Internationalization of academic journals: Is there still a gap between social and natural sciences?

Dyachenko, Ekaterina

doi:10.1007/s11192-014-1357-9

Cited by 24 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Two factors partly explain variations in citation dynamics and a journal's reputation. Social sciences have tended to be more locally oriented and linguistically fragmented than natural sciences (Dyachenko, 2014). Also, at least in computer science reviewing, evidence suggests a bias in favor of authors from English-speaking countries and affiliated with prestigious institutions (Walker et al, 2015).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Innovation for sustainability in the Global South: bibliometric findings from management & business and STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) fields in developing countries

Cortés-Sánchez

Guix

Carbonell

2021

Heliyon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research on innovation and sustainability is prolific but fragmented. This study integrates the research on innovation in management and business and STEM fields for sustainability in a unified framework for the case of developing countries (i.e., the Global South). It presents and discusses the output, impact, and structure of such research based on a sample of 14,000 þ articles and conference proceedings extracted from the bibliographic database Scopus. The findings reveal research output inflections after global announcements such as UN-Earth Summits. The study also reveals the indisputable leadership of China in overall output and research agendasetting. Nonetheless, countries such as India, Mexico, and Nigeria are either more efficient or impactful. GS research published in highly reputable journals is still scarce but increasing modestly. Central topic clusters (e.g., knowledge management) remain peripheral to the global Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) research landscape. Finally, academic-corporate collaboration is in its infancy and limited to particular economic sectors: energy, pharmaceuticals, and high-tech.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Innovation for sustainability in the Global South: bibliometric findings from management & business and STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) fields in developing countries

Cortés-Sánchez

Guix

Carbonell

2021

Heliyon

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The comparison of the internationalization of more than one thousand academic journals in six fields of science indicates that social sciences literature is still nationally and linguistically fragmented more than natural sciences one[43]. …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The investigation of the international and domestic coauthorship relations of all citable items in the Social Sciences Citation Index 2011 demonstrates that the international networks in the social sciences have grown during the last decades in addition to the national ones but not by replacing them[ 42 ]. The comparison of the internationalization of more than one thousand academic journals in six fields of science indicates that social sciences literature is still nationally and linguistically fragmented more than natural sciences one[ 43 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

International scientific communications in the field of colorectal tumour markers

Ivanov

Donev

2017

WJGS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AIMTo analyze scientometrically the dynamic science internationalization on colorectal tumour markers as reflected in five information portals and to outline the significant journals, scientists and institutions.METHODSA retrospective problem-oriented search was performed in Web of Science Core Collection (WoS), MEDLINE, BIOSIS Citation Index (BIOSIS) and Scopus for 1986-2015 as well as in Dervent Innovations Index (Derwent) for 1995-2015. Several specific scientometric parameters of the publication output and citation activity were comparatively analyzed. The following scientometric parameters were analyzed: (1) annual dynamics of publications; (2) scientific institutions; (3) journals; (4) authors; (5) scientific forums; (6) patents - number of patents, names and countries of inventors, and (7) citations (number of citations to publications by single authors received in WoS, BIOSIS Citation Index and Scopus).RESULTSThere is a trend towards increasing publication output on colorectal tumour markers worldwide along with high citation rates. Authors from 70 countries have published their research results in journals and conference proceedings in 21 languages. There is considerable country stratification similar to that in most systematic investigations. The information provided to end users and scientometricians varies between these data-bases in terms of most parameters due to different journal coverage, indexing systems and editorial policy. The lists of the so-called “core” journals and most productive authors in WoS, BIOSIS, MEDLINE and Scopus along with the list of the most productive authors - inventors in Derwent present a particular interest to the beginners in the field, the institutional and national science managers and the journal editorial board members. The role of the purposeful assessment of scientific forums and patents is emphasized.CONCLUSIONOur results along with this problem-oriented collection containing the researchers’ names, addresses and publications could contribute to a more effective international collaboration of the coloproctologists from smaller countries and thus improve their visibility on the world information market.

show abstract

“…On metrification autopilot, academics in humanities, social and other sciences challenge disciplinary traditions of knowledge generation and distribution (Becher and Trowler 2001;Alexander von Humboldt-Stiftung 2008). For example, Dyachenko (2014) and Chi (2015) provide insights about the focus of humanities and social sciences research on more local problems, compared to the international problemsolving approach in natural sciences. For example, Flink and Simon (2014) stress the effects of peer pressure in academic communities toward more articles and more (peer-reviewed)…”

Section: System Level: Disciplinary Differences In Auto-metrificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is the German Academic Profession on Metrification Autopilot? A Study of 25 Years of Publication Outputs

Schneijderberg¹,

Müller²,

Götze³

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Given their constitutionally guaranteed academic freedom, German academics are not forced by law to metrify their research outputs, but they do still practice metrification – one could say on autopilot. The metrification autopilot mode captures the voluntary commitment of a substantial part of the German academic profession to socio-calculative valuation, evaluation and valorization practices in the governance and control of higher education institutions (HEI), of disciplines and at the individual level. The effects of the metrification autopilot, in terms of auto-metrification in individual academics’ publication behavior, are studied empirically using three surveys (1992, 2007 and 2018). On the individual level, the metrification autopilot is observed as a trend among all full professors. Among non-full professors, the most metrified publication outputs are produced by academics who have been in their positions for more than 13 years. Accordingly, socialization into metrified status/reputation-seeking and status/reputation-keeping academic culture seems to take about 12 years. On the organizational level, we observe the metrification autopilot trend on the basis of the correlation between journal articles and HEIs’ policy of strong metrified performance recognition. On the discipline level, the metrification autopilot trend is observable in the way that humanities and social sciences scholars adapt to the peer-reviewed journal publication paradigm of the natural sciences, which is a key driver for transforming science and HEIs into a “socio-calculative environment” (Vormbusch 2012) of valuation, evaluation and valorization.

show abstract

Internationalization of academic journals: Is there still a gap between social and natural sciences?

Cited by 24 publications

References 17 publications

Innovation for sustainability in the Global South: bibliometric findings from management & business and STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) fields in developing countries

Innovation for sustainability in the Global South: bibliometric findings from management & business and STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) fields in developing countries

International scientific communications in the field of colorectal tumour markers

Is the German Academic Profession on Metrification Autopilot? A Study of 25 Years of Publication Outputs

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About