Research Publication Characteristics and Their Relative Values: A Report for the Publishing Research Consortium (original) (raw)
RQF Publication Quality Measures: Methodological Issues
2007
The Research Quality Framework uses Thomson-ISI citation benchmarks as its main set of objective measures of research quality. The Thomson-ISI measures rely on identifying a core set of journals in which the major publications for a discipline are to be found. The core for a discipline is determined by applying a nontransparent process that is partly based on Bradford’s Law (1934). Yet Bradford was not seeking measures about quality of publications or journals. How valid then is it to base measures of publication quality on Bradford’s Law? We explore this by returning to Bradford’s Law and subsequent related research asking ‘what is Bradford’s Law really about?’ We go further, and ask ‘does Bradford’s Law apply in Information Systems?’ We use data from John Lamp’s internationally respected Index of Information Systems Journals to explore the latter question. We have found that Information Systems may have a core of journals only a subset of which is also in the list of Thomson-ISI j...
Turning good research into good publications
Nankai Business Review International, 2013
Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to provide a basic list of items that many standard empirical papers need and to highlight some common and fixable problems, as well as some corresponding suggestions and solutions such that authors can turn good research into good papers that have an improved chance of publication. Design/methodology/approach -This paper is a conceptual study on publishing, though it draws heavily on two of the authors' experience as editors of major management journals and their past work on paper organization and research design. A number of helpful resources for authors have also been provided from the academic literature -both journals and books -so that this paper can be a helpful resource to authors in organizing and preparing their work to submit to an appropriate journal.
Quality of research: which underlying values?
Scientometrics, 2013
Traditional bibliometric indicators are considered too limited for some research areas such as humanities and social sciences because they mostly reveal a specific aspect of academic performance (quantity of publications) and tend to ignore a significant part of research production. The frequent misuses (e.g. improper generalizations) of bibliometric measures results in a substantial part of the research community failing to consider the exact nature of bibliometric measures. This study investigates the links between practices for assessing academic performance, bibliometric methods' use and underlying values of research quality within the scientific community of University of Lausanne, Switzerland. Findings reveal four researcher profiles depending on research orientations and goals, ranging from those using "pure" quantitative tools to those using more subjective and personal techniques. Each profile is characterized according to disciplinary affiliation, tenure, academic function as well as commitment to quality values.
PUBLISHING PREFERENCES AMONG ACADEMIC RESEARCHERS: IMPLICATIONS FOR ACADEMIC QUALITY AND INNOVATION
The purpose of this paper was to explore the factors responsible for publication preferences among a select group of researchers attending a research writing workshop in Ghana. The objectives were to investigate the specific motivations for publishing; to explore the factors that influence researchers’ journal selection decisions; and availability of in-house programmes for journal publishing. The population of the study consisted of researchers from several academic institutions in Ghana who attended a research writing workshop. The research made use of the convenience sampling method to select a total of 67 researchers to participate in the study. The study used a self-administered closed-ended questionnaire consisting of 13 items and analysed using the mean test, standard deviation and simple percentages. The study found that researchers consider “contribution to scholarship” as the main motivation for publishing even though job mobility is a major source of motivation. Again, the major factor influencing journal selection decision is journal reputation. However, many researchers indicated a high preference for journals that does not charge publication fees. Finally, most respondents do not benefit from in-house research development programmes. The study recommends the development of in-house academic publishing programmes that are researcher-centred; the development of new of enhancement of existing research mentoring schemes, the issuance of “standalone” low quality journals; and the need for researchers to consider both intrinsic and extrinsic factors in their quest to become quality researchers.
Perceived journal quality: an indicator of research quality (editorial)
2008
Jennifer Fenwick ePublications@ SCU is an electronic repository administered by Southern Cross University Library. Its goal is to capture and preserve the intellectual output of Southern Cross University authors and researchers, and to increase visibility and impact through open access to researchers around the world. For further information please contact epubs@ scu. edu. au.
Comparative Study of Various Research Indices used to measure quality of Research Publications
The success of research projects funded by various agencies can be evaluated by studying the research publications generated from those projects and the research publications can be evaluated using impact factors and citation indices. There are several citation indices commonly used to assess the value/quality of a research publication or the research impact of an author or a journal. Research indices are calculated based on either citation values of research publications of a research scholar or the number of research papers published by a research scholar for a given period. There are many research indices developed by many types of research which include H-index, i10-index, G-index, H(2)-index, HG-index, Q2 -index, AR-index, M-quotient, M-index, W-index, Hw-index, E-index, A-index, R-index, W-index, J-index, etc. Out of these citation based research indices, h-index, G-index and i10-index are commonly used in some of the citation databases. Researchers have also studied the problems and limitations associated with these indices. In this paper, we have discussed the most popular research indices presently used which include h-index, G-index, and i-10-index along with their advantages, benefits, constraints, and disadvantages. Most of the research indices are calculated based on number of citations a paper receives. The major limitation of this model is that the citations usually increase with an increase in time even after the researcher dies, the citations and hence the indices continue to grow. It is argued that due to various reasons, a research publication may not attract citations initially for some years and after ten to twenty years some papers may attract citations. The best method of identifying the contribution to research is calculating the annual research index for an author by considering the annual research publications. Accordingly, based on annual research index of an author, his average research contribution for five years, or ten years, or twenty years or any desired period can be determined. Here, we have suggested some of the new research indices to be used for calculating research productivity of individuals as well as a team of people in an organization. The paper also contains some of our newly proposed indices including ARP-Index – (Annual Research Publication Index), RC-Index – (Research Continuation Index), RE-Index (Research expansion Index), Project Productivity Index, and Cost Index and the method of calculating these indices along with their advantages and limitations.
Measures for the Quality of Individual Articles, Authors and Journals
International Journal of …, 2010
Journal impact factors are not representatives of the quality measures of individual journal articles, authors and quality factor of journals. Hence, due to the high necessity of quality measures, this paper presents new quality measures for journals, authors and individual journal articles.
Research Process and the Value of Publishing in High Impact Scholarly Journals: Prospect for Authors
Research Article, 2021
Scholarly journals are still the most important media for disseminating product of research information concerned with transmission of correct results on right time and to right audience. Nowadays, researchers are faced with variety of challenges due to not observing ethics and rules of publication in high impact journals. Communicating research findings is an essential step in the research process. This article employed the philosophical assumptions of the Constructivism with focus on complexity, richness, multiple interpretations and meaning-making inductively through an Integrative Literature Review which was used to develop this conceptual paper. The aim of the article is to explore the different stages in research process using the Onion Model, to help researchers create a better organised methodology and avoid plagiarism and to extensively describe the basic structure of a research article, identifying the common pitfalls and recommend strategies to avoid them. Importance of literature review and its types such as Narrative, Systematic, Argumentative, Integrative and Theoretical literature review and choice of methodology are also discussed. Further, the article describes the review process for publishing scientific research and ways of identifying predatory publishers and journals. The article concludes that peer-reviewed journals are the forum for communicating research findings, and recommend that researchers should give more concern to principles and ethics of how to write a publishable paper in indexed journals and avoid plagiarism and predatory.
Being published in reputable academic and scientific journals: Key criteria for acceptance
International Journal of Higher Education Management, 2018
Purpose: In scholarly journal publication, blind peer review has become an integral part of the process that helps maintain the standard and quality of academic papers that are accepted for publication. The main purpose of this study was to understand the reasons for the acceptance or rejection of a manuscript by analysing the reviewers' comments based on the ratings on eight specific areas of concern and their written comments. Research method: The study was based on a content analysis of 248 reviewers' comments for a total of 160 manuscripts. These papers were submitted to an academic journal between September 2017 and February 2018. 62 reviewers' comments were analysed for 32 manuscripts that were accepted, and 186 reviewers' comments were analysed for the 93 papers that were rejected. The reasons for desk rejections were analysed for the remaining 35 manuscripts. Findings: The study has identified the most important reasons for acceptance based on their rating and these are: adequacy of literature review, research methodology/study design, structure of the paper, quality of the writing, quality of the problem formulation, discussions and conclusions, findings and quality of analysis, importance/relevance, title & abstract and research contribution to the body of knowledge. The main reasons for rejections are: poor discussion & conclusions section, substandard quality of writing, poorly structured paper, weak study design/methodological issues, lack of research gap, poorly developed literature review among others. Conclusion: Structural problems are one of the most salient issues for the manuscript. While the context of the manuscripts is generally reasonably well developed, many authors seemed to overlook or ignore areas such as use of the English language, accurate punctuation, structure of the paper that includes poorly developed tables, figures and diagrams, inappropriate citation and list of references, unsuitable research instruments and poorly developed critical review of literature. Originality/value-The study is original and contributes to the body of knowledge as it provides insight into reasons for acceptance and rejection of a manuscript based on the contentment analysis of 160 manuscripts. This will provide guidelines to the authors with valuable information on the ways in which they can develop their manuscripts with a view to increasing the likelihood of acceptance by a peer reviewed scholarly journal.
In this article we examine what motivations influence academic authors in selecting a journal in which to publish. A survey was sent to approximately 15,000 faculty, graduate students, and postdoctoral researchers at four large North American research universities with a response rate of 14.4% (n = 2021). Respondents were asked to rate how eight different journal attributes and five different audiences influence their choice of publication output. Within the sample, the most highly rated attributes are quality and reputation of journal and fit with the scope of the journal; open access is the least important attribute. Researchers at other research-intensive institutions are considered the most important audience, while the general public is the least important. There are significant differences across subject disciplines and position types. Our findings have implications for understanding the adoption of open access publishing models.
ecancermedicalscience, 2017
This study identifies the personal and professional profiles of researchers with a greater potential to publish high-impact academic articles. Method: The study involved conducting an international survey of journal authors using a web-based questionnaire. The survey examined personal characteristics, funding, and the perceived barriers of research quality, work-life balance, and satisfaction and motivation in relation to career. The processes of manuscript writing and journal publication were measured using an online questionnaire that was developed for this study. The responses were compared between the two groups of researchers using logistic regression models. Results: A total of 269 questionnaires were analysed. The researchers shared some common perceptions; both groups reported that they were seeking recognition (or to be leaders in their areas) rather than financial remuneration. Furthermore, both groups identified time and funding constraints as the main obstacles to their scientific activities. The amount of time that was spent on research activities, having >5 graduate students under supervision, never using text editing services prior to the publication of articles, and living in a developed and English-speaking country were the independent variables that were associated with their article getting a greater chance of publishing in a high-impact journal. In contrast, using one's own resources to perform studies decreased the chance of publishing in high-impact journals. Conclusions: The researchers who publish in high-impact journals have distinct profiles compared with the researchers who publish in low-impact journals. English language abilities and the actual amount of time that is dedicated to research and scientific writing, as well as aspects that relate to the availability of financial resources are the factors that are associated with a successful researcher's profile.
Understanding the metrics used to assess the quality of journals
International Journal Of Community Medicine And Public Health
Various databases offer access to thousands of academic journals. A miscellaneous picture with respect to quality, scientific influence and prestige is presented by umpteen numbers of journals present. Authors wishing to publish their research aim to publish in journals with the highest ratings and are ultimately in no man’s land.
Scientific evaluation of the scholarly publications
Journal of Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapeutics, 2013
Worthiness of any scientific journal is measured by the quality of the articles published in it. The Impact factor (IF) is one popular tool which analyses the quality of journal in terms of citations received by its published articles. It is usually assumed that journals with high IF carry meaningful, prominent, and quality research. Since IF does not assess a single contribution but the whole journal, the evaluation of research authors should not be influenced by the IF of the journal. The h index, g index, m quotient, c index are some other alternatives to judge the quality of an author. These address the shortcomings of IF viz. number of citations received by an author, active years of publication, length of academic career and citations received for recent articles. Quality being the most desirable aspect for evaluating an author's work over the active research phase, various indices has attempted to accommodate different possible variables. However, each index has its own merits and demerits. We review the available indices, find the fallacies and to correct these, hereby propose the Original Research Performance Index (ORPI) for evaluation of an author's original work which can also take care of the bias arising because of self-citations, gift authorship, inactive phase of research, and length of non-productive period in research.
Measuring the quality of publications: new methodology and case study
Information Processing & Management, 2000
In practice, it is important to evaluate the quality of research, in order to make decisions on tenure, funding, and so on. This article develops a methodology using citations to measure the quality of journals, proceedings, and book publishers. (Citations are also used by the Science and Social Science Citation Indexes, published by the Institute for Scienti®c Information (ISI), but these Indexes do not cover proceedings, books, and certain journals.) The novel methodology uses statistical sampling, bootstrapping, and classi®cation. This methodology is applied to the ®eld of Information Systems. In this case-study, class-1 turns out to consist of three journals Ð MIS Quarterly, Management Science, and Communications of the ACM Ð and two proceedings Ð VLDB and SIGMOD. The class-1 publishers are Springer, Wiley, and Addison-Wesley. Moreover, hundreds of other journals etc. are classi®ed into a small number of classes. 7
Bibliometric Indicators for Evaluating the Quality of Scientific Publications
The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice, 2014
Evaluation of quality and quantity of publications can be done using a set of statistical and mathematical indices called bibliometric indicators. Two major categories of indicators are (1) quantitative indicators that measure the research productivity of a researcher and (2) performance indicators that evaluate the quality of publications. Bibliometric indicators are important for both the individual researcher and organizations. They are widely used to compare the performance of the individual researchers, journals and universities. Many of the appointments, promotions and allocation of research funds are based on these indicators. This review article describes some of the currently used bibliometric indicators such as journal impact factor, crown indicator, h-index and it's variants. It is suggested that for comparison of scientific impact and scientific output of researchers due consideration should be given to various factors affecting theses indicators. How to cite this ar...