Search results

This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of a digital medical library, including department-based electronic journal access, library training course participation and scholarly publications.

The data on full-text electronic journal access, participants of library training courses and scholarly publications were exported from a digital medical library database during 2017–2021. In addition, electronic journal access and library training courses were divided into high-level and low-level groups, while scholarly publications were divided into physician and non-physician groups.

The scholarly publications had a positive correlation to library training courses and electronic journal access. Furthermore, scholarly publications showed a significant difference between the high-level and low-level electronic journal access groups but not between the high-level and low-level library training course groups. Scholarly publications and electronic journal access had positive correlations for both the physician and non-physician groups. Scholarly publications and library training courses, and electronic journal access and library training courses had positive correlations only in the non-physician group.

The importance of electronic journal access for scholarly publications is suggested based on the findings of the present study. The training courses held by the medical library had a positive effect on scholarly publications for the non-physician group.

The current study provides insights relevant to the electronic journal access of library-supported scholarly publications among medical departments. These results can serve as a reference for medical library development planning and decision-making in the future.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the role of reading in scholarly work among academics in Finland. This study analyzes readings from a variety of publication types including books, conference proceedings, research reports, magazines, newspapers, blogs, non-fiction and fiction.

An online survey was developed and distributed in Finland in 2016–2017 (n=528). Participants were asked their finding and use of scholarly information resources of all types.

Scholars read from a variety of publications. Different types of publications are read and used differently. Reading also varies between disciplines, ranks, work responsibilities and type of research performed.

The study was a nationwide study of researchers in Finland; therefore, all findings are within the context of researchers in a single country. All results are self-reported; therefore, the authors assume but cannot be sure that respondents accurately recollect the specifics of their use of scholarly information.

The results of this study are relevant to publishers, research librarians, editors and others who serve consumers of scholarly information resources, design information products and services for those scholars, and seek to better understand the information needs and use of a variety of types of scholarly publications.

This study replicates previous studies in a variety of countries and provides a more up-to-date and single-country contextualized overview of how researchers find and use scholarly information in their work.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze the evolution in terms of shares of scholarly book publications in the social sciences and humanities (SSH) in five European countries, i.e. Flanders (Belgium), Finland, Norway, Poland and Slovenia. In addition to aggregate results for the whole of the social sciences and the humanities, the authors focus on two well-established fields, namely, economics & business and history.

Comprehensive coverage databases of SSH scholarly output have been set up in Flanders (VABB-SHW), Finland (VIRTA), Norway (NSI), Poland (PBN) and Slovenia (COBISS). These systems allow to trace the shares of monographs and book chapters among the total volume of scholarly publications in each of these countries.

As expected, the shares of scholarly monographs and book chapters in the humanities and in the social sciences differ considerably between fields of science and between the five countries studied. In economics & business and in history, the results show similar field-based variations as well as country variations. Most year-to-year and overall variation is rather limited. The data presented illustrate that book publishing is not disappearing from an SSH.

The results presented in this paper illustrate that the polish scholarly evaluation system has influenced scholarly publication patterns considerably, while in the other countries the variations are manifested only slightly. The authors conclude that generalizations like “performance-based research funding systems (PRFS) are bad for book publishing” are flawed. Research evaluation systems need to take book publishing fully into account because of the crucial epistemic and social roles it serves in an SSH.

The authors present data on monographs and book chapters from five comprehensive coverage databases in Europe and analyze the data in view of the debates regarding the perceived detrimental effects of research evaluation systems on scholarly book publishing. The authors show that there is little reason to suspect a dramatic decline of scholarly book publishing in an SSH.

This study aims to assess the scholarly communication competence of Zambian library and information science (LIS) professionals by evaluating their awareness, knowledge and practices regarding scholarly publication.

Applying a quantitative research approach, the study used a specially designed questionnaire. Responses from 57 professionals across universities and colleges in Zambia were gathered using convenience sampling. Data analysis involved descriptive statistics, mean and standard deviation calculations and t-values and p-values to understand respondents’ perceptions and knowledge of scholarly communication and publication.

The findings revealed significant gaps in respondents’ knowledge and awareness, particularly regarding predatory journals, journal selection factors, open-access models, publication challenges, reference management software (RMS) usage and research obstacles. The study underscored the necessity for increased training and capacity-building initiatives among Zambian LIS professionals to enhance their scholarly communication competence.

This research contributed to the field by highlighting deficiencies in scholarly communication awareness among Zambian LIS professionals. It emphasised the need for targeted interventions, awareness programs and educational support to improve academic literacy and scholarly publication practices. Additionally, the study suggested future research avenues, such as longitudinal studies and strategies for enhancing RMS adoption, to advance scholarly practices among Zambian professionals further.

Gamification has been studied in many areas, i.e. marketing, education, training, and psychology. There has been an increased interest in the topic of gamification among scholars in the past several years. The purpose of this paper is therefore to use citation network analysis and explore changes in scholarly interest in the topic of gamification. As a result, four study hypotheses were developed: H1a: the “other” category publications (books, proceedings, etc.) will have a significantly larger frequency when compared with “journal” publications; H1b: the trend line of the frequency of publications will most closely fit the S-curve of Adoption in the adoption of innovations or the spread of new ideas as postulated by Rogers (2003); H2a: there will be a negative correlation between graph density and the number of vertices (publications); and H2b: there will be a positive correlation between average geodesic distance (AVGD) and the number of vertices (publications).

Data were collected from three searches for all published works that contained the word “gamification” in the titles of publication (the unit of analysis) from 2010 to 2013. The sampling was conducted via Google Scholar, amazon.com, and the academic library databases, i.e. EBSCO Search, JStor Scholarly Journal Archive, PsychArticles, and WorldCat. Data were analyzed using frequency counts and citation network. NodeXL is a highly structured workbook that includes multiple worksheets and computational functions necessary to store, represent, and analyze a network.

All four hypotheses were supported; the “other” category accounted for a significantly larger number of publications with the word “gamification” in the title; the trend line of the frequency of publications will most closely fit the S-curve of Adoption in the adoption of innovations or the spread of new ideas as postulated by Rogers (2003); there was a negative correlation between graph density and the number of vertices (publications); and there was a positive correlation between AVGD and the number of vertices (publications).

It is highly improbable that a “pure” or “random” sample of publications could be collected because it is highly probable that there exists no known, i.e. identifiable and verifiable “true” population of works that include gamification in the title.

The study findings have three major implications. The first takes in scholarly communication and the development of scientific knowledge. The findings imply that scholarly communication follows patterns similar to the adoption of innovation. The second implication deals with the topic known as “gamification.” The study findings imply that scholars believe gamification is worthy of serious study as the network of scholars studying gamification is increasing. The third implication of our study relates to the methods used to study scholarly communication. The study findings imply that network analysis can be used to understand how a new concept can be vetted by the scientific community.

The citation network analysis of this study provided tangible evidence of how new concepts are vetted, i.e. adopted. Citation network studies thus offer promise for a deeper understanding of scholarly communication and the adoption of new research topics and fields of inquiry. In addition, the findings indicate that “gamification” is a potentially fruitful topic for scholars to continue to explore.

The lack of a country-wide data on the extent to which academic librarians in Ghana publish combined with perceived publishing challenges as indicated by a number of scholars including Opoku (2012) leaves much to be desired. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to seek the views of professional librarians in Ghana on the subject.

Using a sample size of 45 out of 50 academic librarians who make up the membership of the Consortium of Academic and Research Libraries, the study employed the descriptive survey research strategy in identifying the prospects and challenges associated with academic publications among librarians in Ghana.

Opportunities for growth, institutional encouragement, requirements for promotion, and opportunities for research training are some of the factors that motivated academic librarians to publish in scholarly journals notwithstanding the pressures to perform their professional duties. Challenges often encountered included lack of research grants, high rejection rate of publishing agencies, lack of research skills and difficulty in getting access to research journals.

On the basis of the above, the establishment of research fund and an award scheme for persons or units with the highest number of publications among others are recommended.

With the exception of cited works, all other forms of this research output are the handiwork of the researchers and have neither been a reproduction of existing research nor ever published in any other journal.

The purpose of this paper is to suggest ways of improving the quality of Nigerian journals so that they would have global visibility and impact.

This is a literature‐based opinion paper which examines the implication of evaluating Nigerian academics using journal impact factors, despite its limitations, particularly to African scholars.

Revelations from available literature point to the fact that the use of journal impact factors is not an objective method of research evaluation, particularly in developing country like Nigeria. However, evaluation of research outputs remains critical in the overall socio‐economic, scientific and technological growth of any society. The creation of institutional repositories that are compliant with open archives initiatives by the relevant institutions in Nigeria would to a very large extent address the problem of visibility of research outputs coming from the country.

African scholars are disadvantaged by their work environment in the present global scholarly productivity. This paper proposes a number approaches to improve the quality and global visibility of Nigerian scholarly productivity so that journal impact factors should no longer be a parameter for research evaluation in the country.

The originality of the paper lies in the strategies proposed for improving the quality of journals in Nigeria.