Scrambling for higher metrics in the Journal Impact Factor bubble period: a real-world problem in science management and its implications

Universities and funders in many countries have been using Journal Impact Factor (JIF) as an indicator for research and grant assessment despite its controversial nature as a statistical representation of scientific quality. This study investigates how the changes of JIF over the years can affect its role in research evaluation and science management by using JIF data from annual Journal Citation Reports (JCR) to illustrate the changes. The descriptive statistics find out an increase in the median JIF for the top 50 journals in the JCR, from 29.300 in 2017 to 33.162 in 2019. Moreover, on average, elite journal families have up to 27 journals in the top 50. In the group of journals with a JIF of lower than 1, the proportion has shrunk by 14.53% in the 2015–2019 period. The findings suggest a potential ‘JIF bubble period’ that science policymaker, university, public fund managers, and other stakeholders should pay more attention to JIF as a criterion for quality assessment to ensure more efficient science management

ASTRO Journals' Data Sharing Policy and Recommended Best Practices.

Transparency, openness, and reproducibility are important characteristics in scientific publishing. Although many researchers embrace these characteristics, data sharing has yet to become common practice. Nevertheless, data sharing is becoming an increasingly important topic among societies, publishers, researchers, patient advocates, and funders, especially as it pertains to data from clinical trials. In response, ASTRO developed a data policy and guide to best practices for authors submitting to its journals. ASTRO's data sharing policy is that authors should indicate, in data availability statements, if the data are being shared and if so, how the data may be accessed

Mapping Scholarly Communication Infrastructure: A Bibliographic Scan of Digital Scholarly Communication Infrastructure

This bibliography scan covers a lot of ground. In it, I have attempted to capture relevant recent literature across the whole of the digital scholarly communications infrastructure. I have used that literature to identify significant projects and then document them with descriptions and basic information. Structurally, this review has three parts. In the first, I begin with a diagram showing the way the projects reviewed fit into the research workflow; then I cover a number of topics and functional areas related to digital scholarly communication. I make no attempt to be comprehensive, especially regarding the technical literature; rather, I have tried to identify major articles and reports, particularly those addressing the library community. The second part of this review is a list of projects or programs arranged by broad functional categories. The third part lists individual projects and the organizations—both commercial and nonprofit—that support them. I have identified 206 projects. Of these, 139 are nonprofit and 67 are commercial. There are 17 organizations that support multiple projects, and six of these—Artefactual Systems, Atypon/Wiley, Clarivate Analytics, Digital Science, Elsevier, and MDPI—are commercial. The remaining 11—Center for Open Science, Collaborative Knowledge Foundation (Coko), LYRASIS/DuraSpace, Educopia Institute, Internet Archive, JISC, OCLC, OpenAIRE, Open Access Button, Our Research (formerly Impactstory), and the Public Knowledge Project—are nonprofit.Andrew W. Mellon Foundatio

Publication Output of Journal ‘Clinical Cancer Research’ (2005-2018): A Bibliometric Analysis

The paper analysis, authorship productivity and collaborative research of research articles available on Clinical Cancer Research for a period of fourteen years from 2005 to 2018. The data were downloaded from the Clarivate Analytics - web of science database. The data included fourteen thousand one hundred fifty six (14156) research articles and sixty eight thousand one hundred seventy (68170) authors. This paper analysis the co-authorship network using CiteSpace Java application with the aim of the understanding of research collaboration in this journal. This paper test the appropriateness of relative growth rate and doubling time

Records Management and Big Data Environment: The roles of records professional in managing big data

The increase of big data lead to the need of an effective records management system. This study aims to provide the best guideline or practices suitable for managing big data through records management standards. The study will apply qualitattive case method using interview as the tool to collect data from experts from the organization contributing to big data. This study set is to identify which records management practices are suitable and able to manage big data. This paper offers a new view and research by seeing Records Management standards as a method of handling big data issues. Keywords: Records Management, Big Data, Records Professional, ISO 15489 eISSN: 2398-4287 © 2022. The Authors. Published for AMER ABRA cE-Bs by E-International Publishing House, Ltd., UK. This is an open-access article under the CC  BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer-review under responsibility of AMER (Association of Malaysian Environment-Behavior Researchers), ABRA (Association of Behavioral Researchers on Asians), and cE-Bs (Centre for Environment-Behavior Studies), Faculty of Architecture, Planning & Surveying, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia

Records Management Practices: A solution in dealing with big data

Big data in the Internet of Things (IoT) led to various issues and problems. Therefore, this study aims to provide a guideline through Records Management practices.This study is qualitative with the records professional who deals with big data and records management from various fields. Organizations involved in emerging big data will be chosen as respondents. The study intended to develop guidelines from the current Records Management standard, best practices and guidelines in managing big data. This will offer new research and view on the ability of Records Management as a solution in managing big data. Keywords: Big Data, Records Management, Internet of Things eISSN: 2398-4287 © 2022. The Authors. Published for AMER ABRA cE-Bs by E-International Publishing House, Ltd., UK. This is an open-access article under the CC  BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer-review under the responsibility of AMER (Association of Malaysian Environment-Behavior Researchers), ABRA (Association of Behavioral Researchers on Asians), and cE-Bs (Centre for Environment-Behavior Studies), Faculty of Architecture, Planning & Surveying, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia

Tracking self-citations in academic publishing

Citation metrics have value because they aim to make scientific assessment a level playing field, but urgent transparency-based adjustments are necessary to ensure that measurements yield the most accurate picture of impact and excellence. One problematic area is the handling of self-citations, which are either excluded or inappropriately accounted for when using bibliometric indicators for research evaluation. Here, in favor of openly tracking self-citations we report on self-referencing behavior among various academic disciplines as captured by the curated Clarivate Analytics Web of Science database. Specifically, we examined the behavior of 385,616 authors grouped into 15 subject areas like Biology, Chemistry, Science and Technology, Engineering, and Physics. These authors have published 3,240,973 papers that have accumulated 90,806,462 citations, roughly five percent of which are self-citations. Up until now, very little is known about the buildup of self-citations at the author-level and in field-specific contexts. Our view is that hiding self-citation data is indefensible and needlessly confuses any attempts to understand the bibliometric impact of one's work. Instead we urge academics to embrace visibility of citation data in a community of peers, which relies on nuance and openness rather than curated scorekeeping.Peer reviewe

Research and innovation 2019

Research and innovation are two pillars that come together when universities are at stake. The expansion of the frontiers of human knowledge, in all areas and disciplines, is an irrefutable commitment of higher education institutions. Together with public and private entities, they are also committed to promoting knowledge transfer to society and the economy, in the form of new ideas, new products and new processes. Universities are supposed to transform ideas into value for society. To achieve these goals, higher education institutions have to assure their human resources are highly qualified, that they have an adequate atmosphere, that research is of high quality, and finally that adequate interactions take place. At UMinho we have a clear strategy to be an open and permanent space for knowledge production and furtherance of nationally and internationally relevant innovation across different social and economic sectors. For many years, UMinho has adopted the principles of open access and open science. We aim at carrying out our scientific activity and the dissemination of the corresponding results transparently and collaboratively; this implies that researchers, citizens, policymakers, state agencies, companies, and third sector organizations work in close cooperation facing research and innovation processes. We believe this is the shorter way to trigger smart and sustainable growth and qualified job creation. At UMinho, we encourage the coupling between research and education. Our goal is to expand research opportunities and to give our students occasions to experience vibrant research environments, ensuring that learning goes beyond the “common” routines. Joining research and learning processes provides both undergraduate and postgraduate students with opportunities to own their learning process. We believe that research experience has a role to play in improving students’ motivation for learning, in the pursuit of their interests. Doing better science occurs when we make it both more sensitive to the needs of society and also more efficient in what concerns the allocated resources. It is also a question of accountability. This is fundamental for reinforcing society awareness about our contributions to human and social development. Following the 2018 publication, we present here the 2019 edition of Research and Innovation, a series that draws on the outcomes of the activity of the UMinho research and innovation ecosystem. This comprehensive volume gives particular emphasis to the Research Units outcomes, namely in terms of funding, research projects, papers, and the most important achievements; the activity of the Interface Units and Collaborative Laboratories in which UMinho participates is also reported, through their activities and institutional projects, making evident their importance for the continuous growth of our Institution, our region, and our country. Rui Vieira de Castro RectorPublishe