IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/116499.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Academic Publishing – An Annotated Inventory of Challenges and chosen Pathways

Author

Listed:
  • Zait, Adriana

Abstract

Context and Purpose: The increased focus of higher education institutions on research and – lately – on societal challenges and real-world problems, the importance of academic rankings for financing and international competitions and the research and publication oriented professional advancement criteria transformed academics into publishing hunters. The world of academic publishing is wild and dangerous, due to the massification of research. Aims and objectives are often confounded with means, quantity and quality (already difficult to assess) don’t always walk together, stakeholders have conflicting interests, the old linear models of publishing are replaced with intricate looped and interconnected ones, leading to academics publishing more and achieving less – especially from a societal perspective. The aim of the present study is to summarize the main challenges of the publishing process, together with the pathways chosen by academics to overcome these difficulties. Design/methodology: A meta-analysis of recent studies on academic publishing was performed, together with a nethnographic exploratory approach on publishing patterns in economics and business; informal talks with academics from business and economics fields from several Eastern EU higher education institutions were used, as well. Findings: The inventory of challenges includes individual factors (personality and individual morale, goals, knowledge and status, preferences and habits), institutional factors (university and strategy level), social structures and infrastructural level factors (open access, technological disruptive innovations, new social contract for research, preprints), as well as professional culture type of factors (peer-review issues and various biases, alternative research assessment methods, predatory journals, predatory informal rules). Several pathways chosen by academics were observed, leading to hypotheses formulation for future research. Limitations: The study is exploratory, based on a conventional sample of academics for the empirical part and has an emic, potentially subjective approach. Originality/value: The study touches a delicate and controversial subject – academic publishing – and brings together both positive and negative aspects for existent pathways, offering a ground for future research.

Suggested Citation

  • Zait, Adriana, 2020. "Academic Publishing – An Annotated Inventory of Challenges and chosen Pathways," MPRA Paper 116499, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 25 Oct 2020.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:116499
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/116499/1/MPRA_paper_116499.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Moed, Henk F. & de Moya-Anegon, Felix & Guerrero-Bote, Vicente & Lopez-Illescas, Carmen, 2020. "Are nationally oriented journals indexed in Scopus becoming more international? The effect of publication language and access modality," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(2).
    2. Diego Ponte & Bozena I. Mierzejewska & Stefan Klein, 2017. "The transformation of the academic publishing market: multiple perspectives on innovation," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 27(2), pages 97-100, May.
    3. Jeffrey Beall, 2012. "Predatory publishers are corrupting open access," Nature, Nature, vol. 489(7415), pages 179-179, September.
    4. Chavarro, Diego & Tang, Puay & Ràfols, Ismael, 2017. "Why researchers publish in non-mainstream journals: Training, knowledge bridging, and gap filling," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(9), pages 1666-1680.
    5. Anne‐Wil Harzing & Ron van der Wal, 2009. "A Google Scholar h‐index for journals: An alternative metric to measure journal impact in economics and business," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 60(1), pages 41-46, January.
    6. Loet Leydesdorff, 2008. "Caveats for the use of citation indicators in research and journal evaluations," Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 59(2), pages 278-287, January.
    7. Jung Cheol Shin & William K. Cummings, 2010. "Multilevel analysis of academic publishing across disciplines: research preference, collaboration, and time on research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 85(2), pages 581-594, November.
    8. Xin Gu & Karen L. Blackmore, 2016. "Recent trends in academic journal growth," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(2), pages 693-716, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ratinho, Tiago & Harms, Rainer & Walsh, Steven, 2015. "Structuring the Technology Entrepreneurship publication landscape: Making sense out of chaos," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 168-175.
    2. Mingyang Wang & Shijia Jiao & Kah-Hin Chai & Guangsheng Chen, 2019. "Building journal’s long-term impact: using indicators detected from the sustained active articles," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 121(1), pages 261-283, October.
    3. William M. Cockriel & James B. McDonald, 2018. "The influence of dispersion on journal impact measures," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 609-622, July.
    4. Sumiko Asai, 2021. "Collaboration between research institutes and large and small publishers for publishing open access journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(6), pages 5245-5262, June.
    5. A Townsend Peterson & Paul E Johnson & Narayani Barve & Ada Emmett & Marc L Greenberg & Josh Bolick & Huijie Qiao, 2019. "The NIH public access policy did not harm biomedical journals," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(10), pages 1-7, October.
    6. Mingers, John & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2015. "A review of theory and practice in scientometrics," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 246(1), pages 1-19.
    7. Rosenthal, Edward C. & Weiss, Howard J., 2017. "A data envelopment analysis approach for ranking journals," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 135-147.
    8. Bryce, Cormac & Dowling, Michael & Lucey, Brian, 2020. "The journal quality perception gap," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(5).
    9. Anastassios Pouris, 2010. "A scientometric assessment of the Southern Africa Development Community: science in the tip of Africa," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 85(1), pages 145-154, October.
    10. Rafols, Ismael & Leydesdorff, Loet & O’Hare, Alice & Nightingale, Paul & Stirling, Andy, 2012. "How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: A comparison between Innovation Studies and Business & Management," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(7), pages 1262-1282.
    11. Nianhang Xu & Winnie P. H. Poon & Kam C. Chan, 2014. "Contributing Institutions and Authors in International Business Research: A Quality-Based Assessment," Management International Review, Springer, vol. 54(5), pages 735-755, October.
    12. Catherine P. Slade & Saundra J. Ribando & C. Kevin Fortner, 2016. "Faculty research following merger: a job stress and social identity theory perspective," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 107(1), pages 71-89, April.
    13. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Flavia Costa, 2023. "Correlating article citedness and journal impact: an empirical investigation by field on a large-scale dataset," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(3), pages 1877-1894, March.
    14. Mohamed Boufarss & Mikael Laakso, 2020. "Open Sesame? Open access priorities, incentives, and policies among higher education institutions in the United Arab Emirates," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(2), pages 1553-1577, August.
    15. Juho Jokinen & Jaakko Pehkonen, 2017. "Promotions and Earnings – Gender or Merit? Evidence from Longitudinal Personnel Data," Journal of Labor Research, Springer, vol. 38(3), pages 306-334, September.
    16. Chang, Yu-Wei, 2022. "Capability of non-English-speaking countries for securing a foothold in international journal publishing," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3).
    17. Kaffash, Sepideh & Azizi, Roza & Huang, Ying & Zhu, Joe, 2020. "A survey of data envelopment analysis applications in the insurance industry 1993–2018," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 284(3), pages 801-813.
    18. Robert A. Buckle & John Creedy & Ashley Ball, 2021. "Fifteen Years of a PBRFS in New Zealand: Incentives and Outcomes," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 54(2), pages 208-230, June.
    19. Linh, Nguyen Thi Thuy & Lab, SDAG, 2019. "Factors influencing on salesperson performance in information service industry," Thesis Commons ugcre, Center for Open Science.
    20. Hajar Sotudeh & Zahra Ghasempour & Maryam Yaghtin, 2015. "The citation advantage of author-pays model: the case of Springer and Elsevier OA journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(2), pages 581-608, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    higher education research; publishing models; publishing culture; publishing influence factors; academic publishing pathways.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • I23 - Health, Education, and Welfare - - Education - - - Higher Education; Research Institutions
    • M12 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Personnel Management; Executives; Executive Compensation
    • M14 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Business Administration - - - Corporate Culture; Diversity; Social Responsibility

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:116499. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.