Publications

13 pages, 1249 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Citizen Science in Europe—Challenges in Conducting Citizen Science Activities in Cooperation of University and Public Libraries

by Alisa Martek, Dorja Mučnjak and Dolores Mumelaš

Publications 2022, 10(4), 52; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications10040052 - 13 Dec 2022

Viewed by 2167

Abstract

Citizen science has many definitions but it is commonly known as collaboration between professional scientists and the rest of society. Although there have been cases of its implementation in the past, the term became globally known in 2012. Citizen science activities cover a [...] Read more.

Citizen science has many definitions but it is commonly known as collaboration between professional scientists and the rest of society. Although there have been cases of its implementation in the past, the term became globally known in 2012. Citizen science activities cover a wide range of academic disciplines and vary widely in what is required of the activity participants in terms of knowledge, time commitment, travel, and the use of technology). For the past ten years, libraries have often introduced citizen science in order to encourage greater interaction between science and society as a form of their services or specially organized activities. The types of libraries that often conduct citizen science are academic, public, and research libraries. Each of these library types has a specific user population; academic libraries have students and scientific and teaching staff; public libraries have the local community; and research libraries have researchers. However, libraries usually carry out CS activities separately, and very rarely in cooperation with other types of libraries. Some collaboration challenges are related to its complexity, the uncertainty regarding research cocreation, and participant retention strategies. Such cooperation is one of the aspects explored by the LIBER project CeOS_SE Project—Citizen-Enhanced Open Science in Southeastern Europe Higher Education Knowledge Hubs. The main goal of the project is to raise awareness of mainstream Open Science and CS practices in Southeastern (SE) Europe. As a project partner, the National and University Library in Zagreb, in cooperation with the University Library of Southern Denmark, conducted a survey that included other European countries in addition to SE Europe to examine and collect good practices of civil engagement in university libraries. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Toward a New World in Scholarly Communication: The 9th PUBMET2022 Conference on Scholarly Communication in the Context of Open Science)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

13 pages, 1244 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Challenges of Promoting Open Science within the NI4OS-Europe Project in Hungary

by Ákos Lencsés and Péter Sütő

Publications 2022, 10(4), 51; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications10040051 - 09 Dec 2022

Viewed by 2014

Abstract

National Initiatives for Open Science in Europe (NI4OS-Europe) is a Horizon 2020 project related to the European Open Science Cloud (EOSC). One of the project objectives is promoting EOSC and open science in 15 Central and East European EU states and EU-associated countries. [...] Read more.

National Initiatives for Open Science in Europe (NI4OS-Europe) is a Horizon 2020 project related to the European Open Science Cloud (EOSC). One of the project objectives is promoting EOSC and open science in 15 Central and East European EU states and EU-associated countries. This paper describes the variety of promoting activities carried out in Hungary as part of the NI4OS-Europe project by the Governmental Agency for IT Development (KIFÜ). Identifying good practices will give us the chance to find the best communication channels and methods to promote open science and to manage expectations of funders, researchers and librarians. The audience diversity of organized NI4OS events was analyzed in this study. The anonymized dataset based on registration forms was filtered by profession. Results suggest that events are generally visited by more librarians than researchers. The only exception is the third forum where the main Hungarian research fund as co-organizer might have attracted researchers’ attention. This suggests that librarians are considered to be in charge of open science issues in general. Usage data of the open science news feed were also studied. The 130 posts between May 2021 and April 2022 and 2500 visitors until the end of June 2022 give us the chance to learn about the characteristics of the most visited posts. We can conclude that the focus of communication is on open and FAIR data management, while other areas receive less attention. The results show that despite more international posts being published, the target group is more interested in local information. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Toward a New World in Scholarly Communication: The 9th PUBMET2022 Conference on Scholarly Communication in the Context of Open Science)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

29 pages, 4031 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Indonesian Scientists’ Behavior Relative to Research Data Governance in Preventing WMD-Applicable Technology Transfer

by Lindung Parningotan Manik, Zaenal Akbar, Aris Yaman and Ariani Indrawati

Publications 2022, 10(4), 50; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications10040050 - 08 Dec 2022

Cited by 2 | Viewed by 2041

Abstract

Performing research data governance is critical for preventing the transfer of technologies related to weapons of mass destruction (WMD). While research data governance is common in developed countries, it is still often considered less necessary by research organizations in developing countries such as [...] Read more.

Performing research data governance is critical for preventing the transfer of technologies related to weapons of mass destruction (WMD). While research data governance is common in developed countries, it is still often considered less necessary by research organizations in developing countries such as Indonesia. An investigation of research data governance behavior for Indonesian scientists was conducted in this study. The theories of planned behavior (TPB) and protection motivation (PMT) were used to explain the relationships between different factors influencing scientists’ behavior. The theories have been widely used in the information security domain, and the approach was adopted to build the research model of this study. The obtained data were analyzed using partial least-squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) to answer the main research question: “what factors determine the likelihood of practicing research data governance by Indonesian scientists to prevent WMD-applicable technology transfer?” By learning what motivates scientists to adopt research data governance practices, organizations can design relevant strategies that are directed explicitly at stimulating positive responses. The results of this study can also be applied in other developing countries that have similar situations, such as Indonesia. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Research Data and Data Papers)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

25 pages, 2161 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Measuring and Promoting the Success of an Open Science Discovery Platform through “Compass Indicators”: The GoTriple Case

by Stefano De Paoli, Emilie Blotière, Paula Forbes and Sona Arasteh-Roodsary

Publications 2022, 10(4), 49; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications10040049 - 08 Dec 2022

Viewed by 1790

Abstract

Previous research on indicators for measuring the success of Open Science tends to operate at a macro/global level and very rarely addresses the need to measure success at the level of a single project. However, this previous research has the merit of arguing [...] Read more.

Previous research on indicators for measuring the success of Open Science tends to operate at a macro/global level and very rarely addresses the need to measure success at the level of a single project. However, this previous research has the merit of arguing for the definition of indicators that offer an alternative to more traditional bibliometric measures or indicators that focus on mere performance. This paper is the outcome of work conducted for a specific project that aims to build a discovery platform for social sciences and humanities, the platform GoTriple. GoTriple is designed taking inspiration from Open Science principles and has been built through a user-centered approach. The paper details the practice-led work conducted by the GoTriple team for assessing the meaning of the term success for the project and to identify indicators. To this end, this paper proposes the concept of compass indicators and presents how the project team arrived at the definition of this concept. The paper also highlights a distinction between compass indicators, which are modest measures, and key performance indicators, which tend to be tied up with measurable objectives. Compass indicators are defined as indicators that do not aim to achieve a specified numerical target of success but rather explain the journey of a project toward achieving certain desirable outcomes and offer insights to take action. Compass indicators defined for the project embrace areas such as diversity, inclusivity, collaboration, and the general use of the platform. In the final discussion, the paper offers reflections on the potential relevance of the notion of compass indicators and closes with a discussion of the next steps for this work. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Toward a New World in Scholarly Communication: The 9th PUBMET2022 Conference on Scholarly Communication in the Context of Open Science)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

7 pages, 605 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Dynamically Updated Alive Publication Date

by Mikhail Gorbunov-Posadov

Publications 2022, 10(4), 48; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications10040048 - 05 Dec 2022

Cited by 2 | Viewed by 3618

Abstract

A scientific work posted on the internet, which its authors constantly keep up to date, is called an ‘alive’ publication. The genre of alive publishing has many attractive features. However, it requires a certain expansion of the composition of the meta-attributes of the [...] Read more.

A scientific work posted on the internet, which its authors constantly keep up to date, is called an ‘alive’ publication. The genre of alive publishing has many attractive features. However, it requires a certain expansion of the composition of the meta-attributes of the publication: along with the traditional attributes, the date of the appearance of the new, fresh revision is brought to the fore here. Such a date is placed in a prominent place in the text of the publication. Along with this, it becomes highly desirable to include a dynamically (“on the fly”) generated date in a bibliographic reference to an alive publication. The currently used methods of dynamic extraction of this date are considered for a simple online publication, for a publication that has received a DOI through Crossref, and for a publication posted in arXiv. Thanks to adding this meta-attribute, references to alive publications will improve any bibliographic list. Full article

► Show Figures

Figure 1

16 pages, 388 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Multifactor Citation Analysis over Five Years: A Case Study of SIGMETRICS Papers

by Eitan Frachtenberg

Publications 2022, 10(4), 47; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications10040047 - 02 Dec 2022

Cited by 2 | Viewed by 1477

Abstract

Performance evaluation is a broad discipline within computer science, combining deep technical work in experimentation, simulation, and modeling. The field’s subjects encompass all aspects of computer systems, including computer architecture, networking, energy efficiency, and machine learning. This wide methodological and topical focus can [...] Read more.

Performance evaluation is a broad discipline within computer science, combining deep technical work in experimentation, simulation, and modeling. The field’s subjects encompass all aspects of computer systems, including computer architecture, networking, energy efficiency, and machine learning. This wide methodological and topical focus can make it difficult to discern what attracts the community’s attention and how this attention evolves over time. As a first attempt to quantify and qualify this attention, using the proxy metric of paper citations, this study looks at the premier conference in the field, SIGMETRICS. We analyze citation frequencies at monthly intervals over a five-year period and examine possible associations with myriad other factors, such as time since publication, comparable conferences, peer review, self-citations, author demographics, and textual properties of the papers. We found that in several ways, SIGMETRICS is distinctive not only in its scope, but also in its citation phenomena: papers generally exhibit a strongly linear rate of citation growth over time, few if any uncited papers, a large gamut of topics of interest, and a possible disconnect between peer-review outcomes and eventual citations. The two most-cited papers in the dataset also exhibit larger author teams, higher than typical self-citations, and distinctive citation growth curves. These two papers, sharing some coauthors and a research focus, could either signal the area where SIGMETRICS had the most research impact, or they could represent outliers; their omission from the analysis reduces some of the otherwise distinctive observed metrics to nonsignificant levels. Full article

► Show Figures

Figure 1

10 pages, 772 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Adoption of Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) Guidelines across Journals

by Inga Patarčić and Jadranka Stojanovski

Publications 2022, 10(4), 46; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications10040046 - 28 Nov 2022

Cited by 3 | Viewed by 3206

Abstract

Journal policies continuously evolve to enable knowledge sharing and support reproducible science. However, that change happens within a certain framework. Eight modular standards with three levels of increasing stringency make Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) guidelines which can be used to evaluate to [...] Read more.

Journal policies continuously evolve to enable knowledge sharing and support reproducible science. However, that change happens within a certain framework. Eight modular standards with three levels of increasing stringency make Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) guidelines which can be used to evaluate to what extent and with which stringency journals promote open science. Guidelines define standards for data citation, transparency of data, material, code and design and analysis, replication, plan and study pre-registration, and two effective interventions: “Registered reports” and “Open science badges”, and levels of adoption summed up across standards define journal’s TOP Factor. In this paper, we analysed the status of adoption of TOP guidelines across two thousand journals reported in the TOP Factor metrics. We show that the majority of the journals’ policies align with at least one of the TOP’s standards, most likely “Data citation” (70%) followed by “Data transparency” (19%). Two-thirds of adoptions of TOP standard are of the stringency Level 1 (less stringent), whereas only 9% is of the stringency Level 3. Adoption of TOP standards differs across science disciplines and multidisciplinary journals (N = 1505) and journals from social sciences (N = 1077) show the greatest number of adoptions. Improvement of the measures that journals take to implement open science practices could be done: (1) discipline-specific, (2) journals that have not yet adopted TOP guidelines could do so, (3) the stringency of adoptions could be increased. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Toward a New World in Scholarly Communication: The 9th PUBMET2022 Conference on Scholarly Communication in the Context of Open Science)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

37 pages, 4010 KiB

Open AccessFeature PaperArticle

Knowledge Production: Analysing Gender- and Country-Dependent Factors in Research Topics through Term Communities

by Parminder Bakshi-Hamm and Andreas Hamm

Publications 2022, 10(4), 45; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications10040045 - 23 Nov 2022

Viewed by 1977

Abstract

Scholarly publications are among the most tangible forms of knowledge production. Therefore, it is important to analyse them, amongst other features, for gender or country differences and the incumbent inequalities. While there are many quantitative studies of publication activities and success in terms [...] Read more.

Scholarly publications are among the most tangible forms of knowledge production. Therefore, it is important to analyse them, amongst other features, for gender or country differences and the incumbent inequalities. While there are many quantitative studies of publication activities and success in terms of publication numbers and citation counts, a more content-related understanding of differences in the choice of research topics is rare. The present paper suggests an innovative method of using term communities in co-occurrence networks for detecting and evaluating the gender- and country-specific distribution of topics in research publications. The method is demonstrated with a pilot study based on approximately a quarter million of publication abstracts in seven diverse research areas. In this example, the method validly reconstructs all obvious topic preferences, for instance, country-dependent language-related preferences. It also produces new insight into country-specific research focuses. It emerges that in all seven subject areas studied, topic preferences are significantly different depending on whether all authors are women, all authors are men, or there are female and male co-authors, with a tendency of male authors towards theoretical core topics, of female authors towards peripheral applied topics, and of mixed-author teams towards modern interdisciplinary topics. Full article

► Show Figures

Figure 1

29 pages, 876 KiB

Open AccessArticle

What Drives Faculty Publication Citations in the Business Field? Empirical Results from an AACSB Middle Eastern Institution

by Guy Assaker and Wassim Shahin

Publications 2022, 10(4), 44; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications10040044 - 22 Nov 2022

Cited by 1 | Viewed by 2088

Abstract

This paper examines how journal-, article-, and author-related factors influence citation counts in the business field using 236 journal articles collected from an AACSB medium research output business school in the Middle East between 2017 and 2021. Results from association tests demonstrated that [...] Read more.

This paper examines how journal-, article-, and author-related factors influence citation counts in the business field using 236 journal articles collected from an AACSB medium research output business school in the Middle East between 2017 and 2021. Results from association tests demonstrated that journal rank and format, the subfield of the article, and author prestige are significantly related to the number of citations. Results from CHAID further demonstrated the presence of an interaction/joint effect among variables; in particular: (1) articles published in Q1 WoS journals that are also authored/co-authored by prestige authors resulted in the highest number of citations; (2) articles published in Q2–Q3 WoS journals that also belonged to the business and management domain resulted in an average number of citations, and (3) articles published in Q4 or unranked journals in WoS also ranked Q3–Q4 or unranked in Scimago resulted in the lowest number of citations. These results provide theoretical implications and practical recommendations for faculty and business schools interested in enhancing their scholarly impact and rankings. Full article

► Show Figures

Figure 1

18 pages, 2810 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Scholars’ Domain of Information Space

by Danijela Pongrac, Mihaela Banek Zorica and Roman Domović

Publications 2022, 10(4), 43; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications10040043 - 22 Nov 2022

Viewed by 1294

Abstract

This article addresses Croatian scholars’ information behavior and how they use technology to acquire information in three areas of their work: teaching, research, and administrative activities. Our study aims to find which communication channels scholars utilize to find and share knowledge. Are they [...] Read more.

This article addresses Croatian scholars’ information behavior and how they use technology to acquire information in three areas of their work: teaching, research, and administrative activities. Our study aims to find which communication channels scholars utilize to find and share knowledge. Are they using communication channels targeting a broader audience, i.e., formal–explicit communication, or those targeting a narrower one, i.e., informal–implicit communication? The questionnaire used included four questions regarding scholar activities, with nine possible communication channels, scored on a seven-point Likert scale. Considering many channels for each area of activity, a reduction was made through Principal Component Analysis (PCA), to determine latent components in various channels. In finding information for teaching activities, the main communication channel is informal and implicit, while for research and administrative activities, it is formal and explicit. PCA shows a distinction between social and technical domains of science in terms of how scholars collect material for administrative tasks. A further communication channel is reduced to two factors for all questions, where the first factor has formal–explicit and the second has informal–implicit characteristics. This work is part of a larger study aimed at determining the mechanisms of information diffusion within academic institutions, utilizing the Information space model. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Toward a New World in Scholarly Communication: The 9th PUBMET2022 Conference on Scholarly Communication in the Context of Open Science)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

19 pages, 1432 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Building National Open Science Cloud Initiatives (NOSCIs) in Southeast Europe: Supporting Research and Scholarly Communication

by Milica Ševkušić, Eleni Toli, Katerina Lenaki, Kalliopi Kanavou, Electra Sifakaki, Biljana Kosanović, Ilias Papastamatiou and Elli Papadopoulou

Publications 2022, 10(4), 42; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications10040042 - 08 Nov 2022

Viewed by 2477

Abstract

The Horizon 2020 project National Initiatives for Open Science in Europe—NI4OS Europe supports the development of the European Open Science Cloud (EOSC) by integrating 15 countries in Southeast Europe into the governance structure of this new pan-European research environment. Through a qualitative secondary [...] Read more.

The Horizon 2020 project National Initiatives for Open Science in Europe—NI4OS Europe supports the development of the European Open Science Cloud (EOSC) by integrating 15 countries in Southeast Europe into the governance structure of this new pan-European research environment. Through a qualitative secondary analysis of the data collected during the project, the paper focuses on the main instrument developed by the project with the aim of enabling the integration of the partner countries in the EOSC—a network of national Open Science Cloud Initiatives (NOSCIs)—and explains how the concept of NOSCI and a wide range of related activities, tools, services, and resources foster research and open scholarly communication. The paper has three main sections: the first identifies challenges to scholarly communication in Southeast Europe, the second describes the methodology used to deal with these challenges revolving around the concept of NOSCI, whereas the third presents a set of indicators to track the change generated by project actions and discusses the impact of this methodology and project outputs in the area of scholarly communication. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Toward a New World in Scholarly Communication: The 9th PUBMET2022 Conference on Scholarly Communication in the Context of Open Science)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

14 pages, 282 KiB

Open AccessArticle

The Perception of Academic Plagiarism in Industrial Engineering Students at a Public University in Lima

by Roberto Carlos Dávila Morán

Publications 2022, 10(4), 41; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications10040041 - 24 Oct 2022

Cited by 2 | Viewed by 1939

Abstract

The objective of this research was to study the perception of academic plagiarism as a dishonest behavior and the factors that characterize it in industrial engineering students at a public university in Lima. This work corresponds to a basic type of study with [...] Read more.

The objective of this research was to study the perception of academic plagiarism as a dishonest behavior and the factors that characterize it in industrial engineering students at a public university in Lima. This work corresponds to a basic type of study with a quantitative approach, non-experimental design and cross-sectional descriptive level. From the operational field, the study variable was the perception of academic plagiarism, and its dimensions were knowledge, motivations and practices. The population consisted of 2145 students, and intentional non-probabilistic sampling was carried out, resulting in a sample of 155 students in the 8th and 9th cycles of this public university. For data collection, a questionnaire was designed with 35 questions referring to the variable and its dimensions, with each question having five response options according to a Likert-type scale which were answered virtually by the students. The results from the descriptive point of view reflect that 56.1% of the students perceived plagiarism in a negative way and 43.9% perceived it in an irrelevant way. In the inferential field, the results did not show significant statistical differences (p > 0.05). In conclusion, most students believe that academic plagiarism is a behavior that affects their education and is unethical and dishonest. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Publication Ethics and Research Integrity)

17 pages, 18205 KiB

Open AccessFeature PaperArticle

The Scientific Productivity of Collective Subjects Based on the Time-Weighted PageRank Method with Citation Intensity

by Alexander Kuchansky, Andrii Biloshchytskyi, Yurii Andrashko, Svitlana Biloshchytska and Adil Faizullin

Publications 2022, 10(4), 40; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications10040040 - 20 Oct 2022

Cited by 7 | Viewed by 1912

Abstract

This study aims to estimate the scientific productivity of collective subjects. The objective is to build a method for evaluating scientific productivity through calculation, including for new collective subjects with a small citation network—the paper proposes the Time-Weighted PageRank method with citation intensity [...] Read more.

This study aims to estimate the scientific productivity of collective subjects. The objective is to build a method for evaluating scientific productivity through calculation, including for new collective subjects with a small citation network—the paper proposes the Time-Weighted PageRank method with citation intensity (TWPR-CI). The Citation Network Dataset (ver. 13) has been analyzed to verify the method. The dataset includes more than 5 million scientific publications and 48 million citations. Four classes of collective subjects (more than 27,000 collective subjects in total) were established. For each class, scientific productivity estimates from 2000 to 2021 were calculated using the PageRank, Time-Weighted PageRank, and TWPR-CI methods. It is shown that the advantage of the TWPR-CI method is the higher sensitivity of the scientific productivity estimates for new collective subjects on average during the first ten years of observation. At the same time, the assessment of scientific productivity for other collective subjects according to this method is stable. However, the small citation network of the new collective subjects prevents the adequate assessment of scientific productivity during the first years of its operation. Therefore, the TWPR-CI method can be used to assess the scientific productivity of collective subjects, in particular the productivity of new ones. Full article

► Show Figures

Figure 1

40 pages, 8745 KiB

Open AccessFeature PaperArticle

Deep Impact: A Study on the Impact of Data Papers and Datasets in the Humanities and Social Sciences

by Barbara McGillivray, Paola Marongiu, Nilo Pedrazzini, Marton Ribary, Mandy Wigdorowitz and Eleonora Zordan

Publications 2022, 10(4), 39; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications10040039 - 15 Oct 2022

Cited by 8 | Viewed by 5196

Abstract

The humanities and social sciences (HSS) have recently witnessed an exponential growth in data-driven research. In response, attention has been afforded to datasets and accompanying data papers as outputs of the research and dissemination ecosystem. In 2015, two data journals dedicated to HSS [...] Read more.

The humanities and social sciences (HSS) have recently witnessed an exponential growth in data-driven research. In response, attention has been afforded to datasets and accompanying data papers as outputs of the research and dissemination ecosystem. In 2015, two data journals dedicated to HSS disciplines appeared in this landscape: Journal of Open Humanities Data (JOHD) and Research Data Journal for the Humanities and Social Sciences (RDJ). In this paper, we analyse the state of the art in the landscape of data journals in HSS using JOHD and RDJ as exemplars by measuring performance and the deep impact of data-driven projects, including metrics (citation count; Altmetrics, views, downloads, tweets) of data papers in relation to associated research papers and the reuse of associated datasets. Our findings indicate: that data papers are published following the deposit of datasets in a repository and usually following research articles; that data papers have a positive impact on both the metrics of research papers associated with them and on data reuse; and that Twitter hashtags targeted at specific research campaigns can lead to increases in data papers’ views and downloads. HSS data papers improve the visibility of datasets they describe, support accompanying research articles, and add to transparency and the open research agenda. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Research Data and Data Papers)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

4 pages, 183 KiB

Open AccessCommunication

Do Papers with Japanese Authors Have a Different Number of Authors? A Follow-Up Study after 25 Years and Implication for Other Countries

by Akira Akabayashi, Eisuke Nakazawa and Katsumi Mori

Publications 2022, 10(4), 38; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications10040038 - 07 Oct 2022

Viewed by 1223

Abstract

A follow-up study was conducted 25 years after the 1997 British Medical Journal report. Articles with at least one Japanese author were defined as ‘Article by Japanese’ and those with no Japanese authors were defined as ‘Article by Non-Japanese’. The number of authors [...] Read more.

A follow-up study was conducted 25 years after the 1997 British Medical Journal report. Articles with at least one Japanese author were defined as ‘Article by Japanese’ and those with no Japanese authors were defined as ‘Article by Non-Japanese’. The number of authors per article for the years 2000, 2010, and 2020 in Circulation, Circulation Research, and the Japanese Circulation Journal was studied. Results are: (1) In all journals and all years covered, ‘Article by Japanese’ had more authors per article than ‘Article by Non-Japanese’. Twenty-five years later, the results were similar. (2) Comparison by year revealed that all journals showed increases with time in the number of authors per article. We have discussed the problem of the Science Council of Japan’s statement, influence on practising physicians and sample providers, and influence on international collaborations. This 25-year follow-up study highlights once again the need for global discussions on the qualifications for authorship in research studies. Full article

19 pages, 584 KiB

Open AccessArticle

The Research Environment in a Developing Economy: Reforms, Patterns, and Challenges in Kazakhstan

by Diana Amirbekova, Timur Narbaev and Meruyert Kussaiyn

Publications 2022, 10(4), 37; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications10040037 - 03 Oct 2022

Cited by 4 | Viewed by 2315

Abstract

Kazakhstan has implemented numerous policy reforms to improve its research environment since 1991, experiencing both positive changes and critical challenges. In this study, we conduct a comprehensive investigation of the country’s research environment. Our materials include statistical data, science policy reports, bibliometric data [...] Read more.

Kazakhstan has implemented numerous policy reforms to improve its research environment since 1991, experiencing both positive changes and critical challenges. In this study, we conduct a comprehensive investigation of the country’s research environment. Our materials include statistical data, science policy reports, bibliometric data from Scopus, and interview responses. Using descriptive statistics and regression analysis, we analyze the country’s publication capacity, key characteristics, and science funding by the government. We critically review significant policy reforms and conduct interviews with subject matter experts. Our findings suggest there has been an increasing number of publications and growth in citations since joining the Bologna process in 2010, and that there is a high positive correlation between the volume of science funding and publication output, development levels across fields of science, and focus from science on commercialization of science. The challenges relate to publishing in international journals, government financing and commercialization, researcher capacity, scientific areas, and international collaboration. Our contributions to scholarly communication and science policy are two-fold. First, we present the relationship between several factors/policies and the research environment. Second, we reveal the main challenges Kazakhstan and its academic community have experienced which can be considered by stakeholders, including the government, academic institutions, researchers, and other developing countries. Full article

► Show Figures

Figure 1

13 pages, 551 KiB

Open AccessArticle

Scientific Abstract to Full Paper: Publication Rate over a 3-Year Period in a Malaysian Clinical Research Conference

by Nicholas Yee Liang Hing, Xin Ci Wong, Pei Xuan Kuan, Mohan Dass Pathmanathan, Mohd Aizuddin Abdul Rahman and Kalaiarasu M. Peariasamy

Publications 2022, 10(4), 36; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications10040036 - 03 Oct 2022

Viewed by 1712

Abstract

Background: The publication rates of abstracts after they were presented at the National Conference for Clinical Research (NCCR), a scientific conference held in Malaysia, was determined to gauge the scientific value of the conference, whilst providing comparative information with other scientific conferences. Methods: [...] Read more.

Background: The publication rates of abstracts after they were presented at the National Conference for Clinical Research (NCCR), a scientific conference held in Malaysia, was determined to gauge the scientific value of the conference, whilst providing comparative information with other scientific conferences. Methods: All the abstracts that were presented at the NCCR from 2014 to 2016 were analysed. Keywords from the abstract title, along with the first, second, and last author’s name, were searched via PubMed, Google Scholar, and Scopus to determine publication status. Results: A total of 320 abstracts were analysed. Of those, 57 abstracts (17.8%) were published. Almost 70% of published abstracts appeared in open access journals that charge article processing fees. Early publications (≤18 months from the conference date) had higher median journal impact factors compared to later publications. Approximately 42% of the published abstracts had collaborations with the Institute for Clinical Research (ICR) or Clinical Research Centres (CRCs). An increasing number of authors in an abstract and having the first author from a research centre, reduced and increased the odds of publication, respectively. Conclusions: The NCCR publication rate is lower compared to the reported average in other scientific conferences abroad. More encouragement and support to publish should be provided to the presenting authors. Clinicians should also be encouraged to collaborate with research centres such as those from the ICR or CRCs to boost publication likelihoods. Full article

► Show Figures

Figure 1

13 pages, 3220 KiB

Open AccessArticle

The Influence of International Collaboration on the Scientific Impact in V4 Countries

by Zsolt Kohus, Márton Demeter, Gyula Péter Szigeti, László Kun, Eszter Lukács and Katalin Czakó

Publications 2022, 10(4), 35; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications10040035 - 28 Sep 2022

Cited by 4 | Viewed by 2947

Abstract

Several strategies are used by researchers and research facilities to increase their scientific production and consequent research quality. Bibliometric records show that coauthorship and the number of participating organizations in research publications are steadily increasing; however, the effect of collaboration varies across disciplines, [...] Read more.

Several strategies are used by researchers and research facilities to increase their scientific production and consequent research quality. Bibliometric records show that coauthorship and the number of participating organizations in research publications are steadily increasing; however, the effect of collaboration varies across disciplines, and the corresponding author’s country appears to influence research impact. This finding inspired our research question for this study: How does international cooperation affect scientific impact, and does the affiliation of corresponding authors influence citation impact indicators at the level of individual publications? To this end, we provide a comparative evaluation of research articles published in Q1 journals among Visegrad Group countries (Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia) in Medical and Health sciences between 2017 and 2021. The study investigates the relationship between collaboration type (national vs. international) and scientific impact (impact factor of the journal and category normalized citation impact or research papers), as well as the impact of the country of the corresponding author’s affiliation on quantitative quality of individual papers. We show that Q1 research papers in international collaboration have a higher scientific impact than papers published in national partnerships. Moreover, the corresponding authors’ country of affiliation significantly affects scientific impact. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Research Data and Data Papers)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

18 pages, 3391 KiB

Open AccessArticle

A Bibliometric Analysis of the Scientific Outcomes of European Projects on the Digital Transformation of SMEs

by Fernando Almeida, José Morais and José Duarte Santos

Publications 2022, 10(4), 34; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications10040034 - 26 Sep 2022

Cited by 2 | Viewed by 2562

Abstract

The projects funded under the European Horizon 2020 program have responded to the challenges facing small enterprises and have provided a framework for different actors (e.g., universities, R&D centers, SMEs) to collaborate and find innovative approaches to address the challenges of digital transformation. [...] Read more.

The projects funded under the European Horizon 2020 program have responded to the challenges facing small enterprises and have provided a framework for different actors (e.g., universities, R&D centers, SMEs) to collaborate and find innovative approaches to address the challenges of digital transformation. This study conducts a bibliometric analysis of the scientific production supported by this project, between 2014 and 2021, evaluating 114 projects, which have associated 2312 scientific production items and 1460 deliverables. The results demonstrate that scientific production is mostly carried out collaboratively with project partners and is mainly published in peer-reviewed journals. The research demonstrates that resources, such as Horizon 2020, provide a useful adjunct to other databases as a basis for bibliometric and related analyses. Full article

► Show Figures

Figure 1

19 pages, 1936 KiB

Open AccessReview

What the Neuroscience and Psychology of Magic Reveal about Misinformation

by Robert G. Alexander, Stephen L. Macknik and Susana Martinez-Conde

Publications 2022, 10(4), 33; https://doi.org/10.3390/publications10040033 - 23 Sep 2022

Viewed by 8175

Abstract

When we believe misinformation, we have succumbed to an illusion: our perception or interpretation of the world does not match reality. We often trust misinformation for reasons that are unrelated to an objective, critical interpretation of the available data: Key facts go unnoticed [...] Read more.

When we believe misinformation, we have succumbed to an illusion: our perception or interpretation of the world does not match reality. We often trust misinformation for reasons that are unrelated to an objective, critical interpretation of the available data: Key facts go unnoticed or unreported. Overwhelming information prevents the formulation of alternative explanations. Statements become more believable every time they are repeated. Events are reframed or given “spin” to mislead audiences. In magic shows, illusionists apply similar techniques to convince spectators that false and even seemingly impossible events have happened. Yet, many magicians are “honest liars”, asking audiences to suspend their disbelief only during the performance, for the sole purpose of entertainment. Magic misdirection has been studied in the lab for over a century. Psychological research has sought to understand magic from a scientific perspective and to apply the tools of magic to the understanding of cognitive and perceptual processes. More recently, neuroscientific investigations have also explored the relationship between magic illusions and their underlying brain mechanisms. We propose that the insights gained from such studies can be applied to understanding the prevalence and success of misinformation. Here, we review some of the common factors in how people experience magic during a performance and are subject to misinformation in their daily lives. Considering these factors will be important in reducing misinformation and encouraging critical thinking in society. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Science Information, Media Misinformation, and Public Trust)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

Journal Menu

Journal Browser

Publications, Volume 10, Issue 4 (December 2022) – 20 articles

Further Information

Guidelines

MDPI Initiatives

Follow MDPI