Facilitators and barriers to dealing with questionable journals in management science

IF 3.4 3区 管理学 0 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
Mehdi Dadkhah, F. Rahimnia, A. Memon
{"title":"Facilitators and barriers to dealing with questionable journals in management science","authors":"Mehdi Dadkhah, F. Rahimnia, A. Memon","doi":"10.1108/lht-09-2022-0420","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeScientific publishing has recently faced challenges in dealing with questionable (predatory and hijacked) journals. The presence of questionable journals in any field, including management science, will yield junk science. Although there are studies about questionable journals in other fields, these journals have not yet been examined in the field of business and management. This study aims to identify facilitators and barriers to dealing with questionable journals in management science.Design/methodology/approachA Delphi research method consisting of three rounds was used in this study. Data were collected from 12 experts in the first two rounds, and ten experts in the final round.FindingsThe present study shows that management science is vulnerable to questionable journals. A total of 18 barriers and eight facilitators to dealing with questionable journals in management science were found. The present study also identifies some new barriers and facilitators for avoiding questionable journals, which are specific to management science and have not been identified in previous research. Most of these barriers and facilitators were identified as “important” or “very important”. Publishers and scientific databases, government, the research community and universities and research centers were identified as critical players in overcoming challenges posed by questionable journals.Originality/valueThe number of articles that investigate predatory journals in management science is limited, and there is no research focused specifically on hijacked journals in this field. This study identifies facilitators and obstacles to dealing with predatory and hijacked journals in the field of management, by gathering opinions from experts. Thus it is the first study to examine hijacked journals in the field of management science. It is also one of the few studies that examine predatory and hijacked journals by conducting exploratory research rather than with a descriptive/conceptual approach.","PeriodicalId":47196,"journal":{"name":"Library Hi Tech","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Library Hi Tech","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/lht-09-2022-0420","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

PurposeScientific publishing has recently faced challenges in dealing with questionable (predatory and hijacked) journals. The presence of questionable journals in any field, including management science, will yield junk science. Although there are studies about questionable journals in other fields, these journals have not yet been examined in the field of business and management. This study aims to identify facilitators and barriers to dealing with questionable journals in management science.Design/methodology/approachA Delphi research method consisting of three rounds was used in this study. Data were collected from 12 experts in the first two rounds, and ten experts in the final round.FindingsThe present study shows that management science is vulnerable to questionable journals. A total of 18 barriers and eight facilitators to dealing with questionable journals in management science were found. The present study also identifies some new barriers and facilitators for avoiding questionable journals, which are specific to management science and have not been identified in previous research. Most of these barriers and facilitators were identified as “important” or “very important”. Publishers and scientific databases, government, the research community and universities and research centers were identified as critical players in overcoming challenges posed by questionable journals.Originality/valueThe number of articles that investigate predatory journals in management science is limited, and there is no research focused specifically on hijacked journals in this field. This study identifies facilitators and obstacles to dealing with predatory and hijacked journals in the field of management, by gathering opinions from experts. Thus it is the first study to examine hijacked journals in the field of management science. It is also one of the few studies that examine predatory and hijacked journals by conducting exploratory research rather than with a descriptive/conceptual approach.
处理管理科学领域问题期刊的促进因素和障碍
目的科学出版业最近在应对有问题(掠夺性和劫持性)期刊方面面临挑战。包括管理科学在内的任何领域出现问题期刊都会产生垃圾科学。虽然在其他领域有关于问题期刊的研究,但在商业和管理领域还没有对这些期刊进行过研究。本研究旨在确定处理管理科学领域问题期刊的促进因素和障碍。研究结果本研究表明,管理科学很容易受到问题期刊的影响。本研究表明,管理科学很容易受到问题期刊的影响。本研究共发现了 18 种处理管理科学问题期刊的障碍和 8 种促进因素。本研究还发现了一些避免问题期刊的新障碍和促进因素,这些障碍和因素是管理科学所特有的,也是以往研究中没有发现的。这些障碍和促进因素大多被认定为 "重要 "或 "非常重要"。出版商和科学数据库、政府、研究界以及大学和研究中心被认为是克服问题期刊带来的挑战的关键角色。 原创性/价值 研究管理科学领域掠夺性期刊的文章数量有限,而且没有专门针对该领域被劫持期刊的研究。本研究通过收集专家意见,确定了处理管理领域掠夺性期刊和被劫持期刊的促进因素和障碍。因此,这是第一项研究管理科学领域被劫持期刊的研究。这也是少数通过探索性研究而非描述性/概念性方法研究掠夺性和劫持性期刊的研究之一。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Library Hi Tech
Library Hi Tech INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
8.30
自引率
44.10%
发文量
97
期刊介绍: ■Integrated library systems ■Networking ■Strategic planning ■Policy implementation across entire institutions ■Security ■Automation systems ■The role of consortia ■Resource access initiatives ■Architecture and technology ■Electronic publishing ■Library technology in specific countries ■User perspectives on technology ■How technology can help disabled library users ■Library-related web sites
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信