IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/abg/anprac/v25y2021i11417.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Salami Science in the Age of Open Data: Déjà lu and Accountability in Management and Business Research

Author

Listed:
  • Wesley Mendes-Da-Silva
  • Cristiana Cerqueira Leal

Abstract

The growth in the number of scientific research articles that are daily made available to society through their publication in scientific journals has been explicit. In fact, as illustrated by Table 1, in 2018 approximately 2.6 million scientific articles were published, which suggests an annual growth in the area of 3.8% since 2008. During this period, while economically developed countries such as the United States, Germany, the United Kingdom, and Canada have presented annual growth rates inferior to the world average (0.71%, 1.28%, 0.67%, and 1.19% respectively), there has been a significant percentage growth in the number of publications in economically emerging countries — including the annual growth rates of China (7.81%), India (10.73%), Russia (9.88%), Brazil (5.42%), and Iran (10.99%). A priori this growth is very positive, since scientific publications continue to be the best way to validate knowledge and for the authors to receive recognized credit. However, it imposes a group of equally growing costs. We can highlight not just financial costs, but also costs that tend to be forgotten, such as more and more onerous workloads for evaluators and the allocation of resources to process submissions (yes, there is a considerable cost in these activities). Examined together with observed conditions of stocks and flows, it appears reasonable to examine and maintain under observation the sustainability of scientific publication as we know it, especially in terms of open access. The field of management and business, like other fields of knowledge, is subject to these preoccupations, and the Journal of Contemporary Administration (RAC) shares these concerns.

Suggested Citation

  • Wesley Mendes-Da-Silva & Cristiana Cerqueira Leal, 2021. "Salami Science in the Age of Open Data: Déjà lu and Accountability in Management and Business Research," RAC - Revista de Administração Contemporânea (Journal of Contemporary Administration), ANPAD - Associação Nacional de Pós-Graduação e Pesquisa em Administração, vol. 25(1), pages 200194-2001.
  • Handle: RePEc:abg:anprac:v:25:y:2021:i:1:1417
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://rac.anpad.org.br/index.php/rac/article/view/1417
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://rac.anpad.org.br/index.php/rac/article/download/1417/1550/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Debra Jackson & Garry Walter & John Daly & Michelle Cleary, 2014. "Editorial: Multiple outputs from single studies: acceptable division of findings vs. ‘salami’ slicing," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(1-2), pages 1-2, January.
    2. Benson Honig & Joseph Lampel & Donald Siegel & Paul Drnevich, 2014. "Ethics in the Production and Dissemination of Management Research: Institutional Failure or Individual Fallibility?," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 51(1), pages 118-142, January.
    3. Solmaz Filiz Karabag & Christian Berggren, 2016. "Misconduct, Marginality and Editorial Practices in Management, Business and Economics Journals," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(7), pages 1-25, July.
    4. Yomi Babatunde & Sui Pheng Low, 2015. "Research Design and Methodology," Springer Books, in: Cross-Cultural Management and Quality Performance, edition 127, chapter 0, pages 93-113, Springer.
    5. Covin, Jeffrey G. & McMullen, Jeffery S., 2019. "Programmatic research and the case for designing and publishing from rich, multifaceted datasets: Issues and recommendations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 40-46.
    6. Carol Tenopir & Elizabeth D Dalton & Suzie Allard & Mike Frame & Ivanka Pjesivac & Ben Birch & Danielle Pollock & Kristina Dorsett, 2015. "Changes in Data Sharing and Data Reuse Practices and Perceptions among Scientists Worldwide," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-24, 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. Berggren, Christian & Karabag, Solmaz Filiz, 2019. "Scientific misconduct at an elite medical institute: The role of competing institutional logics and fragmented control," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 428-443.
    2. Gary A. Hoover & Christian Hopp, 2017. "What Crisis? Taking Stock of Management Researchers' Experiences with and Views of Scholarly Misconduct," CESifo Working Paper Series 6611, CESifo.
    3. Jeremy Hall & Ben R. Martin, 2019. "Towards a Taxonomy of Academic Misconduct: The Case of Business School Research," SPRU Working Paper Series 2019-02, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    4. Hensel, Przemysław G., 2019. "Supporting replication research in management journals: Qualitative analysis of editorials published between 1970 and 2015," European Management Journal, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 45-57.
    5. Ho Fai Chan & Nikita Ferguson & David A. Savage & David Stadelmann & Benno Torgler, 2020. "Is Science Able to Perform Under Pressure? Insights from COVID-19," CREMA Working Paper Series 2020-07, Center for Research in Economics, Management and the Arts (CREMA).
    6. Pfeil, Katharina & Necker, Sarah & Feld, Lars P., 2023. "Compliance management in research institutes: Boon or bane?," Freiburg Discussion Papers on Constitutional Economics 23/1, Walter Eucken Institut e.V..
    7. Claire M Mason & Paul J Box & Shanae M Burns, 2020. "Research data sharing in the Australian national science agency: Understanding the relative importance of organisational, disciplinary and domain-specific influences," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(8), pages 1-17, August.
    8. Vuong Quan Hoang & La Viet Phuong & Vuong Thu Trang & Hoang Phuong Hanh & Ho Manh Toan & Ho Manh Tung & Nguyen Hong Kong To, 2020. "Multi-faceted insights of entrepreneurship facing a fast-growing economy: A literature review," Open Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 3(1), pages 25-41, January.
    9. Andrea Sixto-Costoya & Rafael Aleixandre-Benavent & Rut Lucas-Domínguez & Antonio Vidal-Infer, 2020. "The Emergency Medicine Facing the Challenge of Open Science," Data, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-7, March.
    10. Hall, Jeremy & Martin, Ben R., 2019. "Towards a taxonomy of research misconduct: The case of business school research," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(2), pages 414-427.
    11. Oded Shenkar & Shmuel Ellis, 2022. "The Rise and Fall of Structural Contingency Theory: A Theory’s ‘autopsy’," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 59(3), pages 782-818, May.
    12. Bettina Suhr & Johanna Dungl & Alexander Stocker, 2020. "Search, reuse and sharing of research data in materials science and engineering—A qualitative interview study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-26, September.
    13. Carolyn Hayes & Debra Jackson & Patricia M. Davidson & John Daly & Tamara Power, 2018. "Pondering practice: Enhancing the art of reflection," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(1-2), pages 345-353, January.
    14. Renata Gonçalves Curty & Kevin Crowston & Alison Specht & Bruce W Grant & Elizabeth D Dalton, 2017. "Attitudes and norms affecting scientists’ data reuse," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(12), pages 1-22, December.
    15. Graeme D Smith & Carol Haigh & Debra Jackson, 2015. "Editorial: Ensuring standards in publication ethics," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(1-2), pages 1-3, January.
    16. Hengky Latan & Charbel Jose Chiappetta Jabbour & Ana Beatriz Lopes de Sousa Jabbour & Murad Ali, 2023. "Crossing the Red Line? Empirical Evidence and Useful Recommendations on Questionable Research Practices among Business Scholars," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 184(3), pages 549-569, May.
    17. Hopp, Christian & Hoover, Gary A., 2017. "How prevalent is academic misconduct in management research?," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 73-81.
    18. Xiaoguang Wang & Qingyu Duan & Mengli Liang, 2021. "Understanding the process of data reuse: An extensive review," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 72(9), pages 1161-1182, September.
    19. Michelle Cleary & Kim Usher & Debra Jackson, 2015. "Editorial: Money, money, money: not so funny in the research world," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(5-6), pages 611-613, March.
    20. Shibayama, Sotaro & Lawson, Cornelia, 2021. "The use of rewards in the sharing of research resources," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(7).

    More about this item

    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:abg:anprac:v:25:y:2021:i:1:1417. 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: Information Technology of ANPAD (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://anpad.org.br .

    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.