18,669 research outputs found

    Cyberscience and the Knowledge-Based Economy, Open Access and Trade Publishing: From Contradiction to Compatibility with Nonexclusive Copyright Licensing

    Get PDF
    Open source, open content and open access are set to fundamentally alter the conditions of knowledge production and distribution. Open source, open content and open access are also the most tangible result of the shift towards e-Science and digital networking. Yet, widespread misperceptions exist about the impact of this shift on knowledge distribution and scientific publishing. It is argued, on the one hand, that for the academy there principally is no digital dilemma surrounding copyright and there is no contradiction between open science and the knowledge-based economy if profits are made from nonexclusive rights. On the other hand, pressure for the ‘digital doubling’ of research articles in Open Access repositories (the ‘green road’) is misguided and the current model of Open Access publishing (the ‘gold road’) has not much future outside biomedicine. Commercial publishers must understand that business models based on the transfer of copyright have not much future either. Digital technology and its economics favour the severance of distribution from certification. What is required of universities and governments, scholars and publishers, is to clear the way for digital innovations in knowledge distribution and scholarly publishing by enabling the emergence of a competitive market that is based on nonexclusive rights. This requires no change in the law but merely an end to the praxis of copyright transfer and exclusive licensing. The best way forward for research organisations, universities and scientists is the adoption of standard copyright licenses that reserve some rights, namely Attribution and No Derivative Works, but otherwise will allow for the unlimited reproduction, dissemination and re-use of the research article, commercial uses included

    The Quest for Citations: Drivers of Article Impact

    Get PDF
    Why do some articles become building blocks for future scholars, while many others remain unnoticed? We aim to answer this question by contrasting, synthesizing and simultaneously testing three scientometric perspectives – universalism, social constructivism and presentation – on the influence of article and author characteristics on article citations. To do so, we study all articles published in a sample of five major journals in marketing from 1990 to 2002 that are central to the discipline. We count the number of citations each of these articles has received and regress this count on an extensive set of characteristics of the article (i.e. article quality, article domain, title length, the use of attention grabbers and expositional clarity), and the author (i.e. author visibility and author personal promotion). We find that the number of citations an article in the marketing discipline receives, depends upon “what one says†(quality and domain), on “who says it†(author visibility and personal promotion) and not so much on “how one says it†(title length, the use of attention grabbers, and expositional clarity). Our insights contribute to the marketing literature and are relevant to scientific stakeholders, such as the management of scientific journals and individual academic scholars, as they strive to maximize citations. They are also relevant to marketing practitioners. They inform practitioners on characteristics of the academic journals in marketing and their relevance to decisions they face. On the other hand, they also raise challenges towards making our journals accessible and relevant to marketing practitioners: (1) authors visible to academics are not necessarily visible to practitioners; (2) the readability of an article may hurt academic credibility and impact, while it may be instrumental in influencing practitioners; (3) it remains questionable whether articles that academics assess to be of high quality are also managerially relevant.Impact;Citation Analysis;Referencing;Scientometrics;Cite

    Information Systems Scholarship: An Examination of the Past, Present, and Future of the Information Systems Academic Discipline

    Get PDF
    This dissertation investigates the topic of scholarship in the Information Systems (IS) discipline through a series of three papers. The papers, presented in Chapters 2, 3, and 4, each delve into a specific chronological period of IS scholarship which are delineated into the past, present, and future. Chapter 2 elucidates the IS discipline’s ‘past’ by categorizing the entire corpus of extant research in the Association of Information Systems Senior Scholars’ Basket of eight journals. Clusters derived from these mainstream journal publications represent a thematic identity of the IS discipline. After analyzing the corpus altogether, further analysis segments the corpus into shorter, 5-year periods to illuminate the historical evolution of the themes. Lastly, interpretations of the trends and a recommendation to curate an IS Body of Knowledge are discussed. Chapter 3 surveys business school deans and IS academics eliciting their ‘present’ social representations of the IS discipline. It then seeks the two groups’ feedback regarding their level of agreement with concerns attributed to the IS discipline as summarized in Ives and Adams (2012). Group responses are evaluated independently and are juxtaposed for between-group analysis. Then, additional concerns are gathered to ensure the full range of issues are represented. Network topic maps illustrate the findings, and interpretations are discussed. Group differences suggest that IS academics are more critical of the IS discipline than business school deans. In Chapter 4, an alternative research approach is offered for conducting ‘future’ scholarship efforts in the IS discipline. A framework that organizes discourse on the emergent crowdsourced research genre is constructed. Prior to building the framework, a crowdsourcing process model is developed to conceptualize how problems and outcomes interact with the crowdsourcing process. The internal process components include task, governance, people, and technology. Then, the crowdsourcing process model is applied to eight general research process phases beginning with the idea generation phase and concluding with the apply results phase. Implementation of the crowdsourced research framework expounds phase-specific implications as well as other ubiquitous implications of the research process. The findings are discussed, and future directions for the IS crowd are suggested

    MDPI Annual Report 2017

    Get PDF
    Contents: Message from the CEO ● MDPI at a Glance ● Key Figures ● 19 Journals Launched in 2017 ● Preprints.org in 2017 ● Scilit in 2017 ● Sciforum in 2017 ● Institutional Open Access Program in 2017 ● OA Initiatives in 2017 ● Top MDPI Books in 2017 ● Journal Development in 2017 ● Journals Tracked for Impact Factor in 2018 ● Electronic Conferences in 2017 ● Call for Expression of Interest ● Physical Conferences in 2017 ● About MDPI ● Corporate Social Responsibility at MDPI ● Upcoming Physical Conferences in 2018 ● Collaborations with Societies ● JAMS ● Stay Connected The year 2017 has been extremely interesting and rewarding for open access publishing and for open science. Funders and policy-makers have demonstrated a strong commitment and support for open access publishing, and to immediate availability of research output. In 2017, MDPI has continued to focus on its primary purpose of making science openly and rapidly available. We took great care in fulfilling this mission, and constantly kept in mind our responsibility towards researchers and science, to disseminate the latest research findings without delay, facilitating new research projects to be initiated and new breakthroughs to be made. We published 35,950 peer-reviewed articles in our journals, 96 % of which are available in Web of Science. This marks a 52.5 % increase compared to 2016 and makes MDPI a leader among pure open access publishers. This has only been possible thanks to the trust that authors have placed in our journals, the dedication of our academic editors and reviewers, and the devotion of MDPI team members for every single manuscript. In 2017, we continued to demonstrate our commitment to serving research communities. We signed several initiatives, such as the Initiative for Open Citations ( I4OC ) and the San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment ( DORA ), and we joined the trial of Knowledge Unlatched for funding open access in the Humanities. We strengthened our program to reward and credit the important work done by reviewers by transferring reviewers\u27 information to Publons and offered APC vouchers to reviewers for future publications in our journals. We also added a free job advertisement service on the website of each journal. We presented more than 100 awards for researchers, including The World Sustainability Award and The Emerging Sustainability Leader Award, and sponsored 2397 academic events. Our literature database, Scilit, expanded and now contains more than 100 million publication records, a number that increases every day, and we launched SciFeed for users to receive regular alerts about new articles in their field from any publisher. I believe that 2018 will be a crucial year for the future of open access. Libraries, policy-makers and funders are starting to work together to effect a permanent transition. At MDPI, we are looking forward to keeping up with these important developments.--Dr. Franck Vazquez, Chief Executive Office

    Scientometric studies in marketing

    Get PDF

    Designing the interface between research, learning and teaching.

    Full text link
    Abstract: This paper’s central argument is that teaching and research need to be reshaped so that they connect in a productive way. This will require actions at a whole range of levels, from the individual teacher to the national system and include the international communities of design scholars. To do this, we need to start at the level of the individual teacher and course team. This paper cites some examples of strategies that focus on what students do as learners and how teachers teach and design courses to enhance research-led teaching. The paper commences with an examination of the departmental context of (art and) design education. This is followed by an exploration of what is understood by research-led teaching and a further discussion of the dimensions of research-led teaching. It questions whether these dimensions are evident, and if so to what degree in design departments, programmes and courses. The discussion examines the features of research-led departments and asks if a department is not research-led in its approach to teaching, why it should consider changing strategies

    The extent and impact of intellectual capital research:a two decade analysis

    Get PDF
    Purpose: This paper examines the leading publication trends including the extent and impact of intellectual capital research in the Journal of Intellectual Capital (JIC) over a two-decade period (2000–2020). The bibliometric analysis offers the description of publications trends such as key authors, articles, cited references, institutions and countries— in other words the extent and impact in the field. This paper also presents the knowledge structure (including conceptual, intellectual and social structures) of JIC, that is prominent themes, co-citation and bibliographic networks. Design/methodology/approach: In order to achieve research objectives, we collected the bibliographic information of the articles published in JIC for the period 2000 to 2020 from the Scopus database on 11.04.2020. The bibliographic information of 737 documents were analysed using to open source analysis tool, that is bibliometrics package in r software and VOSviewer. These tools were used to create the graphical visualization of bibliographic data on basis of co-occurrence, co-citation and bibliographic coupling. Findings: The results show that the journal is progressing in terms of publication quantity and reputation in the field. To date, 737 documents have been published in JIC, which includes 659 research articles, eight editorials, seven notes and 63 review papers. This paper also portrays the author impact list in terms of most impactful articles published in JIC. Country-wise Italy, Australia, and USA exert maximum influence on JIC scholarship. Originality/value: Bibliographic analysis offers a comprehensive understanding of past trends and presents the future direction of a journal

    Open Access Publishing: A Literature Review

    Get PDF
    Within the context of the Centre for Copyright and New Business Models in the Creative Economy (CREATe) research scope, this literature review investigates the current trends, advantages, disadvantages, problems and solutions, opportunities and barriers in Open Access Publishing (OAP), and in particular Open Access (OA) academic publishing. This study is intended to scope and evaluate current theory and practice concerning models for OAP and engage with intellectual, legal and economic perspectives on OAP. It is also aimed at mapping the field of academic publishing in the UK and abroad, drawing specifically upon the experiences of CREATe industry partners as well as other initiatives such as SSRN, open source software, and Creative Commons. As a final critical goal, this scoping study will identify any meaningful gaps in the relevant literature with a view to developing further research questions. The results of this scoping exercise will then be presented to relevant industry and academic partners at a workshop intended to assist in further developing the critical research questions pertinent to OAP
    • …
    corecore