Abstract

Digital technology led to the emergence of a new economic model for scientific journals: consortial purchasing. This has been a breakthrough, providing library users widespread access to scientific information. In addition, the transition from individual paper subscriptions to electronic joint purchases has meant significant savings in processing costs for libraries. Nonetheless, consortium purchasing is not without problems: cost of journals continues to increase above the CPI, consortial agreements with publishers are inflexible, and pricing models become obsolete as time passes. In this state of impasse, open access appeared (and remains) on the scene, based on the powerful idea that information will be more useful the more easily it flows between its users. On the other hand, academic and research reputations have long been based on cumulated research citations: this is the “original sin” of the current scientific communication system, and until somebody figures out how to build an alternative system our high dependence on journals will persist.

Abstract

Sleeping beauties (SB) is a term that is used to describe scientific articles that pass unnoticed in science for long periods of time until they are rediscovered. This phenomenon is little known in the scientific community and contradicts some of science’s basic presuppositions. At the same time, the current reality of scientific research is defined according to the quantity of information that is produced. Although the SB field of study is little known, it has very specific characteristics that generate a number of cross-cutting interpretations about the way that science reflects on itself. This article explores three problems that the SB spotlights which are conceptualized within the same epistemological approach. We concludes that the SB analysis and the expected increase in the occurrence of SBs offers a point upon which to reflect bout epistemological frameworks of scientific practice.

Abstract

ResearchGate is currently one of the most important academic social networks, with more than 9 million users and 80 million documents. The platform offers not only important academic networking tools and job vacancies but also a wide range of bibliometric indicators. The objective of this work is to discuss the main advantages and disadvantages of these indicators paying special attention to the RG Score, the ResearchGate’s flagship indicator. Although ResearchGate provides features and bibliometric indicators of enormous potential in order to gather additional insights about the scientific and academic impact of authors’ production, their communication policies and some recent actions taken in the design, development, and dissemination of indicators generate serious doubts regarding their use for evaluation purposes. Finally, regarding the RG Score indicator, we conclude that it does not measure the prestige of researchers, but instead their level of participation in the platform.

Abstract

The main goal of this article is to describe the purpose and content of a new branch of bibliometrics: ALMetrics (Author Level Metrics). ALMetrics is focused on the quantitative analysis of an author’s performance by measuring the dimensions of their intellectual activity as shown through varied metric indicators. This article will list, define, and classify the different metrics that are offered in newer information portals that showcase the scientific activity of authors. These metrics are grouped into five sets: bibliometrics (publication and citation), usage, participation, rating, social connectivity, and composite indicators. This new bibliometric specialty is necessary because of new trends in scientific assessment, which have moved analysis away from old bibliometrics (based on journal analysis and Impact Factor) towards new bibliometrics that analyze both documents and authors via a mix of indicators. Most importantly, ALMetrics responds to the researchers’ desire for both knowledge and acknowledgement.

Abstract

The main goal of this article is to describe the purpose and content of a new branch of bibliometrics: ALMetrics (Author Level Metrics). ALMetrics is focused on the quantitative analysis of an author’s performance by measuring the dimensions of their intellectual activity as shown through varied metric indicators. This article will list, define, and classify the different metrics that are offered in newer information portals that showcase the scientific activity of authors. These metrics are grouped into five sets: bibliometrics (publication and citation), usage, participation, rating, social connectivity, and composite indicators. This new bibliometric specialty is necessary because of new trends in scientific assessment, which have moved analysis away from old bibliometrics (based on journal analysis and Impact Factor) towards new bibliometrics that analyze both documents and authors via a mix of indicators. Most importantly, ALMetrics responds to the researchers’ desire for both knowledge and acknowledgement.

Abstract

Librarians are playing a secondary role in the process of evaluating research activities, usually as auxiliary providers of raw data extracted from pre-selected sources. Given the subjective nature of the decision committees, there is a strong need for unbiased and objective procedures guaranteed by independent professionals. A neutral, comprehensive, modern, quantitative approach guided by academic librarians is proposed, including closeness to applicants, anonymity of their identities in the reports, contextualization (academic age, gender, and discipline) of data, usage of relative non-central values with indication of thresholds, and incorporation of new bibliometric and non-bibliometric sources.

Abstract

Librarians are playing a secondary role in the process of evaluating research activities, usually as auxiliary providers of raw data extracted from pre-selected sources. Given the subjective nature of the decision committees, there is a strong need for unbiased and objective procedures guaranteed by independent professionals. A neutral, comprehensive, modern, quantitative approach guided by academic librarians is proposed, including closeness to applicants, anonymity of their identities in the reports, contextualization (academic age, gender, and discipline) of data, usage of relative non-central values with indication of thresholds, and incorporation of new bibliometric and non-bibliometric sources.

Abstract

This paper explores the current paradigm of the publication culture in Spain, examining the negative and positive forces that shape the dominant dynamics in the production, dissemination and evaluation of scholars’ works. Following the intentional sampling of maximum variety, we planned a set of interviews with scholars in the area of ​​communication that represented the heterogeneity of academic ranks, gender, and territories of Spain. The final output consisted of thirty-five semi-structured interviews that took place between May 2018 and May 2019. Scholarship on how researchers and university professors experience publication cultures is abundant, however the national and international studies that address this phenomenon from a holistic approach are practically non-existent. Comprising three actions or systems -production, dissemination and evaluation-, the current publishing culture is depicted as a structure tuned to a set of global-accepted requirements that seem easy to understand and replicate. Under such model, most of the scholars experience discomfort because overproduction is widespread, social transference is rare, and the production and diffusion of scientific works frequently occur at the expense of scholars themselves. The goal seems to be inspired by the cost- and time-effective system of evaluation processes that, despite academics’ general opposition, official bodies and university departments have adopted to circumvent the costly task of assessing scientists’ outcomes on an individual basis.

Abstract

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.