IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v129y2024i5d10.1007_s11192-024-04991-8.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How metric-based performance evaluation systems fuel the growth of questionable publications?

Author

Listed:
  • Onur Öztürk

    (Hacettepe University)

  • Zehra Taşkın

    (Hacettepe University
    Adam Mickiewicz University)

Abstract

The proliferation of questionable publishing practices has raised serious concerns in academia, prompting numerous discussions and investigations into the motivations behind researchers’ preference for such journals. In this study, we aimed to explore the impact of current academic performance evaluation systems on scholars’ questionable journal preferences in Turkey. Utilizing data from the comprehensive study conducted by Kulczycki et al. (2021) on questionable journals, we analyzed the academic careers of 398 researchers who authored 417 articles in this context. Our findings reveal a clear association between current research evaluation systems and journal selection, particularly during the process of applying for associate professorship. Notably, 96% of the articles published in questionable journals were listed in scholars’ academic profiles, indicating their use in academic promotion or incentive portfolios. While this study contributes valuable insights into the relationship between academic performance evaluation systems and questionable journal preferences, additional research is required to comprehensively understand the motivations behind scholars’ publishing choices and to devise effective strategies to combat questionable publishing practices in academia.

Suggested Citation

  • Onur Öztürk & Zehra Taşkın, 2024. "How metric-based performance evaluation systems fuel the growth of questionable publications?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(5), pages 2729-2748, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:129:y:2024:i:5:d:10.1007_s11192-024-04991-8
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-024-04991-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-024-04991-8
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-024-04991-8?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jeffrey Beall, 2016. "Ban predators from the scientific record," Nature, Nature, vol. 534(7607), pages 326-326, June.
    2. Yaşar Tonta & Müge Akbulut, 2020. "Does monetary support increase citation impact of scholarly papers?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(2), pages 1617-1641, November.
    3. Tove Faber Frandsen, 2017. "Are predatory journals undermining the credibility of science? A bibliometric analysis of citers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(3), pages 1513-1528, December.
    4. Bo-Christer Björk & Sari Kanto-Karvonen & J. Tuomas Harviainen, 2020. "How Frequently Are Articles in Predatory Open Access Journals Cited," Publications, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-12, March.
    5. Agnes Grudniewicz & David Moher & Kelly D. Cobey & Gregory L. Bryson & Samantha Cukier & Kristiann Allen & Clare Ardern & Lesley Balcom & Tiago Barros & Monica Berger & Jairo Buitrago Ciro & Lucia Cug, 2019. "Predatory journals: no definition, no defence," Nature, Nature, vol. 576(7786), pages 210-212, December.
    6. Ramón A Feenstra & Emilio Delgado López-Cózar, 2023. "The footprint of a metrics-based research evaluation system on Spain’s philosophical scholarship: An analysis of researchers’ perceptions," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(1), pages 32-46.
    7. Jelena Brankovic & Leopold Ringel & Tobias Werron, 2022. "Spreading the gospel: Legitimating university rankings as boundary work," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 31(4), pages 463-474.
    8. Marcelo S. Perlin & Takeyoshi Imasato & Denis Borenstein, 2018. "Is predatory publishing a real threat? Evidence from a large database study," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 255-273, July.
    9. Sefika Mertkan & Gulen Onurkan Aliusta & Nilgun Suphi, 2021. "Profile of authors publishing in ‘predatory’ journals and causal factors behind their decision: A systematic review [Understanding of Medical Students about Predatory Journals: A Comparative Study ," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(4), pages 470-483.
    10. Emanuel Kulczycki & Marek Hołowiecki & Zehra Taşkın & Franciszek Krawczyk, 2021. "Citation patterns between impact-factor and questionable journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(10), pages 8541-8560, October.
    11. Daniele Fanelli, 2010. "Do Pressures to Publish Increase Scientists' Bias? An Empirical Support from US States Data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(4), pages 1-7, April.
    12. Alexander McLeod & Arline Savage & Mark G. Simkin, 2018. "The Ethics of Predatory Journals," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 153(1), pages 121-131, November.
    13. Demir, Selcuk Besir, 2018. "Predatory journals: Who publishes in them and why?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 1296-1311.
    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. Salim Moussa, 2021. "Citation contagion: a citation analysis of selected predatory marketing journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 485-506, January.
    2. Emanuel Kulczycki & Marek Hołowiecki & Zehra Taşkın & Franciszek Krawczyk, 2021. "Citation patterns between impact-factor and questionable journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(10), pages 8541-8560, October.
    3. Dimity Stephen, 2023. "Medical articles in questionable journals are less impactful than those in non-questionable journals but still extensively cited," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(8), pages 4509-4522, August.
    4. Kyle Siler, 2020. "Demarcating spectrums of predatory publishing: Economic and institutional sources of academic legitimacy," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 71(11), pages 1386-1401, November.
    5. Vít Macháček & Martin Srholec, 2021. "RETRACTED ARTICLE: Predatory publishing in Scopus: evidence on cross-country differences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(3), pages 1897-1921, March.
    6. You, Taekho & Park, Jinseo & Lee, June Young & Yun, Jinhyuk & Jung, Woo-Sung, 2022. "Disturbance of questionable publishing to academia," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    7. Mauricio Marrone, 2020. "Application of entity linking to identify research fronts and trends," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 122(1), pages 357-379, January.
    8. Joshua Eykens & Raf Guns & A I M Jakaria Rahman & Tim C E Engels, 2019. "Identifying publications in questionable journals in the context of performance-based research funding," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(11), pages 1-19, November.
    9. Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva & Daniel J. Dunleavy & Mina Moradzadeh & Joshua Eykens, 2021. "A credit-like rating system to determine the legitimacy of scientific journals and publishers," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(10), pages 8589-8616, October.
    10. Anna Abalkina, 2021. "Detecting a network of hijacked journals by its archive," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(8), pages 7123-7148, August.
    11. Libor Ansorge, 2023. "The right to reject an unwanted citations: do we need it?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(7), pages 4147-4150, July.
    12. Raminta Pranckutė, 2021. "Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-59, March.
    13. Philip Darbyshire & Mark Hayter & Kate Frazer & Robin Ion & Debra Jackson, 2020. "Hitting rock bottom: The descent from predatory journals and conferences to the predatory PhD," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(23-24), pages 4425-4428, December.
    14. Liu, Xiaojuan & Wang, Chenlin & Chen, Dar-Zen & Huang, Mu-Hsuan, 2022. "Exploring perception of retraction based on mentioned status in post-retraction citations," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3).
    15. Stefan, Matthias & Huber, Jürgen & Kirchler, Michael & Sutter, Matthias & Walzl, Markus, 2023. "Monetary and social incentives in multi-tasking: The ranking substitution effect," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    16. Jasper Brinkerink, 2023. "When Shooting for the Stars Becomes Aiming for Asterisks: P-Hacking in Family Business Research," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 47(2), pages 304-343, March.
    17. Dell'Anno, Roberto & Caferra, Rocco & Morone, Andrea, 2020. "A “Trojan Horse” in the peer-review process of fee-charging economic journals," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(3).
    18. 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.
    19. Necker, Sarah, 2014. "Scientific misbehavior in economics," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(10), pages 1747-1759.
    20. Edré Moreira & Wagner Meira & Marcos André Gonçalves & Alberto H. F. Laender, 2023. "The rise of hyperprolific authors in computer science: characterization and implications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(5), pages 2945-2974, May.

    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:spr:scient:v:129:y:2024:i:5:d:10.1007_s11192-024-04991-8. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.