Search

When deciding which submissions should be peer reviewed, eLife editors consider whether they will be able to find high-quality reviewers, and whether the reviews will be valuable to the scientific community.

Simple Summary: The article studies the research output on sheep and goats from Greece; a country where small ruminant farming is the most important terrestrial animal farming business. Milk production from sheep and goats exceeds that from cattle and over 90% of total milk produced from sheep and goats is used for dairy products. Research output on sheep and goats have increased significantly from 1997 to 2022. The bulk of publications, 87.5% of relevant papers, has originated from four establishments: Aristotle University of Thessaloniki; University of Thessaly; Agricultural University of Athens and Hellenic Agricultural Organization—Dimitra. Papers were published most frequently in the journals Small Ruminant Research and Journal of the Hellenic Veterinary Medical Society. The most frequent general topics of study were animal health-welfare and animal products. The findings have indicated that research has focused on milk production and diseases of the udder of small ruminants; moreover, there was accumulation of relevant research in Greece in some establishments only. The findings of the study can be used by researchers; stakeholders and Government entities to improve relevant research and to better allocate resources in the country. The study is a scientometrics evaluation of published articles performed in Greece on sheep and goats during the last 25 years, a period coinciding with implementation of reforms to shape and consolidate tertiary education and research establishments in the country. Objectives were: evaluation of the relevant publications and presentation of quantitative characteristics regarding scientific content and bibliometric details. The Web of Science platform was used (search terms: [[sheep OR goat*] OR [Ovis aries OR Capra hircus]] (1997–2022)) and 1080 papers were considered in detail. Throughout the study period, there was a clear progressive increase in numbers of papers published. The papers originated from 39 different entities, most from Aristotle University of Thessaloniki (34.0%), University of Thessaly (28.0%), Agricultural University of Athens (21.2%) and Hellenic Agricultural Organization—Dimitra (13.6%). Papers were published in 318 different journals. Journals with more published papers were Small Ruminant Research and Journal of the Hellenic Veterinary Medical Society. The most frequent general topic of study in the papers was health and welfare (46.7% of papers); second most frequent topic was animal products (18.6%). The papers have received 16,558 citations, i.e., οn average 15.4 citations per paper; the h-index was 56, the i10-index was 518 and the yearly citations per paper were 1.71. Papers on goats had higher impact than papers on sheep. There were 1711 individual authors, of which 728 were first or last authors. In total, 24 authors have each co-authored ≥2.5% of all papers; five authors were each first or last in that proportion of all papers. The findings have indicated that relevant research has focused on milk production and diseases of the udder of small ruminants; moreover, there was accumulation of relevant research in Greece in some establishments only. The findings of the study can be employed to initiate improved relevant research approaches in the country. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many published resources on the topic can trace the research community's increasing interest in medicinal plant research. However, there is no systematic bibliometric review in the field of medicinal plants. This research's primary purpose was to analyze research output on the medicinal plant by the Indian researcher from 1977 to 2020 through a bibliometric perspective. To analyze and present the results based on bibliometrics indicators, namely yearly research trends, relevant journals, productive organization, prolific authors, authorship pattern, country collaboration level, and funding agencies. A total of 3911 quality research papers have been downloaded from the web of science. Data was analyzed with Microsoft excel, bibliometrics, and scientometric software, namely Bibexcel, VOSviewer, and Biblioshiny (RStudio). The study reveals that the year 2020 has the highest number of research papers (NP=376) in the medicinal plant, Journal of Ethnopharmacology (NP=125) found the leading contributed sources in the medicinal plant. Kumar A was the prolific author among Indian authors. Most of the researchers published their papers in the form of articles (89.70%), CSIR (NP=143) was the highest contributed organization in the field, and University Grants Commission India (NP=421) was the most influential funding agency on medicinal plant research in India. This bibliometrics analysis not providing the researchers' direction, but it extends helps to the policymaker and funding agencies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Ukraine, Scopus data are used to evaluate academics. Existing shortcomings in the Ukrainian evaluation system allow them to publish in titles that have been delisted from Scopus, and continue to use those papers as credible research output for evaluation. The purpose of this study was to analyse the publishing activity of Ukrainian institutions in Scopus‐delisted titles (as of September 2021) in different fields between 2011 and 2020 and to attempt to appreciate how common this practice is among Ukrainian authors. Scopus was sourced to collect bibliographic and citations‐related data, while SciVal was used to analyse these data. The findings suggest that for 17 Ukrainian institutions, papers from titles that have been delisted from Scopus still play an important part of the publication achievement of their employees. In particular, in the field of economics, econometrics and finance, 46.92% of Ukrainian papers were published in a title that was excluded from Scopus. Moreover, the analysis indicated that in two Ukrainian institutions, the level of citation of such papers significantly exceeds the average number of citations to Scopus‐indexed papers in the same year and in the same field. Given that bibliometric indicators are also used for research assessment in other Eastern European countries, the results of this paper are applicable to a wider geographic context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We studied the research performance of 69 countries by considering two different types of new knowledge: incremental (normal) and fundamental (radical). In principle, these two types of new knowledge should be assessed at two very different levels of citations, but we demonstrate that a simpler assessment can be performed based on the total number of papers (P) and the ratio of the number of papers in the global top 10% of most cited papers divided to the total number of papers (Ptop 10%/P). P represents the quantity, whereas the Ptop 10%/P ratio represents the efficiency. In ideal countries, P and the Ptop 10%/P ratio are linked to the gross domestic product (GDP) and GDP the per capita, respectively. Only countries with high Ptop 10%/P ratios participate actively in the creation of fundamental new knowledge and have Noble laureates. In real countries, the link between economic and scientific wealth can be modified by the technological activity and the research policy. We discuss how technological activity may decrease the Ptop 10%/P ratio while only slightly affecting the capacity to create fundamental new knowledge; in such countries, many papers may report incremental innovations that do not drive the advancement of knowledge. Japan is the clearest example of this, although there are many less extreme examples. Independently of technological activity, research policy has a strong influence on the Ptop 10%/P ratio, which may be higher or lower than expected from the GDP per capita depending on the success of the research policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper summarizes the 18th Academic Publishing in Europe (APE) Conference: Berlin Re-Visited: Building Technological Support for Scholarship and Scientific Publishing, held as a hybrid event 10 and 11 January 2023, and organized by the Berlin Institute of Scholarly Publishing (BISP), a not-for-profit organization dedicated to bringing publishers, researchers, funders, and policymakers together. This year's conference theme "Out with the old, in with the new!" was discussed and presented in keynote speeches, the APE lecture, and several panel discussions. Current challenges within scholarly publishing, e.g., with research integrity, trust, and research assessment, have much to do with the old ways of doing things. To move science forward, new technologies and innovations, like the decentralized web, FAIR digital objects, and blockchain technology are needed to shape new paradigms. In many sessions it was stressed that not just new technologies are needed to move science forward, but human collaboration and partnerships as well. The changing role of the journal and the importance to recognize more diverse research outputs, beyond the journal article, was a topic of importance. Not only research assessment reforms and improved collaboration amongst different stakeholder groups are needed to address this, new publishing systems, better metadata, and open infrastructures as well. A session presenting different start-ups showcased how Artificial Intelligence, Natural Language Processing and software technology can be used to tackle problems in e.g., finding relevant funders and peer reviewers, and detecting image plagiarism. It was also discussed what publishers can do to help achieve the Sustainable Development Goals. Collaboration, data transparency and sharing best practices amongst researchers, funders, and policy makers are key. Another important topic during this year's APE was how publishers can support Early Career Researchers: establishing new workflows and infrastructures that enable publication of a wider range of research outputs, and broader recognition of these outputs, will incentivize ECRs. This year's APE was concluded with the APE Award Ceremony. The winner - Vsevolod Solovyov from Prophy - has used AI to enhance the current peer review system and made a very important contribution to improving the scholarly communication system. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering (AJSE) is a rapidly growing multidisciplinary academic journal that publishes original contributions in the Science disciplines of Biological sciences, Chemistry, Earth Sciences, and Physics, and in the Engineering disciplines of Civil, Chemical, Electrical, Mechanical, Petroleum Engineering, Computer Science and Engineering, Systems Engineering, and along with a Theme Issue on specific topic. This study uses bibliometric tools to present a retrospective analysis of research productivity during 1977–2021. The bibliometric method used to analyze AJSE's published papers based on annual growth, citation pattern, prolific authors, country, organization, funding agencies, author keyword, authorship patterns, theme analysis, most cited papers, cited references, and international collaborations. The result shows that AJSE has grown noticeably from 1977 to 2021 in total publications and citations, reaching 7658 papers and 33,846 citations. India (TP: 1324) is the country with the more number of papers contributed. King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals (TP: 838) found as the most contributing organization to the AJSE publications. Zhang L identified as the most prolific author with 28 publications. The most important author keywords are Optimization, Adsorption, Genetic algorithm, and Mechanical properties. Saudi Arabia and Egypt collaborated in the maximum number of AJSE research papers. This is the first bibliometric investigation of AJSE scientific literature since its establishment. Overall, the findings provide useful information to the AJSE editorial board. Its retrospective review will likely encourage readers of the journal and help the editorial team formulate research agendas and inform research strategies that will enable research scientists to contribute high-quality research papers to the AJSE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper is based on a presentation from a panel discussion on Innovation, Technology and Infrastructure at the 2023 APE Conference. It provides an overview of the use, misuse and value of bibliometrics in research assessment, examines the responsible use of metrics and the importance of going beyond existing bibliometric indicators of scholarly impact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aims of this research is to evaluate the literature on Environmentalism indexed on the Web of Science between 1941 to 2020. The analysis is based on bibliometric methods to evaluate global research performance in environmental publications. Bibliometric software, namely Bibexcel, VOSviewer, Biblioshiny, and Microsoft Excel, was used to analyze the data. The result shows 4095 publications with 73829 citations between 1941 and 2020. The maximum number of papers, i.e., 295 published in 2020. The Journal Environmental Politics published the highest research paper with 114 publications. Milfont TL was the most prolific author with 10 papers. The USA is the leading contributed country with 1620 publications, and Michigan State University emerged as a top-performing organization. The USA and China together collaborated maximum research paper on Environmentalism. The study concludes that there is a need for further bibliometric study of related topics in Environmentalism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Solid waste management refers to collecting, treating, and disposing of solid waste that has served its purpose or is no longer useful. The primary purpose of this research is to map and visualize the solid waste management literature indexed on the Web of science between 1966 and 2021 based on bibliometrics analysis. This study also identified the most productive authors, sources, organizations, countries, research areas, funding agencies etc. This study employed the bibliometric method to analyze global research productivity on solid waste management literature. A total of 4444 research papers downloaded from the Web of science during the study period. Bibliometrics software, namely Bibexcel, VOSviewer, Biblioshiny, and Microsoft Excel, used to analyze the data. The results show that there was 4444 publication with 78759 citations between 1966 and 2021. The maximum number of papers, i.e., 424 published in 2020, in 1966 single paper published and received one citation. The journal Waste management published 382 papers and became the most relevant source of the topic, whereas Huang GH recognized as the most prolific author with 214 papers. China contributed a significant number of research papers in the field, while the University of Regina, Canada, emerged as a top-performing institution. China and Canada together collaborated more in producing literature in solid waste management. The study concludes that there is a need for further bibliometric study of other related topics in waste management, such as liquid waste management and gasses waste management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Assess whether ChatGPT 4.0 is accurate enough to perform research evaluations on journal articles to automate this time-consuming task. Test the extent to which ChatGPT-4 can assess the quality of journal articles using a case study of the published scoring guidelines of the UK Research Excellence Framework (REF) 2021 to create a research evaluation ChatGPT. This was applied to 51 of my own articles and compared against my own quality judgements. ChatGPT-4 can produce plausible document summaries and quality evaluation rationales that match the REF criteria. Its overall scores have weak correlations with my self-evaluation scores of the same documents (averaging r=0.281 over 15 iterations, with 8 being statistically significantly different from 0). In contrast, the average scores from the 15 iterations produced a statistically significant positive correlation of 0.509. Thus, averaging scores from multiple ChatGPT-4 rounds seems more effective than individual scores. The positive correlation may be due to ChatGPT being able to extract the author's significance, rigour, and originality claims from inside each paper. If my weakest articles are removed, then the correlation with average scores (r=0.200) falls below statistical significance, suggesting that ChatGPT struggles to make fine-grained evaluations. The data is self-evaluations of a convenience sample of articles from one academic in one field. Overall, ChatGPT does not yet seem to be accurate enough to be trusted for any formal or informal research quality evaluation tasks. Research evaluators, including journal editors, should therefore take steps to control its use. This is the first published attempt at post-publication expert review accuracy testing for ChatGPT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Tapuya: Latin American Science, Technology & Society is the property of Taylor & Francis Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Purpose: King Fahd University of petroleum and minerals is one of the best universities in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf region. The primary goal of this study is to analyze research output and mapping knowledge of King Fahd University of petroleum and minerals, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, between 2011 and 2020. Methodology: The present study employed the bibliometric method to explore the research performance of the King Fahd University Petroleum and Minerals between 2011 and 2020. The study focused on bibliometric parameters such as annual research growth and its citation impact over the years, the prolific researcher, authorship pattern, relevant sources, subjects-wise research and level of collaborations by authors and countries, etc. Results: The results show that out of 12494 papers, the highest research was 928 papers published in 2020. The majority of the 9906 publications were published as journal articles, and the "Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering" ranked first with 256 articles. B.S. Yilbas identified the most prolific author with 342 papers, and the three authorship (3509) papers were the most preferred authorship pattern. Moreover, the subject 'Engineering' has the highest number of published papers. Furthermore, the most commonly used author's keywords are adsorption, Corrosion, Laser, Laser, Solar, corrosion inhibition, and nanoparticles between 2011 and 2020. The results also show Saudi Arabia vs. the United States was most the collaborative country for KFUPM research with 1365 publications, followed by Pakistan and India, and the collaboration index noted as 1.42. The study also recommends some valuable suggestions to accelerate and produce more research in KFUPM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Liposome is a spherical-shaped vesicle composed of one or more phospholipid bilayers, closely resembling cell membranes' structure. It has a novel drug delivery system (NDDS); the lipid bilayer can fuse with other bilayers, such as the cell membrane, thus delivering the liposome contents. The present study has been conducted to map the research productivity of 'liposomes as drug delivery' between 1980 and 2021. This study employed the scientometric method to analyze 629 research papers indexed in the Web of Science database. Different bibliometrics indicators were used to assess the annual research growth, prolific authors, authorship pattern, funding agencies, productive source, organization, country, author keywords, cited paper and cited references, etc. Biblioshiny, Bibexcel, VOSviewer, and MS Office were used to analyze the 629 published papers. The findings show that 629 publications were published between 1980 and 2001, with 24674 citations. 2018 and 2019 recorded the highest research with 49 publications and 758 and 471 citations, respectively. Journal of Controlled Release was the most relevant source in the field, with 45 publications and 3063 citations. LIU Y was the most productive author, with 15 publications and 342 citations. Northwestern University USA has the highest record with 11 publications, and the USA was the most productive country with 181 publications, while China emerged as a leading collaborator with the USA (19 publications). Liposomes and cationic liposomes were identified as the most important research themes. Permeability, ocular drug delivery, Chemotherapy, Cancer therapy, Hypoxia, Combination therapy, and hyaluronic acid were research topics that have gained recent popularity. At the same time, Vesicles targeted drug delivery, cellular uptake, ultrasound, Chitosan, and Pegylation were identified as the research areas that require further attention in the field of liposomes as drug delivery research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Scientific productivity is often evaluated by means of cumulative citation metrics. Different metrics produce different incentives. The H-index assigns full credit from a citation to each coauthor, and thus may encourage multiple collaborations in mid-list author roles. In contrast, the Hm-index assigns only a fraction 1/k of citation credit to each of k coauthors of an article, and thus may encourage research done by smaller teams, and in first or last author roles. Whether H and Hm indices are influenced by different authorship patterns has not been examined. Methods: Using a publicly available Scopus database, I examined associations between the numbers of research articles published as single, first, mid-list, or last author between 1990 and 2019, and the H-index and the Hm-index, among 18,231 leading researchers in the health sciences. Results: Adjusting for career duration and other article types, the H-index was negatively associated with the number of single author articles (partial Pearson r -0.06) and first author articles (-0.08), but positively associated with the number of mid-list (0.64) and last author articles (0.21). In contrast, all associations were positive for the Hm-index (0.04 for single author articles, 0.18 for first author articles, 0.24 for mid-list articles, and 0.46 for last author articles). Conclusion: The H-index and the Hm-index do not reflect the same authorship patterns: the full-credit H-index is predominantly associated with mid-list authorship, whereas the partial-credit Hm-index is driven by more balanced publication patterns, and is most strongly associated with last-author articles. Since performance metrics may act as incentives, the selection of a citation metric should receive careful consideration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Financial accounting, the core of corporate reporting, is often characterized as the 'language of business'. Over the last roughly 100 years, and using an evolving set of theories, methods, and data, scholarly work in this area has been contributing to our understanding of this language and how to improve it. This paper seeks, first, to characterize the field with a focus on its evolution in the German-speaking area, where, like elsewhere, normative research traditions interested in improving practice have been making way for positivist approaches that seek a detached understanding of 'what is.' Second, we discuss the changing users and institutional parameters that are reshaping corporate reporting, followed by our personal view of 'wicked' societal problems and challenges that corporate reporting might be able to help alleviate. Finally, we discuss directions in which research might evolve in order to address these issues, in order to make corporate reporting more useful for serving not only economic actors, but also society and the environment more broadly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of El Profesional de la Información is the property of EPI SCP and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Understanding the scholarly impact of social work research can inform strategies to strengthen the profession's research foundations. This study examined research productivity and academic impact using h-indexes for a sample of 112 Australian social work researchers according to the stage of their career. Annual research output was calculated using Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA) data. The average h-index for all social work researchers in the sample was 6.39 (Scopus) and 12.5 (Google Scholar). Web of Science was not used due to the number of inaccurate researcher profiles. One hundred and thirty-nine publications received 100 or more citations, but there were many never-cited publications. A social work benchmark for the number of publications is around 1.4 publications per year, depending upon a person's stage of career and workload profile. Citation analysis can supplement peer review in evaluating research quality, but there are disciplinary differences in publication and citation practices, so it is useful to know where social work is positioned. IMPLICATIONS Citation analysis is used to assess research productivity and quality alongside qualitative assessment, such as peer review. It is imperative for researchers to check, correct, and claim Google Scholar, Scopus and Web of Science records, and to link these to their ORCID profile. A citation benchmark for social work would be in the range of h-index 3.2 for early-career researchers to 15.8 for research-focused positions (Scopus) or h-index 6.1–25.0 (Google Scholar). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Liposome is a spherical-shaped vesicle composed of one or more phospholipid bilayers, closely resembling cell membranes' structure. It has a novel drug delivery system (NDDS); the lipid bilayer can fuse with other bilayers, such as the cell membrane, thus delivering the liposome contents. The present study has been conducted to map the research productivity of 'liposomes as drug delivery' between 1980 and 2021. This study employed the scientometric method to analyze 629 research papers indexed in the Web of Science database. Different bibliometrics indicators were used to assess the annual research growth, prolific authors, authorship pattern, funding agencies, productive source, organization, country, author keywords, cited paper and cited references, etc. Biblioshiny, Bibexcel, VOSviewer, and MS Office were used to analyze the 629 published papers. The findings show that 629 publications were published between 1980 and 2001, with 24674 citations. 2018 and 2019 recorded the highest research with 49 publications and 758 and 471 citations, respectively. Journal of Controlled Release was the most relevant source in the field, with 45 publications and 3063 citations. LIU Y was the most productive author, with 15 publications and 342 citations. Northwestern University USA has the highest record with 11 publications, and the USA was the most productive country with 181 publications, while China emerged as a leading collaborator with the USA (19 publications). Liposomes and cationic liposomes were identified as the most important research themes. Permeability, ocular drug delivery, Chemotherapy, Cancer therapy, Hypoxia, Combination therapy, and hyaluronic acid were research topics that had gained recent popularity. At the same time, Vesicles targeted drug delivery, cellular uptake, ultrasound, Chitosan, and Pegylation were identified as the research areas that require further attention in the field of liposomes as drug delivery research.

Aware of the growing importance of global rankings, universities aim to enhance their positions. However, the exact relation between research productivity and ranking positions is not fully understood in recruitment processes. Taking the field of communication as a case study, this paper analyzes the scholarly performances of 6291 faculty members from 172 QS top-ranked communication departments, and it also offers an experiment in which we tested top departments' interest in recruiting a highly productive communication scholar. We found that while both departments and scholars are aware of the connection between productivity and excellence, there is still room for improvement. Even in the top ranked communication departments, there is a significant scarcity of best-performing scholars, but it is hard to employ a top scholar beyond the usual job posting methods. Contrary to the Standard Model of Productivity, whereby recruitment is based on assumptions and potential, we offer our Model of Maximum Productivity where both recruitment and assessments are based on scientometrics, productivity and evidence alone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years, there has been increased attention given to how research assessment is conducted at different levels - research proposals, individual researchers, research organizations. In this context, the current paper explores existing literature regarding current research assessment approaches, and especially recommendations provided through four reference documents on the topic: the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment (2013), the Leiden Manifesto (Hicks et al. 2015), Science Europe's Position Statement and Recommendations on Research Assessment Processes (2020), and the Hong Kong Principles for assessing researchers (Moher et al. 2020). The aim is to provide a basis for analysing the legislative and normative framework regulating how researchers are being evaluated in Romania for hiring and career development, and then apply it to identify recommendations regarding how the latter can be improved. Some of the recommendations identified refer to aspects such as: the need to explore evaluation arrangements which incorporate research activity related practices, and that measure performance against research units' research goals; increased focus on qualitative approaches, and on scientific content, as opposed to performance in publication metrics; developing a broader list with indicators, including Open Science and societal relevance related; introducing the principle of transparency; developing a monitoring and evaluation framework. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: The present study analysed around 96 articles, i.e. 51 from the DESIDOC journal and 45 from Library Hi Tech. This study tried to reveal the involvement of contents and their representation in the articles in the DESIDOC and Library Hi Tech journals. Design/Methodology/Approach: MS Excel was used for sorting different parameters, arrangements, tabulation, collection, and so on. To identify the differences and similarities of publication standards at the national and international levels, content analysis of full-text journal articles from the years 2017-2018 was conducted. The goal of the analysis was to infer the qualitative and quantitative aspects of the articles for comparison and correlation. Findings: This study revealed that the structure of the foreign journal, in comparison to the Indian journal, is technically sound, with the use of structurally advanced tools and techniques. Most of the aspects of the foreign journal articles had an edge over the articles in the Indian journal. Research Limitations/Practical Implications: The main limitation of the paper is that it covered only one article each in the Indian and foreign context, which limits its capacity to give a more generalised outcome. Originality/ Value: This analysis has provided an insight that the foreign journal articles have more citations compared to the Indian journal, because of their theoretically and statistically sound structure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper investigates how the emotional responses towards research assessment reflect both social position and strategy in the struggle for scientific authority. This is examined through interviews with humanities researchers conducted as a part of a study on the implications for research practice of the Danish Bibliometric Research Indicator (BFI). Drawing on Bourdieu's theory of practice and Scheer and Matthäus' conceptualisation of the affective habitus and emotional practices, our research suggests that emotions can be conceptualized as strategic practices closely tied to the hierarchical position of the researchers. Established researchers deployed emotional practices as a form of resistance against compliance-based research assessment to retain their scientific authority and autonomy, while early-career researchers generally wanted to resist but their precarious positions did not afford them the possibility to do so. The study thus highlights the potential of studying emotions in relation to resistance and reproduction of dominance in higher education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents the results of a research study whose objective was to identify the facilitating factors and barriers that, in the opinion of representatives of the Spanish scientific community, impact the implementation of the new open science model in four areas: open access, open research data, research assessment and open peer review. A qualitative study was designed in which information was obtained through interviews with researchers, editors of scientific journals, representatives of assessment agencies and vice-chancellors, and through a focus group of librarians with expertise in aspects of open science. The enabling factors and barriers identified were related to the researcher and the fruit of their research, as well as to the scientific ecosystem, which provides direct institutional support and backing (universities/research centres), the regulatory framework (management of the science system) and the science communication system (media). The results indicate that a shift in scientific practices toward the open science model can only be achieved if there is a policy framework that integrates all initiatives and links into the scientific assessment and reward system, and if the necessary funding is in place to support this transition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper analyses the effects of research assessment on the overall research practices of academics. Case study research was conducted in departments from two contrasting disciplines – the natural sciences and the humanities – in one research intensive Danish university. The case studies examined academics' and administrators' experiences of a national bibliometric indicator (BFI) used for research assessment. PhD students and early career researchers reported that the greatest effects of research assessment were on their publishing practices. Prompted by further questions, many interviewees reflected on the relationship between research assessment and changes in their overall research practice about which they were previously unaware. We drew on Bourdieu's theory of practice to theorise why there was so little reflexivity, especially among senior researchers, about the relationship between actions to comply with research assessment and changes in research practice itself. We conclude by highlighting some potential implications, especially for mentorship of early career academics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is a rapidly developing field of research that attracts significant funding from both the state and industry players. Such interest is driven by a wide range of AI technology applications in many fields. Since many AI research topics relate to computer science, where a significant share of research results are published in conference proceedings, the same applies to AI. The world leaders in artificial intelligence research are China and the United States. The authors conducted a comparative analysis of the bibliometric indicators of AI conference papers from these two countries based on Scopus data. The analysis aimed to identify conferences that receive above-average citation rates and suggest publication strategies for authors from these countries to participate in conferences that are likely to provide better dissemination of their research results. The results showed that, although Chinese researchers publish more AI papers than those from the United States, US conference papers are cited more frequently. The authors also conducted a correlation analysis of the MNCS index, which revealed no high correlation between MNCS USA vs. MNCS China, MNCS China/MNCS USA vs. MSAR, and MNCS China/MNCS USA vs. CORE ranking indicators.

In recent years, the changing landscape for the conduct and assessment of research and of researchers has increased scrutiny of the reward systems of science. In this context, correcting the research record, including retractions, has gained attention and space in the publication system. One question is the possible influence of retractions on the careers of scientists. It might be assessed, for example, through citation patterns or productivity rates for authors who have had one or more retractions. This is an emerging issue today, with growing discussions in the research community about impact. We have explored the influence of retractions on grant review criteria. Here, we present results of a qualitative study exploring the views of a group of six representatives of funding agencies from different countries and of a follow-up survey of 224 reviewers in the US. These reviewers have served on panels for the National Science Foundation, the National Institutes of Health, and/or a few other agencies. We collected their perceptions about the influence of self-correction of the literature and of retractions on grant decisions. Our results suggest that correcting the research record, for honest error or misconduct, is perceived as an important mechanism to strengthen the reliability of science, among most respondents. However, retractions and self-correcting the literature at large are not factors influencing grant review, and dealing with retractions in reviewing grants is an open question for funders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Collaborative research causes problems for research assessments because of the difficulty in fairly crediting its authors. Whilst splitting the rewards for an article amongst its authors has the greatest surface-level fairness, many important evaluations assign full credit to each author, irrespective of team size. The underlying rationales for this are labour reduction and the need to incentivise collaborative work because it is necessary to solve many important societal problems. This article assesses whether full counting changes results compared to fractional counting in the case of the UK's Research Excellence Framework (REF) 2021. For this assessment, fractional counting reduces the number of journal articles to as little as 10% of the full counting value, depending on the Unit of Assessment (UoA). Despite this large difference, allocating an overall grade point average (GPA) based on full counting or fractional counting gives results with a median Pearson correlation within UoAs of 0.98. The largest changes are for Archaeology (r=0.84) and Physics (r=0.88). There is a weak tendency for higher scoring institutions to lose from fractional counting, with the loss being statistically significant in 5 of the 34 UoAs. Thus, whilst the apparent over-weighting of contributions to collaboratively authored outputs does not seem too problematic from a fairness perspective overall, it may be worth examining in the few UoAs in which it makes the most difference. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research productivity is a basic quantitative measure for universities, but obtaining a comprehensive view of a university's output is difficult. Databases like Web of Science and Scopus can provide a list of publications associated with an institution, but they are limited in the formats and disciplines they cover. An institution can rely on its researchers to provide information on their own publications, which may avoid format and discipline limitations, but the data is often too messy or incomplete for research assessments. This study compares research productivity data obtained through Web of Science and Scopus to self-provided data from researchers at the University of Colorado Colorado Springs (UCCS). The study seeks to determine if certain disciplines are advantaged or disadvantaged by their representation in each dataset and to determine how complete researcher's self-provided data is. It was determined that basing UCCS's research assessment on researcher provided data led to more comprehensive results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The relevance of the Universities of Applied Sciences (UASs) is growing in a world where practice-based learning and research are essential to meet societal development goals. Public policies for science, technology, and innovation must, therefore, account for an increasingly complex context where higher education institutions of varied shapes co-evolve. On the other hand, the increasing influence of international ranking systems and of bibliometric indicators calls for a critical revision of their adequacy to account for UASs' key characteristics such as the importance of interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary approaches when tackling context-based challenges. This paper examines the roles of UASs in contemporary knowledge-intensive societies and critically addresses dominant research evaluation approaches. It is argued that i) qualitative approaches based on the visualization of bibliometric data can provide useful perspectives on interdisciplinarity, ii) the assessment of stakeholder engagement should be incorporated in rankings such as U-Multirank, and iii) knowledge dissemination at large could be assessed using Altmetrics indicators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study discusses the development in the field of superconductivity with a focus on the analysis of research publications in superconductivity based on the information from the Web of Science from 1929 to 2021. The work provides the most comprehensive scientometric study on superconductivity to date, which covers the analysis of 79,061 publications. Specifically, the following analyses were conducted: research trends between 1929 and 2021, country-wise research productivity, journal sources analysis, most productive organizations, most influential funding agencies, and research clusters. The study demonstrates that there is a steady growth in superconductivity research. This study also revealed that the USA emerged as the most prolific country with 19,587 publications and 738,984 citations, followed by Japan with 15,923 publications and 347,488 citations, then China with 9743 publications and 152,487 citations, and Germany with 6402 publications and 166,211 citations. Also, the majority of the publications were published in Physical Review B, IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity, Journal of Superconductivity and Novel Magnetism, Physica C, Superconductivity and Its Applications, Physical Review Letters. The most productive funding organizations identified are the National Natural Science Foundation of China, United States Department of Energy, Ministry of Education Culture Sports Science and Technology Japan, National Science Foundation, and Japan Society for The Promotion of Science. The authors believe this report will be useful for scientists, funding organizations, and policymakers that are interested in superconductivity in making critical research funding decisions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the past 5 years, we captured the perspectives from a broad array of research stakeholders to better understand the impact that current approaches to success and research assessment may have on the integrity and the quality of research. Here, we translate our findings in four actions that are urgently needed to foster better research. First, we need to address core research structures to overcome systemic problems of the research enterprise; second, we must realign research assessments to value elements that advance and strengthen science; third, we need to remodel, diversify, and secure research careers; and finally, we need to unite and coordinate efforts for change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Definition: In the context of open science, universities, research-performing and funding organizations and authorities worldwide are moving towards more responsible research assessment (RRA). In 2022, the European Coalition for Advancing Research Assessment (CoARA) published an agreement with ten commitments, including the recognition of the "diversity of contributions to, and careers in, research", the "focus on qualitative evaluation for which peer review is central, supported by responsible use of quantitative indicators", and the "abandon (of) inappropriate uses in research assessment of journal- and publication-based metrics". Research assessment (RA) is essential for research of the highest quality. The transformation of assessment indicators and procedures directly affects the underlying research information management infrastructures (also called current research information systems) which collect and store metadata on research activities and outputs. This entry investigates the impact of RRA on these systems, on their development and implementation, their data model and governance, including digital ethics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The academic evaluation of teachers of languages other than English (LOTEs) has been extensively researched, especially from the perspective of academic publications. However, little attention has been paid to another key performance indicator in teacher assessment, namely, external research funding. Focusing on German language teachers (GLTs), this paper adopts a mixed methods approach to investigate the assessment requirements for LOTE teachers in terms of external research funding and the factors that may impact their accomplishments. Based on Bronfenbrenner's ecological systems theory and conservation of resources theory, we analyzed policy documents from the universities under investigation, examined "German or Germany-related" funding approvals, and conducted semi-structured interviews with eight GLTs to explore the environmental factors (individual context, institutional context, social context, chronological context) that may influence the survival of GLTs in terms of the requirements for external research funding. The findings indicate that factors from each ecological context interact with one another and have a combined influence on GLTs' external research funding application activity. Moreover, there is an imbalance between the academic demands faced by GLTs and the resource support that is available to them. This imbalance may affect the survival and development of GLTs and is likely to have a continuing influence throughout their career. The study concludes by offering some suggestions at different levels to facilitate the sustainable professional development of GLTs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]