A space to explore, share and shape the issues facing social and behavioral scientists
An investigation by Undark and Retraction Watch finds that some journals’ special issue are being targeted by academic paper mills.
Historically, there has been a tight link between journals, journal publications and a community of scholars working in specific fields of research who contribute to and manage them. Aileen Fyfe asks if we should rethink the structure of the learned societies that underpins this.
Drawing on a recent survey of forty years of research papers in the field of Science and Technology Studies (STS) and interviews with authors, Wolfgang Kaltenbrunner, Kean Birch, Thed van Leeuwen and Maria Amuchastegui observe an increasing homogenization of published work. Weighing up the pros and cons of this development, they discuss whether it has enhanced or limited intellectual innovations in STS.
Using a dataset of journals from the field of business, management, and accounting research, Julián D. Cortés explores how the title and aims and purposes varies across journal, prestige, geography and publication model.
Getting named on a journal article is the ultimate prize for an aspiring academic. Not only do they get the paper on their CV (which can literally be money in the bank), but once named, all the subsequent citations accrue to each co-author equally, no matter what their contribution.
In the latest iteration of a survey series she’s been running for four decades, Carol Tenopir aims to assess the value of access to scholarly journals by examining patterns of use and reading. Your input is sought.
No one ever assumed that everything in print was trustworthy, says Virginia Barbour, and neither should that be the case for open access content. Content is what matters – whether delivered by open access, subscription publishing, or a printed document.
When McDonald’s came under sustained criticism from campaigners in the 1980s, the company responded by constructing a carefully crafted image […]
While preparing for a panel on the subject at APSA this week, political scientist Erik Voeten looks over the launch of the open access and peer-reviewed journal ‘Research & Politics’ and discusses the opportunities and challenges of this kind of publishing.
Academic publishing creates incentives to simplify results, cull aberrations and focus on the exciting — often to the detriment of good research. Could more open access allows us to be good and boring?
The signatories of the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment continue to explore ways to dethrone the reigning monarch of research assessment, the impact factor.
It’s time for a broader dialogue about how we connect the aims of the social science enterprise to our system of journals, argues the editor of Administrative Science Quarterly.
