Search results

This study aims to explore the role of habit strength in explaining intention and open access (OA) and non-OA scholarly publishing.

A decomposed theory of planned behaviour (TPB) is used as the conceptual framework to investigate a sample of 1,588 researchers from the major universities in Norway. Different latent construct models are analysed with a structural equation modelling approach.

The results show that the effect of habit was non-significant in an extended TPB framework where attitude was most important, followed by norms and perceived behavioural control in explaining intention to submit OA. Habit was only found to have a significant impact on intention to submit OA when it played a role as a full mediator for the effects of the intentional antecedents. In this modified model, norms were found to have a stronger effect than attitudes in explaining the habit to submit OA. OA habit strength forms intentions to publish in OA journals and reduces the intention to publish and publishing behaviour in NOA journals.

Other individual forces (e.g. personality and personal values) and the role of habit strength should be included for future research.

The results provide empirical insights to management, policy makers and research on scholarly publishing.

This paper contributes not only to the understanding of OA scholarly publishing, but is also relevant for research on what drives (academic) data sharing, knowledge sharing, the sharing economy or the open source movement.

This paper proposes a new perspective on the enormous and unresolved challenge to existing practices of publication and documentation posed by the outputs of digital research projects in the humanities, where much good work is being lost due to resource or technical challenges.

The paper documents and analyses both the existing literature on promoting sustainability for the outputs of digital humanities projects and the innovative approach of a single large-scale project.

The findings of the research presented show that sustainability planning for large-scale research projects needs to consider data and technology but also community, communications and process knowledge simultaneously. In addition, it should focus not only on a project as a collection of tangible and intangible assets, but also on the potential user base for these assets and what these users consider valuable about them.

The conclusions of the paper have been formulated in the context of one specific project. As such, it may amplify the specificities of this project in its results.

An approach to project sustainability following the recommendations outlined in this paper would include a number of uncommon features, such as a longer development horizon, wider perspective on project results, and an audit of tacit and explicit knowledge.

These results can ultimately preserve public investment in projects.

This paper supplements more reductive models for project sustainability with a more holistic approach that others may learn from in mapping and sustaining user value for their projects for the medium to long terms.

This study aims to develop a framework for applying performance management principles to implementing a pluralistic model of scholarly impact in business schools to increase the value and relevance scholarly research to multiple stakeholder groups.

Performance management principles were studied with case study data of scholarly impact that included bibliographic measures and altmetrics. An analytical model was built for a focal business school that provided benchmarks for managing scholarly impact by using data from three peer schools.

Bibliographic, scholarly output measures and altmetrics were consistent across the focal school and peer schools, thereby providing a solid foundation for establishing performance benchmarks for annual performance reviews, promotion and tenure decisions and organizational impact goals.

This paper provides guidance for designing, building and implementing performance management systems to foster scholarly impact.

This paper integrates pluralistic impact models and performance management systems to build faculty expertise and align it with multiple impact domains.

Implementation of research evaluation policies based on neoliberal orientations of performativity has transformed higher education institutions globally, reshaping academic work and the academic profession. Most lately, the mantra of “publish or no degree” has become the norm in many contexts. There has been little empirical research into the unintended consequences of this neoliberal academic performativity for inexperienced researchers. This article focuses on the role institutional research evaluation policies play on doctoral students and early-career doctoral graduates’ publication practices and on their decision to sometimes publish in journals with ethically “questionable” publishing standards in particular through the concept of figured worlds.

The study was conducted in a higher education setting employing a variety of research incentive schemes to boost research productivity where “publish or no degree” policy is the norm. It employs qualitative approach and involves in-depth interviews with nine doctoral students and seven early career academics who have been working part-time or full-time for five years following PhD completion.

Findings demonstrate publishing in journals with ethically “questionable” publishing standards is not always simply the result of naivety or inexperience. Some authors choose these journals in order to retain a sense of self-efficacy in the face of rejection by more highly ranked journals. Under institutional pressure to publish, they are socialized into this “shadow academia” through (existing) academic networks, conferences and journal special issues.

It is often assumed that scholars are trapped into “questionable” journals through the use of unsolicited emails. This paper challenges this assumption by demonstrating the crucial role research evaluation policies based on neoliberal orientations of performativity and contextual dynamics play on the publication practices of doctoral students and early-career doctoral graduates on their decision to submit to journals with “questionable” publication practices. It introduces the concept of unethical publication brokering, an informal network of ties promising fast and easy publication in outlets that “count”.

The use of bibliographic citation is a crucial aspect in the creation and dissemination of information. Numerous studies have been done ranging from simple citation counts to more complex bibliographic coupling studies, and from citation classifications to citation motivation studies. This review focusses on the citation studies that have explored the complexities and the underlying norms of the citation process. The major emphasis is placed upon the studies which have dealt with citation functions, citation quality, citation concepts and citation motivation. The international perspectives of citation practice are also discussed.

The purpose of this paper is to understand how attitudes, norms (injunctive and descriptive) and perceived behavioral control (PBC) (capacity and autonomy) influence the intention to publish open access (OA), and how personal innovativeness in information technology affects attitude and PBC.

This study employs an integrated and extended theory of planned behavior (TPB) framework within a cross-sectional survey design. The sample consists of researchers at a Norwegian university, and data are collected digitally via e-mail invitation and analyzed using structural equation modeling.

This study determines that attitude is the strongest predictor of the intention to publish OA, followed by injunctive and descriptive social norms, and PBC capacity and autonomy. All factors positively influence intention apart from PBC autonomy, which has a negative effect.

Potential limitations include: a relatively small sample size, self-reported data and employing intention, not behavior, as the ultimate dependent variable.

This research contributes with a deeper understanding of what drives the intention to publish OA research articles, and how innovativeness affects attitudes and PBC autonomy. Support is found for an extended TPB model with decomposed normative and PBC components. This knowledge is essential in creating an impetus for systematic research on OA publishing behavior.

Theory-driven research into understanding OA publishing behavior is rare. Decomposing the normative and PBC constructs is uncommon in TPB research, and a novel approach in OA research. Personal innovativeness has not been explored previously in relation to OA publishing.

Drawing from the work of sociologist Niklas Luhmann, this paper analyzes and critiques the ways sociology presents itself as a vehicle for sociological “enlightenment.” It begins with a brief historical account of how sociology has come to describe itself as a science in the name of promoting social justice rooted back to the European Enlightenment of the eighteenth century. Next, the relevant elements of Luhmann's theory of society are explained ground the analysis. Luhmann's critiques of sociology and science are then presented to explain how a Luhmannian understanding of social systems exposes what is missing in sociology's current self-description of itself and its “enlightenment” mission. Building upon Luhmann's observations, a preliminary observational analysis of the communication techniques and technologies of sociology, such as classes, conferences, and publications, is assessed to evaluate the tools sociology uses to engage in communication and “irritate” other social systems. The central question here is, are these tools effective in communicating sociological knowledge in a way that aligns with the aspirational humanistic goals sociology seeks to achieve? The argument then concludes with some remarks about how sociology might potentially overcome its communicative efficacy problem if it takes seriously the insights from a Luhmannian approach to communication and considers alternative forms of communication to reach new audiences. In this way, sociology could perhaps overcome the gap between the facts of its communicational efficacy and its enlightenment norms.

The purpose of this paper is to make two main contributions: first, showcase the diversity of service research in terms of the variety of used theories and methods, and second, explain (post-publication) success of articles operationalized as interest in an article (downloads), usage (citations), and awards (best paper nomination). From there, three sub-contributions are derived: stimulate a dialogue about existing norms and practices in the service field, enable and encourage openness amongst service scholars, and motivate scholars to join the field.

A mixed method approach is used in combining quantitative and qualitative research methods while analyzing 158 Journal of Service Management (JOSM) articles on several criteria such as their theory, methodology, and main descriptive elements (e.g. number of authors or references) and then using automated text analysis (e.g. investigating the readability of articles, etc.).

The results show that the JOSM publishes a large variety of articles with regard to theories, methods of data collection, and types of data analysis. For example, JOSM has published a mixture of qualitative and quantitative articles and papers containing firm-level and customer-level data. Further, the results show that even though conceptual articles create the same amount of interest (downloads), they are used more (citations).

This paper presents many descriptive results which do not allow for making inferences toward the entire service research discipline. Further, it is only based on one service research journal (JOSM) through a five-year span of publication.

The results have a number of implications for the discipline that are presented and discussed. Amongst them are that: the discipline should be more open toward conceptual articles, service research shows an imbalance toward theory testing, there is more potential to work with transactional data, and writing style should be more accessible (i.e. readable).

This paper is the first to conduct an in-depth analysis of service research articles to stimulate dialogue about common publishing practices in the JOSM and to increase the openness of the field.

This interpretive biography of Norman K. Denzin traces some of the important turns and moments of his intellectual development and prodigious publication. One focus includes his editorial role for the first 52 volumes of Studies in Symbolic Interaction (1978–2020), and how his vision for an inclusive community of qualitative researchers and interpretive scholars emerged and changed.

The purpose of this paper is to shed light on the use of bibliometric indicators as a people analytics tool for examining research performance outcome differences in faculty mobility and turnover.

Employing bibliometric information from research databases, the publication, citations, h-index and newly developed individual annualized h-index (hIa-index) for a sample of university faculty is examined (N = 684). Information relating to turnover decisions from a human resource (HR) information system and bibliometric data from a research database are combined to explore research performance differences across cohorts of retained, resigned or terminated faculty over a five-year period in a single university.

Analysis of variance (ANOVA) results indicate traditional bibliometric indicators of h-index, publication count and citation count which are limited in their ability to identify performance differences between employment status cohorts. Results do show some promise for the newly developed hIa-index, as it is found to be significantly lower for terminated faculty (p < 0.001), as compared to both retained and resigned faculty. Multinomial logistic regression analysis also confirms the hIa metric as a predictor of terminated employment status.

First, the results imply that the hIa-index, which controls for career length and elements of coauthorship is a superior bibliometric indicator for comparison of research performance.

Results suggest that the hIa metric may serve as a useful tool for the examination of employment decisions for universities. It also highlights the potential usefulness of bibliometric indicators for people analytics and the examination of employment decisions, performance management and faculty turnover in research-intensive higher education contexts.

This empirical paper is entirely unique. No research has previously examined the issue of turnover in a university setting using the bibliometric measures employed here. This is a first example of the potential use of hIa bibliometric index as an HR analytics tool for the examination of HR decisions such as employee turnover in the university context.