scholarly journals Internationalization of Polish Journals in the Social Sciences and Humanities: Transformative Role of The Research Evaluation System

2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emanuel Kulczycki ◽  
Ewa Aleksandra Rozkosz ◽  
Aneta Drabek
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Analysis Of Variance ◽  
Science Policy ◽  
Evaluation System ◽  
Research Evaluation ◽  
Journal Ranking ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
The Social ◽  
Editorial Practices

This article discusses the transformations of Polish journals caused by the Polish Journal Ranking evaluation system. We focused on the internationalization of journals in the social sciences and humanities (N = 801), with the goal of investigating how science policy has transformed editorial practices at Polish journals. We used a mixed-method approach involving both one-way analysis of variance, two-way mixed design analysis of variance, and semi-structured interviews. Our findings showed that science policy has transformed editorial practices, but that there is no actual internationalization in Polish social sciences and humanities journals. Rather, there is only the ostensible internationalization that manifests in “gaming” the journal evaluation system. We found that the editors of Polish journals do not discuss the challenges of internationalization, and implement only those internationalization practices that are explicitly required in the system regulations. We conclude with recommendations for how to motivate the internationalization of journals and stem the corruption of parameters measuring internationalization.

scholarly journals Are book publications disappearing from scholarly communication in the social sciences and humanities?

2018 ◽  
Vol 70 (6) ◽  
pp. 592-607 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tim C.E. Engels ◽  
Andreja Istenič Starčič ◽  
Emanuel Kulczycki ◽  
Janne Pölönen ◽  
Gunnar Sivertsen
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Evaluation System ◽  
Research Evaluation ◽  
Book Publishing ◽  
Scholarly Book ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Evaluation Systems ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
The Social ◽  
Comprehensive Coverage

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to analyze the evolution in terms of shares of scholarly book publications in the social sciences and humanities (SSH) in five European countries, i.e. Flanders (Belgium), Finland, Norway, Poland and Slovenia. In addition to aggregate results for the whole of the social sciences and the humanities, the authors focus on two well-established fields, namely, economics & business and history. Design/methodology/approach Comprehensive coverage databases of SSH scholarly output have been set up in Flanders (VABB-SHW), Finland (VIRTA), Norway (NSI), Poland (PBN) and Slovenia (COBISS). These systems allow to trace the shares of monographs and book chapters among the total volume of scholarly publications in each of these countries. Findings As expected, the shares of scholarly monographs and book chapters in the humanities and in the social sciences differ considerably between fields of science and between the five countries studied. In economics & business and in history, the results show similar field-based variations as well as country variations. Most year-to-year and overall variation is rather limited. The data presented illustrate that book publishing is not disappearing from an SSH. Research limitations/implications The results presented in this paper illustrate that the polish scholarly evaluation system has influenced scholarly publication patterns considerably, while in the other countries the variations are manifested only slightly. The authors conclude that generalizations like “performance-based research funding systems (PRFS) are bad for book publishing” are flawed. Research evaluation systems need to take book publishing fully into account because of the crucial epistemic and social roles it serves in an SSH. Originality/value The authors present data on monographs and book chapters from five comprehensive coverage databases in Europe and analyze the data in view of the debates regarding the perceived detrimental effects of research evaluation systems on scholarly book publishing. The authors show that there is little reason to suspect a dramatic decline of scholarly book publishing in an SSH.

scholarly journals The Uses and Disuses of Doctoral Degrees in the Social Sciences and the Humanities: The Case of Hungary

Triple Helix ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 1-31
Author(s):  
Annamária Inzelt ◽  
László Csonka
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Positive Impact ◽  
Doctoral Degrees ◽  
Social Environments ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Academic Field ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
The Social ◽  
Phd Education ◽  
Education Process

This study offers a contribution to our existing knowledge of the impacts of Hungarian social science and humanities PhDs on the graduates themselves and on their own personal and social environments. We employ new empirical findings—gained from an e-survey and from structured interviews—in an attempt to understand and explain impacts and lacks. Empirical analysis allowed us to identify certain differences in terms of usefulness in several respects, such as the specific sector of employment, mobility or the actual level of impact. The PhD education process and the degree itself have a more positive impact on personal satisfaction and on an individual’s career than on the employing organisation. A PhD degree in Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH) fields seems to generate more in the way of benefit and impact in the academic field than in non-academic jobs—a difference which reflects on the academic orientation of Hungarian PhD education. All stakeholders need to devote further major efforts into developing the “dual” form of PhD education, so clearly benefitting the whole of the Hungarian economy and society.

scholarly journals Mapping Diversity of Publication Patterns in the Social Sciences and Humanities: An Approach Making Use of Fuzzy Cluster Analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 33-59 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frederik T. Verleysen ◽  
Arie Weeren
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Cluster Analysis ◽  
Research Evaluation ◽  
Fuzzy Cluster ◽  
Fuzzy Cluster Analysis ◽  
Publication Type ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
Publication Patterns ◽  
The Social ◽  
Publication Language

AbstractPurposeTo present a method for systematically mapping diversity of publication patterns at the author level in the social sciences and humanities in terms of publication type, publication language and co-authorship.Design/methodology/approachIn a follow-up to the hard partitioning clustering by Verleysen and Weeren in 2016, we now propose the complementary use of fuzzy cluster analysis, making use of a membership coefficient to study gradual differences between publication styles among authors within a scholarly discipline. The analysis of the probability density function of the membership coefficient allows to assess the distribution of publication styles within and between disciplines.FindingsAs an illustration we analyze 1,828 productive authors affiliated in Flanders, Belgium. Whereas a hard partitioning previously identified two broad publication styles, an international one vs. a domestic one, fuzzy analysis now shows gradual differences among authors. Internal diversity also varies across disciplines and can be explained by researchers’ specialization and dissemination strategies.Research limitationsThe dataset used is limited to one country for the years 2000–2011; a cognitive classification of authors may yield a different result from the affiliation-based classification used here.Practical implicationsOur method is applicable to other bibliometric and research evaluation contexts, especially for the social sciences and humanities in non-Anglophone countries.Originality/valueThe method proposed is a novel application of cluster analysis to the field of bibliometrics. Applied to publication patterns at the author level in the social sciences and humanities, for the first time it systematically documents intra-disciplinary diversity.

scholarly journals Open Review and Open Science in the Social Sciences and Humanities: A "Double Blind" Gold Standard

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Veli-Matti Karhulahti ◽  
Hans-Joachim Backe
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Scientific Practices ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
Multi Stage ◽  
The Social ◽  
Open Review

Openings of research results, datasets, and scientific practices in general are currently being implemented across fields. Especially strongly data-driven areas like medicine are discussing publishing transparency too – in a context where open review formats now dominate. Social sciences and humanities (SSH), in turn, still rely on closed systems. In this study, we draw on 12 semi-structured interviews with chief editors of leading journals in SSH fields to better understand the transparencies of such review processes. We find that, within SSH, ‘double blind’ peer review represents a gold standard that credible journals follow by default. However, the actual review processes of these journals are multi-stage and largely open with the authors’ names standardly visible to decision-making peers, with ‘double blind’ principles forming but part of it. We recommend journals to communicate the transparencies of their review in more detail, also and especially if they are ‘double blind’.

scholarly journals Journal article publishing in the social sciences and humanities: A comparison of Web of Science coverage for five European countries

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. e0249879
Author(s):  
Michal Petr ◽  
Tim C. E. Engels ◽  
Emanuel Kulczycki ◽  
Marta Dušková ◽  
Raf Guns ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Web Of Science ◽  
Research Evaluation ◽  
Journal Article ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Eastern European ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
Pattern Dynamics ◽  
The Social ◽  
Eastern European Countries

This study compares publication pattern dynamics in the social sciences and humanities in five European countries. Three are Central and Eastern European countries that share a similar cultural and political heritage (the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Poland). The other two are Flanders (Belgium) and Norway, representing Western Europe and the Nordics, respectively. We analysed 449,409 publications from 2013–2016 and found that, despite persisting differences between the two groups of countries across all disciplines, publication patterns in the Central and Eastern European countries are becoming more similar to those in their Western and Nordic counterparts. Articles from the Central and Eastern European countries are increasingly published in journals indexed in Web of Science and also in journals with the highest citation impacts. There are, however, clear differences between social science and humanities disciplines, which need to be considered in research evaluation and science policy.

scholarly journals Dialnet Métricas como herramienta de evaluación bibliométrica: aportes al análisis de la actividad científica en Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Orlando Gregorio-Chaviano ◽  
Rafael Repiso ◽  
Antonio Calderón-Rehecho ◽  
Joaquín León-Marín ◽  
Evaristo Jiménez-Contreras
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Citation Index ◽  
Research Evaluation ◽  
Research Impact ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
The Social ◽  
Wide Debate ◽  
Eugene Garfield ◽  
Spanish Universities ◽  
The Impact

Within the current panorama of science evaluation, the limitations of citation indexes to study the social sciences and humanities have been the subject of wide debate. To resolve this situation, different products have been created for use in national contexts, since they cover certain aspects not contained in more international indices. An example is the In-RECS family, where an indicator such as the impact factor of Eugene Garfield is defined, but its contribution lies in the ability to evaluate research in Spain by obtaining citation indicators. This paper thus highlights the need to create new products for research evaluation in general, but particularly in the social sciences and humanities. The context in which different alternatives arise and are developed to evaluate existing journals is presented, along with Dialnet Metrics, a citation index developed by the Dialnet Foundation in collaboration with the EC3 Group and dozens of Spanish universities. Based on an analysis of the citations of source journals from different subject areas, Dialnet Metrics provides indicators to evaluate the research impact at different levels. This bibliometric product enables contextualized analysis at the micro (researchers), meso (journals), and macro (areas and universities) levels. Finally, the content, data volumes, and structure of this citation index are described quantitatively. Resumen Dentro del panorama actual de evaluación de la ciencia, las limitaciones de los índices de citación para estudiar las Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades han sido motivo de amplio debate. Para resolver esta situación, se han creado distintos productos para ser usados en contextos nacionales, dado que cubren ciertos aspectos no presentes en los índices de carácter más internacional. Como ejemplo se encuentran los de la familia In-RECS, donde se define un indicador similar al factor de impacto de Eugene Garfield, pero su aporte radica en la capacidad de evaluar la investigación en España mediante la obtención de indicadores de citas. Es por ello por lo que en este trabajo se expone la necesidad de crear nuevos productos para la evaluación de la investigación en general, pero particularizando en las Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades. Se muestra el contexto en el que surgen y se desarrollan las distintas alternativas de evaluación de revistas existentes y se presenta Dialnet Métricas. Este es un índice de citación realizado por la Fundación Dialnet en colaboración con el Grupo EC3 y decenas de universidades españolas. A partir del análisis de las referencias citadas de revistas fuente de distintos campos temáticos, Dialnet Métricas proporciona indicadores para evaluar el impacto de la investigación a varios niveles. Este producto bibliométrico posibilita el análisis contextualizado a nivel micro (investigadores), meso (revistas) y macro (áreas y universidades). Por último, se describen cuantitativamente los contenidos, volúmenes de datos y estructura de este índice de citas. Palabras clave

scholarly journals Open Review and Open Science in The Social Sciences and Humanities: A "Double Blind" Gold Standard

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Veli-Matti Karhulahti ◽  
Hans-Joachim Backe
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
Open Science ◽  
Scientific Practices ◽  
Structured Interviews ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
Multi Stage ◽  
The Social ◽  
Open Review

Abstract Openings of research results, datasets, and scientific practices in general are currently being implemented across fields. Especially strongly data-driven areas like medicine are discussing publishing transparency too – in a context where open review formats now dominate. Social sciences and humanities (SSH), in turn, still rely on closed systems. In this study, we draw on 12 semi-structured interviews with chief editors of leading journals in SSH fields to better understand the transparencies of such review processes. We find that, within SSH, ‘double blind’ peer review represents a gold standard that credible journals follow by default. However, the actual review processes of these journals are multi-stage and largely open with the authors’ names standardly visible to decision-making peers, with ‘double blind’ principles forming but part of it. We recommend journals to communicate the transparencies of their review in more detail, also and especially if they are ‘double blind’.

scholarly journals Publication and Citation Patterns in the Social Sciences and Humanities: A National Perspective

2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-94
Author(s):  
Dejan Pajić ◽  
Tanja Jevremov ◽  
Marko Škorić
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Information Exchange ◽  
Research Evaluation ◽  
Journal Literature ◽  
Social Sciences And Humanities ◽  
Transitional Country ◽  
Scientific Disciplines ◽  
The Social ◽  
Publishing Behavior ◽  
National Perspective

From the perspective of non-Anglophone countries, accountability, liability, and capacity of scientific research is often related to the process of internationalization. The article explores the effects of this process on the example of publication and citation patterns of Serbian scholars. Results of the analysis are mostly in line with the common conceptions about the differences among scientific disciplines. Authors in social sciences and humanities have manifested more nationally oriented publication and citation behavior, tendency to cite older literature, and stronger preference towards non-journal literature. However, huge individual differences among scholars and some inconsistencies between their publication and citation patterns, reveal a form of latent conflict between the accustomed publishing behavior in social sciences and humanities and the new dynamics of knowledge production. This conflict obscures the notion of typical or expected behavior of scholars in certain disciplines and has important implications for research evaluation. Scholars in social sciences and humanities were not so eager and successful in shifting their communication to the international arena. For them, national journals still play a crucial role in the “local” information exchange. But the question is how one transitional country that is facing serious structural challenges and weak economy can afford to support “locally relevant” research projects and whether national journals have become a mere tool for an ungainly customized research evaluation in the social sciences and humanities.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document