“Why Does Google Scholar Sometimes Ask for Money?” Engaging Science Students in Scholarly Communication and the Economics of Information

This study investigated the publishing patterns of information science academics in Kenya. Using a bibliometric approach, the author conducted an analysis of the quantity, quality and visibility of the publications indexed by Google Scholar. Data for the analysis was collected using Harzing’s “Publish or Perish” software from Google Scholar and presented using VOSviewer software. The findings of the study revealed low quantity, quality and visibility of research publications by information science academics in Kenya. Twenty (22.4%) serving academics are yet to publish any scholarly work. Similarly, 185 (42%) of the published papers have not been cited. This low publishing performance can be attributed to lack of scholarly communication skills; inadequate research funding and facilitation; limited access to scholarly communication channels; and heavy teaching workloads, among other factors. The quantity, quality and visibility of publications by information science academics in Kenya can be enhanced by training the lecturers on scholarly communication; accrediting journals and publishers; increasing research funding; strengthening research collaboration; increasing scholarly forums and platforms; and balancing lecturers’ teaching and research workloads.

Download Full-text

Google Scholar Citation metrics of Pakistani LIS scholars: an overview

Global Knowledge Memory and Communication ◽

10.1108/gkmc-03-2018-0025 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 68 (4/5) ◽

pp. 392-412 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Muhammad Yousuf Ali ◽

Joanna Richardson

Keyword(s):

Information Science ◽

Scholarly Communication ◽

Google Scholar ◽

Library And Information Science ◽

Strong Correlations ◽

Content Type ◽

Resultant Data ◽

Study Results ◽

Demographical Data ◽

Citation Metrics

Purpose The purpose of this study is to analyze the use of Google Scholar Citations’ profiling platform by library and information science (LIS) scholars in Pakistan. Design/methodology/approach Purposive sampling was used to collect Google Scholar Citations profiles between 15 November 2017 and 31 January 2018. Resultant data were analyzed in SPSS Version 21. Findings In terms of demographical data, the study results were consistent with previous studies of Pakistani LIS scholars. There were strong correlations between Google Scholar Citations metrics (publications, citations, h-index and i10-index). The results indicate that, compared with a 2011 survey of LIS academics in Pakistan, the overall uptake for this cohort remains relatively low. This cohort is not maximizing the opportunity provided by this specific online profiling system to increase research visibility. Research limitations/implications As the study was limited to those Pakistani LIS scholars who already had a profile on ResearchGate, it would be useful to broaden the research to encompass all Pakistani LIS scholars. Practical implications The role of the librarian as an adviser in scholarly communication and impact can be extended to support scholars in the adoption of new online platforms for scholarly communication and visibility. Originality/value There have been no published research studies on Google Scholar Citations metrics in the context of Pakistani LIS scholars as a whole.

Download Full-text

Retractions and post-retraction citations in the COVID-19 infodemic: is Academia spreading misinformation?

Liinc em Revista ◽

10.18617/liinc.v17i1.5593 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 17 (1) ◽

pp. e5593

Author(s):

Karen Santos-d'Amorim ◽

Rinaldo Ribeiro de Melo ◽

Raimundo Nonato Macedo dos Santos

Keyword(s):

Search Engine ◽

Scholarly Communication ◽

Scientific Field ◽

Google Scholar ◽

Inaccurate Information ◽

Conference Papers

The speed in producing information and the rush to publish scientific articles on COVID-19 in several knowledge areas have resulted in what is known as an infodemic also in the scientific field, potentially producing inaccurate information and sources of misinformation at scholarly communication. This has led to some articles being retracted or withdrawn due to unintentional errors or deliberate misconduct, but they continue to be cited. This article (i) gives an overview of the COVID-19 retracted articles and preprints, and (ii) analyses a set of post-retraction citations in the context of the COVID-19 infodemic. We analyzed 56 retracted articles and preprints by using the list available in the section on “retracted coronavirus (COVID-19) papers” in the Retraction Watch (RW) webpage. We found that 64.3% of these retractions were articles published in journals, 33.9% were uploaded in preprints servers, and 1.8% conference papers. We also analyzed 162 eligible articles out of 612 records identified by using the Google Scholar search engine. This research found that an article from The Lancet continued to be cited even after being retracted. In this case, we identified 214 post-retraction citations, of which 38% were negative (n=81), 32% were neutral (n=69), and 30% were positive citations (n=64)

Download Full-text

Predatory publications in evidence syntheses

Journal of the Medical Library Association JMLA ◽

10.5195/jmla.2019.491 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 107 (1) ◽

Cited By ~ 11

Author(s):

Amanda Ross-White ◽

Christina M. Godfrey ◽

Kimberley A. Sears ◽

Rosemary Wilson

Keyword(s):

Systematic Review ◽

Quality Control ◽

Peer Review ◽

Scholarly Communication ◽

Google Scholar ◽

Bibliographic Databases ◽

Business Practices ◽

Biomedical Sciences ◽

Predatory Journals ◽

Accepted Standard

Objectives: The number of predatory journals is increasing in the scholarly communication realm. These journals use questionable business practices, minimal or no peer review, or limited editorial oversight and, thus, publish articles below a minimally accepted standard of quality. These publications have the potential to alter the results of knowledge syntheses. The objective of this study was to determine the degree to which articles published by a major predatory publisher in the health and biomedical sciences are cited in systematic reviews.Methods: The authors downloaded citations of articles published by a known predatory publisher. Using forward reference searching in Google Scholar, we examined whether these publications were cited in systematic reviews.Results: The selected predatory publisher published 459 journals in the health and biomedical sciences. Sixty-two of these journal titles had published a total of 120 articles that were cited by at least 1 systematic review, with a total of 157 systematic reviews citing an article from 1 of these predatory journals.Discussion: Systematic review authors should be vigilant for predatory journals that can appear to be legitimate. To reduce the risk of including articles from predatory journals in knowledge syntheses, systematic reviewers should use a checklist to ensure a measure of quality control for included papers and be aware that Google Scholar and PubMed do not provide the same level of quality control as other bibliographic databases.

Download Full-text

Pleasure as a Sign of Efficacy of Mental Activity

European Psychologist ◽

10.1027/1016-9040.2.3.226 ◽

1997 ◽

Vol 2 (3) ◽

pp. 226-234 ◽

Cited By ~ 13

Author(s):

Michel Cabanac ◽

Chantal Pouliot ◽

James Everett

Keyword(s):

Evolutionary Psychology ◽

Magnitude Estimation ◽

Mental Activity ◽

Point Of View ◽

Macintosh Computer ◽

Science Students ◽

Cognitive Efficiency ◽

Sensory Pleasure ◽

The Difference ◽

Mental Tasks

Previous work has shown that sensory pleasure is both the motor and the sign of optimal behaviors aimed at physiological ends. From an evolutionary psychology point of view it may be postulated that mental pleasure evolved from sensory pleasure. Accordingly, the present work tested empirically the hypothesis that pleasure signals efficacious mental activity. In Experiment 1, ten subjects played video-golf on a Macintosh computer. After each hole they were invited to rate their pleasure or displeasure on a magnitude estimation scale. Their ratings of pleasure correlated negatively with the difference par minus performance, i.e., the better the performance the greater the pleasure reported. In Experiments 2 and 3, the pleasure of reading poems was correlated with comprehension, both rated by two groups of subjects, science students and arts students. In the majority of science students pleasure was significantly correlated with comprehension. Only one arts student showed this relationship; this result suggests that the proposed relationship between pleasure and cognitive efficiency is not tautological. Globally, the results support the hypothesis that pleasure is aroused by the same mechanisms, and follows the same laws, in physiological and cognitive mental tasks and also leads to the optimization of performance.

Download Full-text