Peruvian Scientific Production Affected by Predatory Journals

Sotomayor-Beltran, Carlos; Segura, Guillermo Wenceslao Zarate

doi:10.1080/10572317.2020.1869902

Cited by 8 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the emerging evidence suggested that perverse incentives within the research ecosystem, a lack of training, opportunity, support, and infrastructure can undermine ambitions for change, which is further hampered by researcher perceptions. 4,24,60,154,181,218,219 The evidence pointed to a range of barriers that have repercussions on the notion of teamwork, such as the ongoing tradition of first and last authors taking most or all of the credit for the work, 220 the use of 'gift authorship' to enhance research publication of academics with poor research performance, 5 and the pressures to have global impact on the scientific community through high-quality scientific writing. 164 Researchers are incentivized to attain research excellence, which can often result in hyper-competitiveness and unfair working practices.…”

Section: Security and Career Progressionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A scoping review on what constitutes a good research culture

Blatch-Jones,

Lakin,

Thomas

2024

F1000Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The crisis in research culture is well documented, covering issues such as a tendency for quantity over quality, unhealthy competitive environments, and assessment based on publications, journal prestige and funding. In response, research institutions need to assess their own practices to promote and advocate for change in the current research ecosystem. The purpose of the scoping review was to explore ‘What does the evidence say about the ‘problem’ with ‘poor’ research culture, what are the benefits of ‘good’ research culture, and what does ‘good’ look like?’ Aims To examine the peer-reviewed and grey literature to explore the interplay between research culture, open research, career paths, recognition and rewards, and equality, diversity, and inclusion, as part of a larger programme of activity for a research institution. Methods A scoping review was undertaken. Six databases were searched along with grey literature. Eligible literature had relevance to academic research institutions, addressed research culture, and were published between January 2017 to May 2022. Evidence was mapped and themed to specific categories. The search strategy, screening and analysis took place between April-May 2022. Results 1666 titles and abstracts, and 924 full text articles were assessed for eligibility. Of these, 253 articles met the eligibility criteria for inclusion. A purposive sampling of relevant websites was drawn from to complement the review, resulting in 102 records included in the review. Key areas for consideration were identified across the four themes of job security, wellbeing and equality of opportunity, teamwork and interdisciplinary, and research quality and accountability. Conclusions There are opportunities for research institutions to improve their own practice, however institutional solutions cannot act in isolation. Research institutions and research funders need to work together to build a more sustainable and inclusive research culture that is diverse in nature and supports individuals’ well-being, career progression and performance.

show abstract

Section: Security and Career Progressionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A scoping review on what constitutes a good research culture

Blatch-Jones,

Lakin,

Thomas

2024

F1000Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, the emerging evidence suggested that perverse incentives within the research ecosystem, a lack of training, opportunity, support, and infrastructure can undermine ambitions for change, which is further hampered by researcher perceptions. (4,24,60,154,181,218,219) The evidence pointed to a range of barriers that have repercussions on the notion of teamwork, such as the ongoing tradition of first and last authors taking most or all of the credit for the work (220) , the use of 'gift authorship' to enhance research publication of academics with poor research performance (5) , and the pressures to have global impact on the scientific community through high-quality scientific writing. (164) Researchers are incentivized to attain research excellence, which can often result in hypercompetitiveness and unfair working practices.…”

Section: Teamwork and Supportive Working Relationshipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A scoping review on what constitutes a good research culture

Blatch-Jones,

Lakin,

Thomas

2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The crisis in research culture is well documented, covering issues such as a tendency for quantity over quality, unhealthy competitive environments, and assessment based on publications, journal prestige and funding. In response, research institutions need to assess their own practices to promote and advocate for change in the current research ecosystem. The purpose of the scoping review was to explore ‘What does the evidence say about the ‘problem’ with ‘poor’ research culture, what are the benefits of ‘good’ research culture, and what does ‘good’ look like?’ Aims: To examine the peer-reviewed and grey literature to explore the interplay between research culture, open research, career paths, recognition and rewards, and equality, diversity, and inclusion, as part of a larger programme of activity for a research institution.Methods: A scoping review was undertaken. Six databases were searched along with grey literature. Eligible literature had relevance to academic research institutions, addressed research culture, and were published between January 2017 to May 2022. Evidence was mapped and themed to specific categories. The search strategy, screening and analysis took place between April-May 2022. Results: 1666 titles and abstracts, and 924 full text articles were assessed for eligibility. Of these, 253 articles met the eligibility criteria for inclusion. A purposive sampling of relevant websites was drawn from to complement the review, resulting in 102 records included in the review. Key areas for consideration were identified across the four themes of job security, wellbeing and equality of opportunity, teamwork and interdisciplinary, and research quality and accountability. Conclusions: There are opportunities for research institutions to improve their own practice, however institutional solutions cannot act in isolation. Research institutions and research funders need to work together to build a more sustainable and inclusive research culture that is diverse in nature and supports individuals’ well-being, career progression and performance.

show abstract

“…The development possibilities of RPA are endless as it can tackle any sequence of tasks. Users can also create bots by observing the digital actions of humans [8]. Robotic process automation software can interact with any application or system in the same way that people do.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, in the same way as the previous authors, the present author points out that RPA still needs to improve when faced with more complex tasks. In addition, the author [8] of states that the automation of robotic processes is a very advanced technology that establishes intelligent software robots that can imitate the interactions of people with business processes or activities, thus being an efficient method where software robots interact through the graphical interface with the user. Likewise, this indicates a new analysis method for RPA processes, comparing it with the traditional model through several fields.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Use of robotized process automation for research management and evaluation

Andrade–Arenas

Vargas-Cuentas²,

Román-Gonzalez³

2022

IJEECS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Universities, called entities with the responsibility of training new professionals and contributing to continuous knowledge for human development through research, seek to increase their scientific production and climb positions in research rankings. In this sense, research management is necessary and knowing which information and communications technology tools help in this task is a great help. The main objective of this work is to identify the information and communications technology tools that help to perform a good research management and implement a system based on Robotized Process Automation to generate a scientific information system for the University of Sciences and Humanities, for this research work was used the cascade methodology which provided several advantages and support for the structure and development of the system, for the process of the system was used the UiPath tool which is considered the best process automation tool. As a result of this research work, a system was obtained that drastically reduces the data collection time to evaluate the scientific production of researchers, thus allowing a better research management.

show abstract

Peruvian Scientific Production Affected by Predatory Journals

Cited by 8 publications

References 28 publications

A scoping review on what constitutes a good research culture

A scoping review on what constitutes a good research culture

A scoping review on what constitutes a good research culture

Use of robotized process automation for research management and evaluation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About