The Impact of Non-Brazilian Contribution on the Publishing Performance of Psychology Journals in Brazil

Abstract

There is considerable variability in publishing performance among psychology journals in Brazil. However, research as to why is very scarce. This study empirically examined the relationship between non-Brazilian contribution and publishing performance, among these journals. A total of 746 articles from the top-18 psychology journals in Brazil were coded for study type, international collaboration, and non-Brazilian contribution. Analyses revealed that publishing performance was associated with the following: (i) international collaboration and (ii) non-Brazilian contribution. Collaboration with, and contribution from, English-speaking authors was more prevalent among the higher performing journals; while contribution from non-Brazilian Ibero-American authors was more prevalent among the lower performing journals. These findings suggest that publishing performance for psychology journals in Brazil may be strongly tied to non-Brazilian contribution. Implications may be relevant to journal publishers and editors, as well as arbiters of scientific policy.

The promotion and implementation of open science measures among high‐performing journals from Brazil, Mexico, Portugal, and Spain

“…Based on SciELO's commitment to align the journals in its collections with the OS model by the end of 2025 (SciELO, 2023), we hypothesized that the promotion and implementation of OS would be: (H1) higher among journals from Brazil (SciELO's base) than the other three countries, and (H2) higher among SciELO‐indexed journals than their non‐SciELO‐indexed counterparts. Based on English being the global language of science (Fradkin, 2015, 2017a, 2017b, 2018), we hypothesized that the promotion and implementation of OS would be: (H3) higher among English‐only publications than their multi‐language counterparts. Based on journals in the social sciences lagging in their enthusiasm for open science measures (Karhulahti & Backe, 2021; Packer, 2020; Sidler, 2014; Watchorn, 2022), we hypothesized that the promotion and implementation of OS would be: (H4) lower among social science journals than their hard science and health science counterparts.…”