Search results

Peer-reviewed indexable journals have expanded in recent decades as a result, in part, of the value given to research productivity (measured through citations). Latin American journals have grown prompted by the open access (OA) movement, the emergence of regional repositories/indexes, and policies linking institutional rankings and faculty salaries/promotions to indexed publications. This study’s aim was to map the ways Chilean, Colombian, and Venezuelan universities support journal publication. This qualitative study uses Margison and Rhoades’ (2002) Glonacal Agency Heuristic to describe factors that shape higher education (i.e., global, national, and local dimensions), adding university as unit of analysis. Semi-structured in-depth interviews from a previous study, current institutional documents, and websites of 12 major universities from Chile, Venezuela, and Colombia conformed the data of the study. Besides the most prestigious global indexes (Web of Science and Scopus) three regional repositories/indexes, Latindex, SciELO, and RedALyC, have played an important role as countries link faculty salaries/promotions and university ranking systems to publications included in one or more of these services. Latindex collaborates with national science and technology agencies, SciELO has country chapters based at universities (Colombia and Venezuela), and RedALyC works with individual institutions and journals. At the national level, Chile has mechanisms to provide funding for the publication and/or upgrade of journals and incentives to institutions for publications in indexed journals. Colombia’s journal evaluation system Publindex links articles in indexed journals to salary increases in public universities, standard that is also used by private institutions to grant monetary incentives to faculty for publications. Venezuela used to have a funding and publication incentive system that was discontinued in the last decade. Latin American journals are mainly published by universities. Institutions in this study have implemented strategies to support journals such as institutional repositories, discontinuation of print journals, technology support for OA publication, and funding mechanisms.

The purpose of this study is to contribute to the understanding of how the potential of altmetrics varies around the world by measuring the percentage of articles with non-zero metrics (coverage) for articles published from a developing region (Latin America).

This study uses article metadata from a prominent Latin American journal portal, SciELO, and combines it with altmetrics data from Altmetric.com and with data collected by author-written scripts. The study is primarily descriptive, focusing on coverage levels disaggregated by year, country, subject area, and language.

Coverage levels for most of the social media sources studied was zero or negligible. Only three metrics had coverage levels above 2 per cent – Mendeley, Twitter, and Facebook. Of these, Twitter showed the most significant differences with previous studies. Mendeley coverage levels reach those found by previous studies, but it takes up to two years longer for articles to be saved in the reference manager. For the most recent year, coverage was less than half than what was found in previous studies. The coverage levels of Facebook appear similar (around 3 per cent) to that of previous studies.

The Altmetric.com data used for some of the analyses were collected for a six month period. For other analyses, Altmetric.com data were only available for a single country (Brazil).

The results of this study have implications for the altmetrics research community and for any stakeholders interested in using altmetrics for evaluation. It suggests the need of careful sample selection when wishing to make generalizable claims about altmetrics.

It is unclear whether regional rather than global or discipline-focussed preprint platforms as an innovation in the communication of science are removing any of the barriers faced by researchers in the scientific periphery or whether they are increasing access to and visibility of science from the periphery. In response, this paper focusses on the uptake, visibility and academic impact of regional preprint publishing platforms in two peripheral regions (Africa and Latin America) to gain insights into the use and possible impact of regional preprint servers.

Comparative quantitative analysis using bibliometric and altmetric data to compare six preprint servers (two regional, one global and three discipline-specific).

There is evidence of the uptake of regional preprint servers, but the uptake is comparatively modest compared with global and discipline-focussed preprint servers. The academic and social visibility of preprints available on regional preprint servers is comparatively lower when compared to other preprint servers. The preprint server SciELO preprint in comparison to AfricArxiv shows signs of increasing growth and visibility, but more time is required to reach any definitive conclusions.

The research is limited by the short timeframe that the regional preprint servers have existed compared to some of the other preprint servers. The absence of reliable data on the research populations by region or globally by discipline places limits on the comparability of the raw data.

The article provides for the first time a detailed empirical analysis of the contribution of preprint servers targeted at researchers from the scientific periphery to global science.

The peer review history for this article is available at: https://publons.com/publon/10.1108/OIR-04-2023-0153

Observes that electronic information is a part of the established order of things, but almost from the beginning its arrival has created a whole series of wars, accusations and debates on how what is effectively a new system of scholarly communication is to be organised, managed and funded. Looks at the future of scholarly publishing, the “Internet solution”, and the reactions to the new technology of commercial publishers and many other stakeholders in academia.

The purpose of this paper is to look at third party journal portals, which facilitate the low-cost publishing of open access journals. Portals have become very important enablers for converting journals published by scholarly societies and universities to open access, in particular in the social sciences and humanities.

Portals were identified using a combination of methods including a literature search, interviews with experts, a key word web search and by analyzing web addresses and publishers in data from the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ).

In total, 21 portals fitting our definition were identified. Together these published more than 6,000 journals. They contribute around 10 percent of the journals indexed in the DOAJ, and the content is very highly skewed to certain countries, in particular Latin America and Asia.

While there have been earlier case study reports about individual portals, especially SciElo, this is probably the first systematic study of this phenomenon as a whole.

The issue of “predatory” publishing and the scholarly value of journals that claim to operate within an academic framework, namely, by using peer review and editorial quality control, but do not, while attempting to extract open access (OA) or other publication-related fees, is an extremely important topic that affects academics around the globe. Until 2017, global academia relied on two now-defunct Jeffrey Beall “predatory” OA publishing blacklists to select their choice of publishing venue. This paper aims to explore how media has played a role in spinning public impressions about this issue.

The authors focus on a 2017 New York Times article by Gina Kolata, on a selected number of peer reviewed published papers on the topic of “predatory” publications and on an editorial by the Editor-in-Chief of REM, a SciELO- and Scopus-indexed OA journal.

The Kolata article offers biased, inaccurate and potentially misleading information about the state of “predatory” publishing: it relies heavily on the assumption that the now-defunct Beall blacklists were accurate when in fact they are not; it relies on a paper published in a non-predatory (i.e., non-Beall-listed) non-OA journal that claimed incorrectly the existence of financial rewards by faculty members of a Canadian business school from “predatory” publications; it praised a sting operation that used methods of deception and falsification to achieve its conclusions. The authors show how misleading information by the New York Times was transposed downstream via the REM editorial.

Education of academics.

In 2019, Brazil had approximately 53.4 million entrepreneurs, of which 60.2% were start-ups. The contingent of nascent entrepreneurs was 11.1 million people and in just one year it grew 390%, a fact that can be explained, on the one hand, by the beginning of the economic recovery of the country which, although timid, began arousing with the gross domestic product closing the year 2019 with growth of 1.1%, and on the other hand, by the slow cooling of the national unemployment rate that reached 11.0% in the last quarter of 2019 (IBGE, 2019). Women have been occupying an important space in the country's entrepreneurial activities, with an initial specific rate of entrepreneurship (total early-stage entrepreneurial activity (TEA)) of 23.1%, similar to that of men, and established specific rates of entrepreneurship (total establishing entrepreneurial activity (TEE)) of 13.9% (GEM, 2019). Despite the enthusiasm brought by the numbers, it is necessary to pay attention to what are the entrepreneurial activities performed by these women, since in a country like Brazil, transformations brought by innovative thoughts, technological development, and expansion of education are not privileges of the entire population. Besides the differences between genders, even among women, the impact of changes in society occurs in different ways, and the “pure” concept of entrepreneurship, associated with innovation and the creation of new products and services, is valid for only a portion of them, leaving to others the broader concept related to creativity, risk, use of available resources, and economic sustainability in a context where individual characteristics and unfavorable structural conditions are intertwined (Haas, 2013). In this sense, the objective of this work is to present the national reality of female entrepreneurship, contributing with the understanding of who are the Brazilian women entrepreneurs that correspond to these “pure” and broad concepts and, therefore, shed light on new studies and research that can contribute with more accurate diagnoses about these women.

Science policy and practice for open access (OA) books is a rapidly evolving area in the scholarly domain. However, there is much that remains unknown, including how many OA books there are and to what degree they are included in preservation coverage. The purpose of this study is to contribute towards filling this knowledge gap in order to advance both research and practice in the domain of OA books.

This study utilized open bibliometric data sources to aggregate a harmonized dataset of metadata records for OA books (data sources: the Directory of Open Access Books, OpenAIRE, OpenAlex, Scielo Books, The Lens, and WorldCat). This dataset was then cross-matched based on unique identifiers and book titles to openly available content listings of trusted preservation services (data sources: Cariniana Network, CLOCKSS, Global LOCKSS Network, and Portico). The web domains of the OA books were determined by querying the web addresses or digital object identifiers provided in the metadata of the bibliometric database entries.

In total, 396,995 unique records were identified from the OA book bibliometric sources, of which 19% were found to be included in at least one of the preservation services. The results suggest reason for concern for the long tail of OA books distributed at thousands of different web domains as these include volatile cloud storage or sometimes no longer contained the files at all.

Data quality issues, varying definitions of OA across services and inconsistent implementation of unique identifiers were discovered as key challenges. The study includes recommendations for publishers, libraries, data providers and preservation services for improving monitoring and practices for OA book preservation.

This study provides methodological and empirical findings for advancing the practices of OA book publishing, preservation and research.