The Author Challenge: Identification of Self in the Scholarly Literature

Considering the expansion of research output across the globe, along with the growing demand for quantitative tracking of research outcomes by government authorities and research institutions, the challenges of author identity are increasing. In recent years, a number of initiatives to help solve the author “name game” have been launched from all areas of the scholarly information market space. This article introduces the various author identification tools and services Thomson Reuters provides, including Distinct Author Sets and ResearcherID—which reflect a combination of automated clustering and author participation—as well as the use of other data types, such as grants and patents, to expand the universe of author identification. Industry-wide initiatives such as the Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID) are also described. Future author-related developments in ResearcherID and Thomson Reuters Web of Knowledge are also included.     

Research workflow skills for education doctoral students and postdocs: A qualitative study

This paper is a qualitative study of how doctoral students and post-doctoral researchers construct their research workflows. The purpose of this study is to examine how doctoral students are constructing their scholarly workflows and to recommend best practices for supporting such early-career scholars. This study will also provide preliminary answers to these questions to help with programming, training, and identifying how academic libraries can support doctoral students and postdoc research work.     

2021年《出版与印刷》编委会暨出版与印刷学术研讨会成功召开

文章解读美国国家信息标准协会（NISO）制定的贡献者角色分类（CRediT）标准,分析中外学术期刊标注“作者贡献声明”的实例,揭示从研究到论文出版各个阶段研究者的贡献角色及其分工。建议学术期刊通过实行贡献者角色分类,明确论文署名作者的实际贡献并承担相应的署名诚信责任,促进科研诚信良性循环。     

Do altmetrics point to the broader impact of research? An overview of benefits and disadvantages of altmetrics

Today, it is not clear how the impact of research on other areas of society than science should be measured. While peer review and bibliometrics have become standard methods for measuring the impact of research in science, there is not yet an accepted framework within which to measure societal impact. Alternative metrics (called altmetrics to distinguish them from bibliometrics) are considered an interesting option for assessing the societal impact of research, as they offer new ways to measure (public) engagement with research output. Altmetrics is a term to describe web-based metrics for the impact of publications and other scholarly material by using data from social media platforms (e.g. Twitter or Mendeley). This overview of studies explores the potential of altmetrics for measuring societal impact. It deals with the definition and classification of altmetrics. Furthermore, their benefits and disadvantages for measuring impact are discussed.     

Is saying ‘sorry’ enough? examining the effects of apology typologies by organizations on consumer responses

Apology has been found to be the most effective strategy in times of crises. However, there is a dearth of research on the kinds of apology used and how primary stakeholders, in particular consumers, received them. This study aims to examine consumer responses to the types of apologies offered post crises against the levels of attribution of responsibility. We also assess the potential mediating role of ethical concerns by developing the Perception-Behavioral Model of Crisis Response. An experiment was conducted to ascertain consumers’ impression of the organization post-apology. The results showed that the attribution of crisis responsibility significantly influences complaining, withholding and negative word-of-mouth behaviors. However, a very high degree of apology issued by the organization does not necessarily translate to reduced negative responses from consumers in light of the large attribution of responsibility. Finally, the Perception-Behavioral Model of Crisis Response suggests that ethical concerns can mediate negative behavioral intentions from consumers.     

The competitive advantage of nations: An application to academia

Within the field of bibliometrics, there is sustained interest in how nations “compete” in terms of academic disciplines, and what determinants explain why countries may have a specific advantage in one discipline over another. However, this literature has not, to date, presented a comprehensive structured model that could be used in the interpretation of a country's research profile and academic output. In this paper, we use frameworks from international business and economics to present such a model.Our study makes four major contributions. First, we include a very wide range of countries and disciplines, explicitly including the Social Sciences, which unfortunately are excluded in most bibliometrics studies. Second, we apply theories of revealed comparative advantage and the competitive advantage of nations to academic disciplines. Third, we cluster our 34 countries into five different groups that have distinct combinations of revealed comparative advantage in five major disciplines. Finally, based on our empirical work and prior literature, we present an academic diamond that details factors likely to explain a country's research profile and competitiveness in certain disciplines.     

JIME: an interactive journal for interactive media

How can new media positively transform scholarly practices? In this article, we describe the Journal of Interactive Media in Education (JIME). JIME's peer-review process is designed to promote multidisciplinary dialogue through the use of a purpose-designed web document–discussion interface. This innovative peer-review model and the resulting enriched digital documents illustrate some of the possibilities for promoting knowledge construction and preserving intellectual products in digital scholarly publications. We present JIME's technical infrastructure, editorial policy, and peer-review process, and discuss how these features are used to support the journal's goals. Finally, we conclude by considering what aspects of our approach might be suitable for e-journals in other disciplines.     

University press publishing and the ecology of disciplinary fluidity: General observations

Academic book and journal publishing constitutes the majority focus of university presses. Besides commercial scholarly publishers, academic scholars and researchers view the opportunities provided by university presses as important venues for the dissemination of their research. This discussion focuses on the disciplinary imperative to publish scholarship that is ever more fluid and specialized as academic disciplines continue to become further nuanced in their response to the increasing knowledge produced by humanities and social science inquiry. The focus is on university presses and not commercial scholarly presses, although constitute a significant locus of scholarly publishing. What are the general characteristics of academic specialization and university press publishing? Further, how is disciplinary fluidity, especially evolving specialization, reflected in university press book publishing nomenclature and how scholarship is tied to the intellectual preoccupations of academic specialization? Multi- and inter-disciplinarities further articulate disciplinary publishing, accelerating disciplinary fluidity. Examples from disciplinary and emerging configurations of disciplinary nomenclature utilized by university presses offers insight into specialization and publishing. Academic history publishing is used to illustrate newly emerging fluid disciplinary configurations.     

Librarians as Research Partners: Their Contribution to the Scholarly Endeavour Beyond Library and Information Science

Academic libraries are increasingly called upon to demonstrate their value to their home institutions. Research collaboration with faculty resulting in the co-authorship of scholarly output is one possible way to demonstrate the alignment of the library with the institutional mission. Involvement in research also improves librarians' skills in offering research support services. This study explores the contribution of librarians to scholarly journals in fields other than Library and Information Science (LIS) as well as their collaboration practices with researchers in those fields. Results show an increasing number of papers published by library-affiliated authors in non-LIS journals between 2006 and 2015. The papers fall broadly into four areas: articles on topics related to LIS published in non-LIS journals; higher education and information literacy; systematic reviews and meta-analysis; and research collaboration in the faculty's areas of expertise. The study is limited by the difficulty in properly retrieving the scholarly output of librarians from bibliographic databases and the difficulty in ascertaining their contributions to published articles.     

Beginning to See the Light

SUMMARY

As the proliferation of electronic content continues, the need to get a better handle on how we communicate about the management of these resources has grown. In many instances, these processes and workflows have a basis in print resource workflow management. However, the discourse used to describe print resource management is not fully transferable to the management of electronic resources. With the rapid development of open-source software, ubiquitous acceptance of sophisticated integrated library systems, and emerging digital standards, new models for workflow and processing of electronic resources are emerging. Drawn from the discourse used in other disciplines, this paper explores ways to create a discourse of electronic resource management to better enable the development of a more universal management scheme for electronic resources.     

The changed – and changing – landscape of serials publishing: Review of the literature on emerging models

This article presents an up‐to‐date portrayal of the greatly changed landscape of scholarly journal publishing and identifies the emerging trends characterizing it. We consider the attributes, novelty, and disruptive potential of different models, which range from improvements to the extant model to attempts at reconfiguration and transformation. We propose that journal transition can be seen as falling into three categories. The first is enhanced models of the traditional scholarly journal, which typically afford enriched functionality that breaks the bonds of the printed page whilst otherwise remaining wholly traditional in their offerings. The second category is innovative models of the traditional scholarly journal, which aim at supporting the journal in performing its traditional roles through convention‐altering ways. The third category is the possible alternatives to the traditional journal, which represent a move towards alternative modes of knowledge dissemination. This review shows that each of the models identified makes contributions to enriching the reporting and showcasing of scholarly output. They also make it more effective and more efficient. However, we conclude that none of the possible alternatives being discussed can serve as a full‐fledged alternative to the journal.     

Open Access Publishing in Business Research: The Authors’ Perspective

Open access (OA) publishing is now accepted as an integral part of the emerging trends within scholarly communication. Business librarians, like their subject specialist colleagues in other disciplines, are increasingly called upon to interpret scholarly communication trends to their faculty. This study surveys 1,293 business faculty from American schools of business accredited by the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business. Issues explored include business faculty publishing practices within the discipline and how these affect academic advancement, obtaining articles for their own research, electronic publishing, self-archiving, and their perceptions about OA publishing generally.     

Scholarly Publishing in Korea: Language,Perception, Practice of Korean University Faculty

This study reports how internationalization of academic knowledge is reflected in the language choice of Korean academic journals across disciplines and examines perceptions and practices of eighty two faculty from various disciplines at three Korean universities concerning publishing in English journals. The results indicate that natural science has the highest percentage of English-medium journals whereas those in humanities and social science predominantly use Korean as a medium of publication. Similar disciplinary patterns are observed in the responses to survey questions about frequency of publication as well as desire and preference for publishing papers in English. The biggest motivation for Korean scholars to publish in English was the desire to reach global scholarly communities. Implications of these findings are discussed.     

Altmetrics as a means of assessing scholarly output

Career progression for scientists involves an assessment of their contribution to their field and a prediction of their future potential. Traditional measures, such as the impact factor of the journal that a researcher publishes in, may not be an appropriate or accurate means of assessing the overall output of an individual. The development of altmetrics offers the potential for fuller assessments of a researcher's output based on both their traditional and non‐traditional scholarly outputs. New tools should make it easier to include non‐traditional outputs such as data, software and contributions to peer review in the evaluation of early‐ and mid‐career researchers.     

Scholarly communication and open access: Perspectives from Korea

This article reports on scholarly communication and open access (OA) in Korea. Drawing on a range of databases, articles, and reference sources, it provides unique insights. In contrast to the UK/US model of scholarly communication, in Korea, most scholarly journals are published by discipline‐based scholarly societies and research institutes affiliated to universities. Payment for publication is the norm, and typically features article processing charges and scholarly society membership fees for both OA and toll access (TA) journals. Online access to journals in Korea is provided by commercial vendors who enter into contracts with the scholarly societies for exclusive use. Three online access models apply – TA, gold OA, and dual access – with the use of these models varying between disciplines. In parallel with this access provided by commercial vendors, there are a number of government‐funded open access repositories (OARs) to which university researchers are requested to deposit their research outputs, as well as OARs run by universities and other research institutes.     

由舌尖上的安全引发对化学化工类期刊伦理的思考

呼吁化学、化工类期刊工作者应该充分重视来稿中的伦理问题,并通过实践来探讨如何健全整个出版流程中的伦理审查机制,防范有伦理风险的科研成果对社会、环境产生负面的影响,尽最大努力把好稿件的道德伦理关.     

The End of Framing as we Know it … and the Future of Media Effects

Framing has become one of the most popular areas of research for scholars in communication and a wide variety of other disciplines, such as psychology, behavioral economics, political science, and sociology. Particularly in the communication discipline, however, ambiguities surrounding how we conceptualize and therefore operationalize framing have begun to overlap with other media effects models to a point that is dysfunctional. This article provides an in-depth examination of framing and positions the theory in the context of recent evolutions in media effects research. We begin by arguing for changes in how communication scholars approach framing as a theoretical construct. We urge scholars to abandon the general term “framing” altogether and instead distinguish between different types of framing. We also propose that, as a field, we refocus attention on the concept's original theoretical foundations and, more important, the potential empirical contributions that the concept can make to our field and our understanding of media effects. Finally, we discuss framing as a bridge between paradigms as we shift from an era of mass communication to one of echo chambers, tailored information and microtargeting in the new media environment.