2,596 research outputs found
Open access self-archiving: An author study
No full textThis, our second author international, cross-disciplinary study on open access had 1296 respondents. Its focus was on self-archiving. Almost half (49%) of the respondent population have self-archived at least one article during the last three years. Use of institutional repositories for this purpose has doubled and usage has increased by almost 60% for subject-based repositories. Self-archiving activity is greatest amongst those who publish the largest number of papers. There is still a substantial proportion of authors unaware of the possibility of providing open access to their work by self-archiving. Of the authors who have not yet self-archived any articles, 71% remain unaware of the option. With 49% of the author population having self-archived in some way, this means that 36% of the total author population (71% of the remaining 51%), has not yet been appraised of this way of providing open access. Authors have frequently expressed reluctance to self-archive because of the perceived time required and possible technical difficulties in carrying out this activity, yet findings here show that only 20% of authors found some degree of difficulty with the first act of depositing an article in a repository, and that this dropped to 9% for subsequent deposits. Another author worry is about infringing agreed copyright agreements with publishers, yet only 10% of authors currently know of the SHERPA/RoMEO list of publisher permissions policies with respect to self-archiving, where clear guidance as to what a publisher permits is provided. Where it is not known if permission is required, however, authors are not seeking it and are self-archiving without it. Communicating their results to peers remains the primary reason for scholars publishing their work; in other words,
researchers publish to have an impact on their field. The vast majority of authors (81%) would willingly comply with a mandate from their employer or research funder to deposit copies of their articles in an institutional or subject-based repository. A further 13% would comply reluctantly; 5% would not comply with such a mandate
ISC/OSI Journal Authors Survey Report
No full textOn behalf of the Joint Information Systems Committee (JISC) and the Open Society Institute (OSI) a survey of journal authors has been carried out by Key Perspectives Ltd. The terms of reference were to poll a cohort of authors who had published on an open access basis and another cohort of authors who had published their work in conventional journals without making the article available on open access. The survey’s aims were to investigate the authors’ awareness of new open access possibilities, the ease of identification of and submission to open access outlets, their experiences of publishing their work in this way, their concerns about any implications open access publishing may have upon their careers, and the reasons why (or not) they chose to publish through an open access outlet
Self-archiving practice and the influence of publisher policies in the social sciences
No full textAuthors in different disciplines exhibit very different behaviours on the so-called ‘green’ road to open access, i.e. self-archiving. This study looks at the self-archiving behaviour of authors publishing in leading journals in six social science disciplines. It tests the hypothesis that authors are self-archiving according to the norms of their respective disciplines rather than following self-archiving policies of publishers, and that, as a result, they are self-archiving significant numbers of publisher PDF versions. It finds significant levels of
self-archiving, as well as significant self-archiving of
the publisher PDF version, in all the disciplines
investigated. Publishers’ self-archiving policies have
no influence on author self-archiving practice
Open access self-archiving: An Introduction
No full textThis, our second author international, cross-disciplinary study on open access had 1296 respondents. Its focus was on self-archiving. Almost half (49%) of the respondent population have self-archived at least one article during the last three years. Use of institutional repositories for this purpose has doubled and usage has increased by almost 60% for subject-based repositories. Self-archiving activity is greatest amongst those who publish the largest number of papers. There is still a substantial proportion of authors unaware of the possibility of providing open access to their work by self-archiving. Of the authors who have not yet self-archived any articles, 71% remain unaware of the option. With 49% of the author population having self-archived in some way, this means that 36% of the total author population (71% of the remaining 51%), has not yet been appraised of this way of providing open access. Authors have frequently expressed reluctance to self-archive because of the perceived time required and possible technical difficulties in carrying out this activity, yet findings here show that only 20% of authors found some degree of difficulty with the first act of depositing an article in a repository, and that this dropped to 9% for subsequent deposits. Another author worry is about infringing agreed copyright agreements with publishers, yet only 10% of authors currently know of the SHERPA/RoMEO list of publisher permissions policies with respect to self-archiving, where clear guidance as to what a publisher permits is provided. Where it is not known if permission is required, however, authors are not seeking it and are self-archiving without it. Communicating their results to peers remains the primary reason for scholars publishing their work; in other words, researchers publish to have an impact on their field. The vast majority of authors (81%) would willingly comply with a mandate from their employer or research funder to deposit copies of their articles in an institutional or subject-based repository. A further 13% would comply reluctantly; 5% would not comply with such a mandate.
In a separate exercise we asked the American Physical Society (APS) and the Institute of Physics Publishing Ltd (IOPP) what their experiences have been over the 14 years that arXiv has been in existence. How many subscriptions have been lost as a result of arXiv? Both societies said they could not identify any losses of subscriptions for this reason and that they do not view arXiv as a threat to their business (rather the opposite -- this in fact the APS helped establish an arXiv mirror site at the Brookhaven National Laboratory)
33 Tips to Maximize Articles’ Citation Frequency
No full textThe number of citations contributes to over 30% in the university rankings. Therefore, most of the scientists are looking for an effective method to increase their citation record. On the other hand, increase research visibility in the academic world in order to receive comments and citations from fellow researchers across the globe, is essential.
Publishing a high quality paper in scientific journals is only the mid point towards receiving citation in the future. The balance of the journey is completed by disseminating the publications by using the proper “Research Tools”. This presentation provides 33 different tips for increasing the citation frequencies.Cite as: Nader Ale Ebrahim. "33 Tips to Maximize Articles’ Citation Frequency" Equitable Society Research Cluster (ESRC)-Research Seminar 2014. Eastin Hotel, Petaling Jaya, Malaysia. Jun. 2014. Available at: http://works.bepress.com/aleebrahim/8
Are Library and Information Science Journals Becoming More Internationalized? A Longitudinal Study of Authors' Geographical Affiliations in 20 LIS Journals from 1981 to 2003
No full textThis paper examines journal publications in the field of library and information science (LIS) to assess the level of
internationalization in their publications authorship pattern. The international production and communication of
scholarly knowledge is crucial to the growth of a discipline. Recent advancement in communication technology and the rise of globalization have led to the hope of a more balanced flow of scientific knowledge. Nevertheless, scholars also cautioned the possibility of a global digital divide and a widening knowledge gap. This study analyzed the geographical affiliations of authors in 20 international LIS journals to track the longitudinal changes in LIS authorship pattern. Findings suggest an increase in the internationalization of LIS authorships over the years. However, the LIS authorship distribution was still highly uneven in 2003 (Gini coefficient = 0.95). Economic power is still found to be a moderate predictor of publication performance. The findings of this study suggest that, at the moment of the writing, there is still room for the LIS field to be more internationalized. Further research is needed to identify the barriers in international scholarly communication and to explore the implications of such a communication pattern on scientific development and global equality
Readers’ attitudes to self-archiving in the UK
No full textThe online self-archiving by authors of their scholarly articles has been proposed as an alternative to author-pays open access publication, but has the potential to undermine journal publisher income if the ready availability of self-archived articles leads to a drop in subscriptions. This study investigated the awareness of self-archiving and use of self-archived articles in a survey of a mainly academic population including both authors and non-authors, and looks at their attitudes to self-archived papers and whether they view them as an authoritative alternative to subscription access. In total, 70% of respondents had heard of self-archiving, though only 15% knew a lot about it, and 71% had used self-archived papers. These proportions are higher than in previous studies, suggesting that awareness has grown. Most self-archived papers used came from websites rather than repositories, particularly among those whose awareness of self-archiving was low. Use of self-archived articles was greater amongst those who had published more papers and also depended strongly on subject field – use and awareness were both particularly low in the field of medicine. People who were more aware of self-archiving were less likely to view the publisher’s official version as the only authoritative version and more likely not to care about the online location of articles. Moreover, authors who had self-archived tended to archive the publisher’s official version regardless of whether they were permitted to. These results suggest that the awareness of self-archiving is currently mostly limited to academic authors and is unlikely to grow beyond this in the short term. However, in the long term, the combination of high rates of self-archiving of the publisher’s official version, coupled with the devaluation of the journal as the authoritative source of material together with increased convenience of access to self-archived material, could result in fewer people accessing articles through subscription-based methods
表紙・目次・ほか(33(1/2):2008)
No full textAuthor Index (Vol. 33, No.1, 2) , SUbject Index (Vol. 33, No.1, 2) , INFORMATION FOR AUTHORS含むOthersapplication/pdfothe
Research fronts in library and information science in Spain
No full textPublications and author cocitations in library and information science in Spain during the period from 1985 to 1994 were analyzed as a measure of the structure, specificity and composition of research fronts in this country. A cocitation matrix developed from an ad hoc database was subjected to cluster analysis, multidimensional scaling and principal components analysis, The resulting cocitation maps identified specific areas of r~search and their knowledge bases. We inferred the degree of consolidation of the discipline of library and information science, and of the subdisciplines informetrics, librarianship and university affiliation, from the research activities revealed. In this respect, the conclusions from the study show the existence of several research fronts in Spanish literature the contents of which are in most cases difficult to compare with those in other countries. A lesser degree of maturity of research in this field is shown
Theoretical studies of the historical development of the accounting discipline: a review and evidence
No full textMany existing studies of the development of accounting thought have either been atheoretical or have adopted Kuhn's model of scientific growth. The limitations of this 35-year-old model are discussed. Four different general neo-Kuhnian models of scholarly knowledge development are reviewed and compared with reference to an analytical matrix. The models are found to be mutually consistent, with each focusing on a different aspect of development. A composite model is proposed. Based on a hand-crafted database, author co-citation analysis is used to map empirically the entire literature structure of the accounting discipline during two consecutive time periods, 1972–81 and 1982–90. The changing structure of the accounting literature is interpreted using the proposed composite model of scholarly knowledge development
- …
