Diese Datenbank enthält über 40.000 Dokumente zu Themen aus den Bereichen Formalerschließung – Inhaltserschließung – Information Retrieval.
© 2015 W. Gödert, TH Köln, Institut für Informationswissenschaft / Powered by litecat, BIS Oldenburg (Stand: 04. Juni 2021)
1Wakeling, S. ; Spezi, V. ; Fry, J. ; Creaser, C. ; Pinfield, S. ; Willett, P.: Academic communities : the role of journals and open-access mega-journals in scholarly communication.
In: Journal of documentation. 75(2019) no.1, S.120-139.
Abstract: Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide insights into publication practices from the perspective of academics working within four disciplinary communities: biosciences, astronomy/physics, education and history. The paper explores the ways in which these multiple overlapping communities intersect with the journal landscape and the implications for the adoption and use of new players in the scholarly communication system, particularly open-access mega-journals (OAMJs). OAMJs (e.g. PLOS ONE and Scientific Reports) are large, broad scope, open-access journals that base editorial decisions solely on the technical/scientific soundness of the article. Design/methodology/approach Focus groups with active researchers in these fields were held in five UK Higher Education Institutions across Great Britain, and were complemented by interviews with pro-vice-chancellors for research at each institution. Findings A strong finding to emerge from the data is the notion of researchers belonging to multiple overlapping communities, with some inherent tensions in meeting the requirements for these different audiences. Researcher perceptions of evaluation mechanisms were found to play a major role in attitudes towards OAMJs, and interviews with the pro-vice-chancellors for research indicate that there is a difference between researchers' perceptions and the values embedded in institutional frameworks. Originality/value This is the first purely qualitative study relating to researcher perspectives on OAMJs. The findings of the paper will be of interest to publishers, policy-makers, research managers and academics.
Inhalt: Vgl.: https://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/JD-05-2018-0067.
Themenfeld: Elektronisches Publizieren
2Wakeling, S. ; Creaser, C. ; Pinfield, S. ; Fry, J. ; Spezi, V. ; Willett, P. ; Paramita, M.: Motivations, understandings, and experiences of open-access mega-journal authors : results of a large-scale survey.
In: Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 70(2019) no.7, S.754-768.
Abstract: Open-access mega-journals (OAMJs) are characterized by their large scale, wide scope, open-access (OA) business model, and "soundness-only" peer review. The last of these controversially discounts the novelty, significance, and relevance of submitted articles and assesses only their "soundness." This article reports the results of an international survey of authors (n = 11,883), comparing the responses of OAMJ authors with those of other OA and subscription journals, and drawing comparisons between different OAMJs. Strikingly, OAMJ authors showed a low understanding of soundness-only peer review: two-thirds believed OAMJs took into account novelty, significance, and relevance, although there were marked geographical variations. Author satisfaction with OAMJs, however, was high, with more than 80% of OAMJ authors saying they would publish again in the same journal, although there were variations by title, and levels were slightly lower than subscription journals (over 90%). Their reasons for choosing to publish in OAMJs included a wide variety of factors, not significantly different from reasons given by authors of other journals, with the most important including the quality of the journal and quality of peer review. About half of OAMJ articles had been submitted elsewhere before submission to the OAMJ with some evidence of a "cascade" of articles between journals from the same publisher.
Inhalt: Vgl.: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asi.24154.
Themenfeld: Elektronisches Publizieren
3Spezi, V. ; Wakeling, S. ; Pinfield, S. ; Creaser, C. ; Fry, J. ; Willett, P.: Open-access mega-journals : the future of scholarly communication or academic dumping ground? a review.
In: Journal of documentation. 73(2017) no.2, S.263-283.
Abstract: Purpose Open-access mega-journals (OAMJs) represent an increasingly important part of the scholarly communication landscape. OAMJs, such as PLOS ONE, are large scale, broad scope journals that operate an open access business model (normally based on article-processing charges), and which employ a novel form of peer review, focussing on scientific "soundness" and eschewing judgement of novelty or importance. The purpose of this paper is to examine the discourses relating to OAMJs, and their place within scholarly publishing, and considers attitudes towards mega-journals within the academic community. Design/methodology/approach This paper presents a review of the literature of OAMJs structured around four defining characteristics: scale, disciplinary scope, peer review policy, and economic model. The existing scholarly literature was augmented by searches of more informal outputs, such as blogs and e-mail discussion lists, to capture the debate in its entirety. Findings While the academic literature relating specifically to OAMJs is relatively sparse, discussion in other fora is detailed and animated, with debates ranging from the sustainability and ethics of the mega-journal model, to the impact of soundness-only peer review on article quality and discoverability, and the potential for OAMJs to represent a paradigm-shifting development in scholarly publishing. Originality/value This paper represents the first comprehensive review of the mega-journal phenomenon, drawing not only on the published academic literature, but also grey, professional and informal sources. The paper advances a number of ways in which the role of OAMJs in the scholarly communication environment can be conceptualised.
Inhalt: Vgl.: http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/full/10.1108/JD-06-2016-0082.
Themenfeld: Elektronisches Publizieren
4Wakeling, S. ; Clough, P. ; Connaway, L.S. ; Sen, B. ; Tomás, D.: Users and uses of a global union catalog : a mixed-methods study of WorldCat.org.
In: Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 68(2017) no.9, S.2166-2181.
Abstract: This paper presents the first large-scale investigation of the users and uses of WorldCat.org, the world's largest bibliographic database and global union catalog. Using a mixed-methods approach involving focus group interviews with 120 participants, an online survey with 2,918 responses, and an analysis of transaction logs of approximately 15 million sessions from WorldCat.org, the study provides a new understanding of the context for global union catalog use. We find that WorldCat.org is accessed by a diverse population, with the three primary user groups being librarians, students, and academics. Use of the system is found to fall within three broad types of work-task (professional, academic, and leisure), and we also present an emergent taxonomy of search tasks that encompass known-item, unknown-item, and institutional information searches. Our results support the notion that union catalogs are primarily used for known-item searches, although the volume of traffic to WorldCat.org means that unknown-item searches nonetheless represent an estimated 250,000 sessions per month. Search engine referrals account for almost half of all traffic, but although WorldCat.org effectively connects users referred from institutional library catalogs to other libraries holding a sought item, users arriving from a search engine are less likely to connect to a library.
Inhalt: Vgl.: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/asi.23708/full. Der Beitrag ist frei verfügbar.
Themenfeld: Formalerschließung ; Katalogfragen allgemein