Search

Revealing interdisciplinary patterns is a cornerstone for the continued evolution of research, education, and societal progress, providing a scaffold upon which to build a more collaborative and integrated approach to knowledge creation. This study presents a novel approach to identifying and analyzing the critical year for interdisciplinary citations (CYIC), which was defined as the year in which qualitative change in interdisciplinary knowledge flow occurred. We conducted two experiments using a Chinese paper dataset spanning 106 disciplines from 1992 to 2022, with the first to pinpoint the occurrence of CYICs and the second to examine three patterns of interdisciplinarity following these CYICs. Our findings revealed that 85% of disciplines exhibit CYICs, often corresponding with a transition from unidirectional output to reciprocal knowledge cooperation. Furthermore, we found that datasets after CYICs are generally characterized by increased interdisciplinarity of knowledge, albeit without a corresponding rise in the interdisciplinarity of disciplines or interdisciplinary diversity. Our results suggest that policy shifts and societal needs are pivotal in driving the formation of interdisciplinary collaborations, as exemplified by the surge in mutual interdisciplinary citations in response to China's poverty alleviation efforts and western development policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper investigates different uses of the Journal Impact Factor (JIF) in national journal rankings and discusses the merits of supplementing metrics with expert assessment. Our focus is national journal rankings used as evidence to support decisions about the distribution of institutional funding or career advancement. The seven countries under comparison are China, Denmark, Finland, Italy, Norway, Poland, and Turkey—and the region of Flanders in Belgium. With the exception of Italy, top‐tier journals used in national rankings include those classified at the highest level, or according to tier, or points implemented. A total of 3,565 (75.8%) out of 4,701 unique top‐tier journals were identified as having a JIF, with 55.7% belonging to the first Journal Impact Factor quartile. Journal rankings in China, Flanders, Poland, and Turkey classify journals with a JIF as being top‐tier, but only when they are in the first quartile of the Average Journal Impact Factor Percentile. Journal rankings that result from expert assessment in Denmark, Finland, and Norway regularly classify journals as top‐tier outside the first quartile, particularly in the social sciences and humanities. We conclude that experts, when tasked with metric‐informed journal rankings, take into account quality dimensions that are not covered by JIFs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

As a healthcare ICT4D solution, mobile health (mHealth) can potentially improve users' well‐being during pandemics, especially in developing countries with limited healthcare resources. Recent ICT4D research reveals that providing end‐users with access to ICT is insufficient for improving well‐being and, thus, understanding how mHealth empowers end‐users to enhance well‐being against stressful events is important. However, prior research has rarely discussed the issue of empowerment in the domain of mHealth or the context of major disruptive events. This paper contributes to the literature by conceptualizing the psychological empowerment of mHealth users (PEMU) and investigating its nomological network during pandemics. Drawing upon theories of psychological empowerment and event characteristics, we developed a research model and tested it through a mixed‐methods investigation, containing a quantitative study with 602 Chinese mHealth users during COVID‐19 and a follow‐up qualitative study of 326 online articles and reviews. We found that PEMU, driven by three technological characteristics (perceived response efficacy, ease of use, and mHealth quality), affects well‐being through both (a) a stress‐buffering effect, which counterbalances the detrimental, stress‐increasing effects of event criticality and disruption, and (b) a vitality‐stimulating effect, which is intensified by event criticality. These findings have important implications for ICT4D research and practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although the open access citation advantage (OACA) has been discussed extensively, scholars lack a clear understanding of the mechanisms through which switching from subscription‐based model to open access (OA) model affects the citation impact of a scholarly journal. Many journals have switched from subscription to OA, yet they later also flipped their preswitching articles (i.e., those under subscription model) to OA, thus leaving no subscription article to be compared with their postswitching OA counterparts. To detect the switching effect, our study instead focused on 60 journals that "reverse flipped" from OA to subscription. We use a difference‐in‐difference (DiD) analytical framework to analyze two propositions related to OACA, based on the bibliographic and citation data of pre‐ and postswitching publications in these journals. Our findings indicate that reverse flipping is unlikely to affect the journals' impact through changing the visibility of their articles. Instead, it could lead to a systematical shift in the submissions to the journals and thus considerably affect their impact. Our findings have important theoretical and practical implications for subsequent studies, funding agencies, and scholarly journals considering a reverse flip. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study explored users' criteria for citation decisions and investigated the effects on users' intention to cite using a mixed‐method approach. A qualitative study was conducted first, where 16 citing criteria were identified based on interviews and inductive analysis. The findings were then used to develop hypotheses and extend the information adoption model. A questionnaire was designed to collect data from users in Chinese universities to test the research model. The findings indicated that pleasure, topicality, and functionality significantly increased users' perceived information usefulness, while familiarity and accessibility significantly enhanced users' perceived ease of use. Information usefulness and information ease of use further contributed to users' intention to cite with adjusted R2 equaling 44.6%. It is also found that perceived academic quality based on 5 antecedents (i.e., reliability, comprehensiveness, novelty, author credibility, and source reputation) significantly increased users' pleasure. Implications and limitations were provided. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]