Bureaucrats, researchers, editors, and the impact factor - a vicious circle that is detrimental to science

Metze, Konradin

doi:10.1590/s1807-59322010001000002

Cited by 44 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 19 publications

(17 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In particular, the circularity of a system based on the valuing of impact factors-where high impact factor journals, attract more submissions from authors conscious of the career value of publishing in such venues, which in turn increases the JIF-is often bemoaned [24,44,45]. One of the consequences of this system is that publishers of high-JIF journals find it easy to demand transfer of exclusive rights from authors, and so it is therefore argued, stifle innovative approaches to scholarly communication.…”

Section: Copyright and Culturementioning

confidence: 99%

The UK Scholarly Communication Licence: Attempting to Cut through the Gordian Knot of the Complexities of Funder Mandates, Publisher Embargoes and Researcher Caution in Achieving Open Access

Baldwin

Pinfield

2018

Publications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Whilst take-up of open access (OA) in the UK is growing rapidly due partly to a number of funder mandates, managing the complexities of balancing compliance with these mandates against restrictive publisher policies and ingrained academic priorities, has resulted in UK higher education institutions (HEIs) often struggling with confused researchers, complex workflows, and rising costs. In order to try to address this situation, the UK Scholarly Communication Licence (UK-SCL) was formulated to bypass the root causes of many of these challenges by implementing a licensing mechanism for multiple-mandate compliance in one single policy. This is the first empirical study to focus on the genesis of the UK-SCL and how its implementation has been conceived thus far. A qualitative research method was used, taking the form of 14 semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders from the initiative across the UK. The results indicate that those working within UK HEIs are concerned with the complexity of the current OA policy landscape and are frustrated with the inertia within the current system, which has resulted in higher costs, further publisher restrictions, and has not addressed the underlying tensions in academic culture. The UK-SCL is seen by its initiators as a way to achieve further transition towards OA and take back some element of control of the content produced at their institutions. The study concludes by modelling the ways in which the UK-SCL is intended to impact relationships between key stakeholders, and discussing possible implementation futures.

show abstract

Section: Copyright and Culturementioning

confidence: 99%

The UK Scholarly Communication Licence: Attempting to Cut through the Gordian Knot of the Complexities of Funder Mandates, Publisher Embargoes and Researcher Caution in Achieving Open Access

Baldwin

Pinfield

2018

Publications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Esse cenário merece uma rigorosa análise antes de nos apressarmos a afirmar um crescimento exponencial da produção cientifica ou da "ciên-cia" brasileira, porquanto pesquisadores no campo, também em número crescente, vêm alertando sobre a falácia do modelo atual de avaliação acadêmica, não somente no tange à sua lógica, fundada em índices bibliométricos, mas no que concerne à própria fidedignidade dos cálculos 11 . Sem esquecermos o sofrimento dos intelectuais, o desencantamento do trabalho científico, o adoecimento dos pesquisadores 12,13 , em um contexto que incentiva o quanto mais, melhor; muitas vezes não importando como ou para que, sendo esta a essência do que aqui se considera produtivismo.…”

Section: Acerca Do Modelo Atual De Avaliação No Campo Científicounclassified

Produtivismo e avaliação acadêmica na Saúde Coletiva brasileira: desafios para a pesquisa em Ciências Humanas e Sociais

Bosi

2012

Cad. Saúde Pública

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Este artigo problematiza alguns desafios que se impõem à produção do conhecimento nas Ciências Humanas e Sociais, no campo da Saúde Coletiva, sob o atual modelo que norteia as avaliações acadêmicas no Brasil. Para tanto, o artigo focaliza o enfoque qualitativo de pesquisa em Ciências Humanas e Sociais, analisando o seu estatuto ante outras tradições que com ele disputam hegemonia no campo da Saúde Coletiva, conjugando o diálogo com a literatura, notadamente proposições relativas aos campos sociais presentes na obra de Pierre Bourdieu, com elementos concernentes à dinâmica do campo, incluindo incursões a dados empíricos. Dentre os desafios assinalados, destacam-se aqueles referentes ao impedimento de diálogos interdisciplinares e obstáculos à equidade na produção do conhecimento, baseada no reconhecimento da natureza e do lugar fundante das Ciências Humanas e Sociais no campo Saúde Coletiva. Discutem-se estratégias visando a reconfigurar a atual correlação de forças entre os núcleos de saberes da Saúde Coletiva, notadamente aquelas capazes de impactar comitês e agendas que definem a acumulação do capital simbólico e econômico no âmbito analisado.

show abstract

“…The consensual views of the French Academy of Sciences [24] appear to underestimate the dangers of bibliometrics, but colleagues in Brazil appear to be more combative, [25] while some of the strongest indictments come from the community of mathematicians. [26] Notwithstanding the advice of Ernst and Democritus, we fear that h-indices will continue to create havoc.…”

Section: Darwin's Triumphmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Kinship or k-Index as an Antidote Against the Toxic Effects of h-Indices

Molinié

Bodenhausen

2011

Chimia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In a bilingual paper entitled 'Bibliometrics as weapons of mass citation – La bibliométrie comme arme de citation massive', recently translated into English, we have argued that the current fashion of ranking people, papers and journals is anything but harmless. The point was forcefully supported by Richard Ernst in a post-face entitled 'The Follies of Citation Indices and Academic Ranking Lists.' We received a surprising number of passionate responses, such as 'It's written out of my heart' (TH); 'Je soutiens cette entreprise courageuse de tout coeur' (VT); 'Impact Faktoren sind ein Marktinstrument gewisser Verlage (FS); 'Il y a un combat à mener' (SB). Some thoughtful responses have been incorporated into this Essay, albeit in attenuated form. We suggest that the 'fertility' of individual scientists be appreciated in terms of kinship rather than through personalized indices.

show abstract

Bureaucrats, researchers, editors, and the impact factor - a vicious circle that is detrimental to science

Cited by 44 publications

References 19 publications

The UK Scholarly Communication Licence: Attempting to Cut through the Gordian Knot of the Complexities of Funder Mandates, Publisher Embargoes and Researcher Caution in Achieving Open Access

The UK Scholarly Communication Licence: Attempting to Cut through the Gordian Knot of the Complexities of Funder Mandates, Publisher Embargoes and Researcher Caution in Achieving Open Access

Produtivismo e avaliação acadêmica na Saúde Coletiva brasileira: desafios para a pesquisa em Ciências Humanas e Sociais

The Kinship or k-Index as an Antidote Against the Toxic Effects of h-Indices

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About