What Difference Do Retractions Make? An Estimate of the Epistemic Impact of Retractions on Recent Meta-analyses
Every year, several hundred publications are retracted due to fabrication and falsification of data or plagiarism and other breeches of research integrity and ethics. However, the extent to which a retraction requires revising previous scientific estimates and beliefs is unknown.
Discrepancy in Scientific Authority and Media Visibility of Climate Change Scientists and Contrarians
The role of climate change (CC) contrarians is neglected in climate change communication studies. Here the authors used a data-driven approach to identify CC contrarians and CC scientists and found that CC scientists have much higher citation impact than those for contrarians but lower media visibility.
Digitisation of Higher Education: Systemic Framework Conditions and Influencing Political Factors
Which factors have a strong systemic influence on the digitisation of higher education? Which can be influenced politically? In a new work report dealing with the systemic framework conditions for digitisation in higher education, we look at areas of action related to open science and discuss the extent to which future scenarios such as “disruption" can endanger university locations.
Reproducible Research and GIScience: an Evaluation Using AGILE Conference Papers
We reviewed current recommendations for reproducible research and translated them into criteria for assessing the reproducibility of articles in the field of geographic information science (GIScience). Results from the author feedback indicate that although authors support the concept of performing reproducible research, the incentives for doing this in practice are too small. Therefore, we propose concrete actions for individual researchers and the GIScience conference series to improve transparency and reproducibility.
A Landscape Analysis of Open Source Publishing Tools and Platforms catalogs and analyzes all available open-source software for publishing and warns that open publishing must grapple with the dual challenges of siloed development and organization of the community-owned ecosystem
The Impact of Open Access on Teaching-How Far Have We Come?
This article seeks to understand how far the United Kingdom higher education (UK HE) sector has progressed towards open access (OA) availability of the scholarly literature it requires to support courses of study. It uses Google Scholar, Unpaywall and Open Access Button to identify OA copies of a random sample of articles copied under the Copyright Licensing Agency (CLA) HE Licence to support teaching. The quantitative data analysis is combined with interviews of, and a workshop with, HE practitioners to investigate four research questions. Firstly, what is the nature of the content being used to support courses of study? Secondly, do UK HE establishments regularly incorporate searches for open access availability into their acquisition processes to support teaching? Thirdly, what proportion of content used under the CLA Licence is also available on open access and appropriately licenced? Finally, what percentage of content used by UK HEIs under the CLA Licence is written by academics and thus has the potential for being made open access had there been support in place to enable this? Key findings include the fact that no interviewees incorporated OA searches into their acquisitions processes. Overall, 38% of articles required to support teaching were available as OA in some form but only 7% had a findable re-use licence; just 3% had licences that specifically permitted inclusion in an ‘electronic course-pack’. Eighty-nine percent of journal content was written by academics (34% by UK-based academics). Of these, 58% were written since 2000 and thus could arguably have been made available openly had academics been supported to do so.
A Literature Review of Scholarly Communications Metadata
The purpose of this literature review is to identify the challenges, opportunities, and gaps in knowledge with regard to the use of metadata in scholarly communications. This paper compiles and interprets literature in sections based on the professional groups, or stakeholders, within scholarly communications metadata: researchers, funders, publishers, librarians, service providers, and data curators.
Why We Publish Where We Do: Faculty Publishing Values and Their Relationship to Review, Promotion and Tenure Expectations
A survey of academics finds that respondents most value journal readership, while they believe their peers most value prestige and related metrics such as impact factor when submitting their work for publication.
The publication of our first two Registered Reports marks a major milestone for Nature Human Behaviour. These studies demonstrate what many researchers know, but is often hidden from the published literature: confirmatory research doesn't always confirm the authors' hypotheses.
Establishing, Developing, and Sustaining a Community of Data Champions
While research data support units now exist in many universities, these are typically not able to provide discipline-specific expertise or resources. This article focuses on the Data Champion Programme at the University of Cambridge, which empowers discipline-specific expertise already embedded within each unit to advocate for good RDM and to deliver support locally.
Article postulates that a clear definition of use and reuse is needed to establish better metrics for a comprehensive scholarly record of individuals, institutions, organizations, etc. Hence, this article presents a first definition of reuse of research data.
Comparing Journal and Paper Level Classifications of Science
The classification of science into disciplines is at the heart of bibliometric analyses. While most classifications systems are implemented at the journal level, their accuracy has been questioned, and paper-level classifications have been considered by many to be more precise.
The Citation Advantage of Linking Publications to Research Data
Efforts to make research results open and reproducible are increasingly reflected by journal policies encouraging authors to provide data availability statements. As a consequence of this, there has been a strong recent uptake of data availability statements, but it is still unclear what proportion of these statements actually contain well-formed links to data, and if there is an added value in providing them.
The authors explore the extent to which universities are functioning as effective open knowledge institutions; as well as the types of information that universities, funders, and communities might need to understand an institution's open knowledge performance and how it might be improved. The challenges of data collection on open knowledge practices at scale, and across national, cultural and linguistic boundaries are also discussed.
Ten Simple Rules for Researchers Collaborating on Massively Open Online Papers (MOOPs)
The authors provide recommendations for a highly open and participatory interactive process of collaboration using digital tools and environments, discuss potential issues that come with working with large and diverse authoring communities, and provide possible solutions should these arise.
OpenCitations is a scholarly infrastructure organization dedicated to open scholarship and the publication of open bibliographic and citation data as Linked Open Data using Semantic Web technologies, to the development of software tools and services that enable convenient access to these open data, and to community advocacy for open citations. This paper describes OpenCitations and its datasets, tools, services and activities.
A comprehensive and up-to-date analysis of Computer Science literature reveals that, if current trends continue, parity between the number of male and female authors will not be reached in this century.
Assessing the Size of the Affordability Problem in Scholarly Publishing
The prices for open access publishing are high and are rising well beyond inflation. What has been missing from the public discussion so far is a quantitative approach to determine the actual costs of efficiently publishing a scholarly article using state-of-the-art technologies, such that informed decisions can be made as to appropriate price levels.