IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jpubli/v7y2019i2p34-d230597.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ten Hot Topics around Scholarly Publishing

Author

Listed:
  • Jonathan P. Tennant

    (Institute for Globally Distributed Open Research and Education (IGDORE), 75008 Paris, France)

  • Harry Crane

    (Department of Statistics and Biostatistics, Rutgers University, Piscataway, NJ 08901, USA)

  • Tom Crick

    (School of Education, Swansea University, Swansea, SA2 8PP, UK)

  • Jacinto Davila

    (CESIMO, Universidad de Los Andes, Mérida 5101, Venezuela)

  • Asura Enkhbayar

    (Scholarly Communications Lab, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, British Colombia, V6B 5K3, Canada)

  • Johanna Havemann

    (IGDORE, 10115 Berlin, Germany)

  • Bianca Kramer

    (Utrecht University Library, Utrecht University, Utrecht 3512, The Netherlands)

  • Ryan Martin

    (Department of Statistics, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, CA 27607, USA)

  • Paola Masuzzo

    (IGDORE, 9000 Ghent, Belgium)

  • Andy Nobes

    (INASP, Oxford, OX1 1RR, UK)

  • Curt Rice

    (Oslo Metropolitan University, 0010 Oslo, Norway)

  • Bárbara Rivera-López

    (Dirección General de Asuntos Académicos, Universidad de Las Américas, Sede Providencia, Manuel Montt 948, Chile)

  • Tony Ross-Hellauer

    (Institute for Interactive Systems and Data Science, Graz University of Technology and Know-Center GmbH, Graz 8010, Austria)

  • Susanne Sattler

    (National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College London, London, SW3 6LY, UK)

  • Paul D. Thacker

    (Freelance Science Journalist, Madrid, Spain)

  • Marc Vanholsbeeck

    (Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels 1050, Belgium)

Abstract

The changing world of scholarly communication and the emerging new wave of ‘Open Science’ or ‘Open Research’ has brought to light a number of controversial and hotly debated topics. Evidence-based rational debate is regularly drowned out by misinformed or exaggerated rhetoric, which does not benefit the evolving system of scholarly communication. This article aims to provide a baseline evidence framework for ten of the most contested topics, in order to help frame and move forward discussions, practices, and policies. We address issues around preprints and scooping, the practice of copyright transfer, the function of peer review, predatory publishers, and the legitimacy of ‘global’ databases. These arguments and data will be a powerful tool against misinformation across wider academic research, policy and practice, and will inform changes within the rapidly evolving scholarly publishing system.

Suggested Citation

  • Jonathan P. Tennant & Harry Crane & Tom Crick & Jacinto Davila & Asura Enkhbayar & Johanna Havemann & Bianca Kramer & Ryan Martin & Paola Masuzzo & Andy Nobes & Curt Rice & Bárbara Rivera-López & Tony, 2019. "Ten Hot Topics around Scholarly Publishing," Publications, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-24, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jpubli:v:7:y:2019:i:2:p:34-:d:230597
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/7/2/34/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2304-6775/7/2/34/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Moser, Petra & Biasi, Barbara, 2018. "Effects of Copyrights on Science - Evidence from the US Book Republication Program," CEPR Discussion Papers 12651, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    2. Steffen Bernius & Matthias Hanauske & Berndt Dugall & Wolfgang König, 2013. "Exploring the effects of a transition to open access: Insights from a simulation study," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(4), pages 701-726, April.
    3. Mikael Laakso & Andrea Polonioli, 2018. "Open access in ethics research: an analysis of open access availability and author self-archiving behaviour in light of journal copyright restrictions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 291-317, July.
    4. Sarvenaz Sarabipour & Humberto J Debat & Edward Emmott & Steven J Burgess & Benjamin Schwessinger & Zach Hensel, 2019. "On the value of preprints: An early career researcher perspective," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(2), pages 1-12, February.
    5. Marcelo S. Perlin & Takeyoshi Imasato & Denis Borenstein, 2018. "Is predatory publishing a real threat? Evidence from a large database study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 255-273, July.
    6. Richard Owen & Phil Macnaghten & Jack Stilgoe, 2012. "Responsible research and innovation: From science in society to science for society, with society," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 39(6), pages 751-760, December.
    7. Hamid R. Jamali, 2017. "Copyright compliance and infringement in ResearchGate full-text journal articles," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(1), pages 241-254, July.
    8. B. Preedip Balaji & M. Dhanamjaya, 2019. "Preprints in Scholarly Communication: Re-Imagining Metrics and Infrastructures," Publications, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-23, January.
    9. Lisa Matthias & Najko Jahn & Mikael Laakso, 2019. "The Two-Way Street of Open Access Journal Publishing: Flip It and Reverse It," Publications, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-29, April.
    10. Philippe Vincent-Lamarre & Jade Boivin & Yassine Gargouri & Vincent Larivière & Stevan Harnad, 2016. "Estimating open access mandate effectiveness: The MELIBEA score," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 67(11), pages 2815-2828, November.
    11. Richard Van Noorden, 2013. "Open access: The true cost of science publishing," Nature, Nature, vol. 495(7442), pages 426-429, March.
    12. Tony Ross-Hellauer & Birgit Schmidt & Bianca Kramer, 2018. "Are Funder Open Access Platforms a Good Idea?," SAGE Open, , vol. 8(4), pages 21582440188, November.
    13. Cat Ferguson & Adam Marcus & Ivan Oransky, 2014. "Publishing: The peer-review scam," Nature, Nature, vol. 515(7528), pages 480-482, November.
    14. Michael W Carroll, 2011. "Why Full Open Access Matters," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(11), pages 1-3, November.
    15. Leonardo Costa Ribeiro & Márcia Siqueira Rapini & Leandro Alves Silva & Eduardo Motta Albuquerque, 2018. "Growth patterns of the network of international collaboration in science," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(1), pages 159-179, January.
    16. Rafols, Ismael & Ciarli, Tommaso & Chavarro, Diego, 2015. "Under-reporting research relevant to local needs in the global south. Database biases in the representation of knowledge on rice," SocArXiv 3kf9d, Center for Open Science.
    17. Anne-Wil Harzing & Satu Alakangas, 2016. "Google Scholar, Scopus and the Web of Science: a longitudinal and cross-disciplinary comparison," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(2), pages 787-804, February.
    18. Michael W Carroll, 2011. "Why Full Open Access Matters," Working Papers id:4638, eSocialSciences.
    19. Flaminio Squazzoni & Elise Brezis & Ana Marušić, 2017. "Scientometrics of peer review," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 501-502, October.
    20. Alex Csiszar, 2016. "Peer review: Troubled from the start," Nature, Nature, vol. 532(7599), pages 306-308, April.
    21. Jessica K. Polka & Robert Kiley & Boyana Konforti & Bodo Stern & Ronald D. Vale, 2018. "Publish peer reviews," Nature, Nature, vol. 560(7720), pages 545-547, August.
    22. Philippe Mongeon & Adèle Paul-Hus, 2016. "The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 106(1), pages 213-228, January.
    23. Diego Chavarro & Puay Tang & Ismael Rafols, 2014. "Interdisciplinarity and research on local issues: evidence from a developing country," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(3), pages 195-209.
    24. Victoria S S Wong & Lauro Nathaniel Avalos & Michael L Callaham, 2019. "Industry payments to physician journal editors," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(2), pages 1-11, February.
    25. Wang, Yuandi & Hu, Ruifeng & Liu, Meijun, 2017. "The geotemporal demographics of academic journals from 1950 to 2013 according to Ulrich’s database," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(3), pages 655-671.
    26. Steffen Bernius & Matthias Hanauske & Berndt Dugall & Wolfgang König, 2013. "Exploring the effects of a transition to open access: Insights from a simulation study," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 64(4), pages 701-726, April.
    27. Éric Archambault & David Campbell & Yves Gingras & Vincent Larivière, 2009. "Comparing bibliometric statistics obtained from the Web of Science and Scopus," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 60(7), pages 1320-1326, July.
    28. Barbara Biasi & Petra Moser, 2018. "Effects of Copyrights on Science - Evidence from the US Book Republication Program," NBER Working Papers 24255, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    29. Diana Hicks & Paul Wouters & Ludo Waltman & Sarah de Rijcke & Ismael Rafols, 2015. "Bibliometrics: The Leiden Manifesto for research metrics," Nature, Nature, vol. 520(7548), pages 429-431, April.
    30. Aghaei Chadegani, Arezoo & Salehi, Hadi & Md Yunus, Melor & Farhadi, Hadi & Fooladi, Masood & Farhadi, Maryam & Ale Ebrahim, Nader, 2013. "A Comparison between Two Main Academic Literature Collections: Web of Science and Scopus Databases," MPRA Paper 46898, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 18 Mar 2013.
    31. Kendall Powell, 2016. "Does it take too long to publish research?," Nature, Nature, vol. 530(7589), pages 148-151, February.
    32. Bo-Christer Björk & David Solomon, 2015. "Article processing charges in OA journals: relationship between price and quality," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 103(2), pages 373-385, May.
    33. De Camargo, K.R., 2014. "Big publishing and the economics of competition," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 104(1), pages 8-10.
    34. Alonso, S. & Cabrerizo, F.J. & Herrera-Viedma, E. & Herrera, F., 2009. "h-Index: A review focused in its variants, computation and standardization for different scientific fields," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 273-289.
    35. Flaminio Squazzoni & Francisco Grimaldo & Ana Marušić, 2017. "Publishing: Journals could share peer-review data," Nature, Nature, vol. 546(7658), pages 352-352, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Carlos Yure B. Oliveira & Cicero Diogo L. Oliveira & Marius N. Müller & Elizabeth P. Santos & Danielli M. M. Dantas & Alfredo O. Gálvez, 2020. "A Scientometric Overview of Global Dinoflagellate Research," Publications, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-18, November.
    2. Dasapta Erwin Irawan & Juneman Abraham & Rizqy Amelia Zein & Ilham Akhsanu Ridlo & Eric Kunto Aribowo, 2021. "Open Access in Indonesia," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 52(3), pages 651-660, May.
    3. Sandro Serpa & Maria José Sá & Ana Isabel Santos & Carlos Miguel Ferreira, 2020. "Challenges for the Academic Editor in the Scientific Publication," Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, Richtmann Publishing Ltd, vol. 9, May.
    4. J. Israel Martínez-López & Samantha Barrón-González & Alejandro Martínez López, 2019. "Which Are the Tools Available for Scholars? A Review of Assisting Software for Authors during Peer Reviewing Process," Publications, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-28, September.
    5. Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva & Aceil Al-Khatib & Panagiotis Tsigaris, 2020. "Spam emails in academia: issues and costs," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(2), pages 1171-1188, February.
    6. Oswaldo Terán & Jacinto Dávila, 2023. "Simulating and Contrasting the Game of Open Access in Diverse Cultural Contexts: A Social Simulation Model," Publications, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-25, August.
    7. Ping Lou & Dan Yu & Xuemei Jiang & Jiwei Hu & Yuhang Zeng & Chuannian Fan, 2023. "Knowledge Graph Construction Based on a Joint Model for Equipment Maintenance," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(17), pages 1-23, August.
    8. Xu, Fang & Ou, Guiyan & Ma, Tingcan & Wang, Xianwen, 2021. "The consistency of impact of preprints and their journal publications," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2).
    9. Marcel Knöchelmann, 2019. "Open Science in the Humanities, or: Open Humanities?," Publications, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-17, November.
    10. Olivier Pourret & Dasapta Erwin Irawan & Jonathan P. Tennant, 2020. "On the Potential of Preprints in Geochemistry: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-6, April.
    11. Serdar Türkeli & Martine Schophuizen, 2019. "Decomposing the Complexity of Value: Integration of Digital Transformation of Education with Circular Economy Transition," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(8), pages 1-22, August.
    12. Raminta Pranckutė, 2021. "Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-59, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Raminta Pranckutė, 2021. "Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-59, March.
    2. Luisa F. Cabeza & Marta Chàfer & Érika Mata, 2020. "Comparative Analysis of Web of Science and Scopus on the Energy Efficiency and Climate Impact of Buildings," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-24, January.
    3. Waltman, Ludo, 2016. "A review of the literature on citation impact indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 365-391.
    4. Drivas, Kyriakos & Kremmydas, Dimitris, 2020. "The Matthew effect of a journal's ranking," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(4).
    5. Vivek Kumar Singh & Prashasti Singh & Mousumi Karmakar & Jacqueline Leta & Philipp Mayr, 2021. "The journal coverage of Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions: A comparative analysis," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(6), pages 5113-5142, June.
    6. Andrzej Lis & Agata Sudolska & Mateusz Tomanek, 2020. "Mapping Research on Sustainable Supply-Chain Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-26, May.
    7. Sergio Copiello, 2019. "The open access citation premium may depend on the openness and inclusiveness of the indexing database, but the relationship is controversial because it is ambiguous where the open access boundary lie," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(2), pages 995-1018, November.
    8. Wei Ming & Zhenyue Zhao, 2022. "Rethinking the open access citation advantage: Evidence from the “reverse‐flipping” journals," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(11), pages 1608-1620, November.
    9. Michael Gusenbauer, 2022. "Search where you will find most: Comparing the disciplinary coverage of 56 bibliographic databases," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(5), pages 2683-2745, May.
    10. Cathaysa Martín-Blanco & Montserrat Zamorano & Carmen Lizárraga & Valentin Molina-Moreno, 2022. "The Impact of COVID-19 on the Sustainable Development Goals: Achievements and Expectations," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-25, December.
    11. Dalia El Khaled & Nuria Novas & Jose-Antonio Gazquez & Francisco Manzano-Agugliaro, 2018. "Dielectric and Bioimpedance Research Studies: A Scientometric Approach Using the Scopus Database," Publications, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-16, January.
    12. Dag W. Aksnes & Liv Langfeldt & Paul Wouters, 2019. "Citations, Citation Indicators, and Research Quality: An Overview of Basic Concepts and Theories," SAGE Open, , vol. 9(1), pages 21582440198, February.
    13. Anne K. Krüger, 2020. "Quantification 2.0? Bibliometric Infrastructures in Academic Evaluation," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 58-67.
    14. Hugo Baier-Fuentes & José M. Merigó & José Ernesto Amorós & Magaly Gaviria-Marín, 2019. "International entrepreneurship: a bibliometric overview," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 385-429, June.
    15. Saïd Echchakoui, 2020. "Why and how to merge Scopus and Web of Science during bibliometric analysis: the case of sales force literature from 1912 to 2019," Journal of Marketing Analytics, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(3), pages 165-184, September.
    16. Mark Bukowski & Sandra Geisler & Thomas Schmitz-Rode & Robert Farkas, 2020. "Feasibility of activity-based expert profiling using text mining of scientific publications and patents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 123(2), pages 579-620, May.
    17. Saïd Echchakoui, 0. "Why and how to merge Scopus and Web of Science during bibliometric analysis: the case of sales force literature from 1912 to 2019," Journal of Marketing Analytics, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 0, pages 1-20.
    18. Victor Tiberius & Meike Rietz & Ricarda B. Bouncken, 2020. "Performance Analysis and Science Mapping of Institutional Entrepreneurship Research," Administrative Sciences, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-21, September.
    19. Andrés Martínez-Medina & Sonia Morales-Calvo & Vicenta Rodríguez-Martín & Víctor Meseguer-Sánchez & Valentín Molina-Moreno, 2022. "Sixteen Years since the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities: What Have We Learned since Then?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(18), pages 1-21, September.
    20. Andre Bruns & Niels Taubert, 2021. "Investigating the Blind Spot of a Monitoring System for Article Processing Charges," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-9, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jpubli:v:7:y:2019:i:2:p:34-:d:230597. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.