowledge gap between theory and practice. Moreover, all the practical dimensions of Lean/SS/LSS included in the comprehensive conceptual framework formulated could serve as research avenues for academics.

The application of Lean/SS/LSS in the public sector has not been widely reviewed, while the stream of literature focuses on limited issues (critical success factors, benefits, challenges, etc.). Moreover, SLRs in services and specifically in the public administration sector are fewer. Stimulated by this gap and the suggestions of other researchers for future studies, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study provides the first SLR which analyzes the practical implications of Lean/SS/LSS in the public administration sector and determines their key themes.

This study aims to identify a sustainable university’s key features. It is an essential step in tracing the topics discussed in the context of a sustainable university and their evolution in the scientific discourse.

This paper relies on a systematic literature review (SLR) conducted using two scholarly databases: Emerald and Scopus. The timeframe selected by the authors for reviewing the available sources spans from 2001 to 2021.

The analysis distinguished seven sustainable university categories, each revealing critical features of sustainable higher education. Each of these categories represents an intriguing area for in-depth analysis. The SLR reveals gaps requiring further scientific exploration.

The performed literature review was determined by the choice of entries (keywords) to identify the scientific papers in the selected databases. Moreover, as the authors aimed to focus on peer-reviewed sources, this SLR did not include books and doctoral dissertations dealing with the studied issues.

The results of the analysis can be used practically by both researchers and practitioners in the field of sustainable development (SD). Identified scientific gaps become a potential research field, and practitioners interested in the transition toward SD may contribute by accompanying universities in this journey. Collaboration and networking with business stakeholders are critical vectors for spreading the idea of SD.

Society’s growing concern for climate change requires accurate and specific actions from institutions. As entities educating future generations, universities have a unique role in transforming toward SD. The findings allow us to get acquainted with the existing main activities undertaken by higher education institutions in this field and understand the importance of this topic for researchers.

SLR is a cornerstone of research synthesis and helps integrate scientific evidence from qualitative and quantitative published studies. Conducted research presents knowledge about university sustainability and can help scientists find research gaps.