Crossing disciplinary boundaries: An ethnographic exploration of academic publishing invitations.

IF 2.8 1区 哲学 Q1 MEDICAL ETHICS
Christina Severinsen
{"title":"Crossing disciplinary boundaries: An ethnographic exploration of academic publishing invitations.","authors":"Christina Severinsen","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2024.2419823","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> This autoethnographic study examines email invitations for health researchers to publish in journals outside their expertise, exploring implications for interdisciplinary research and knowledge production.<b>Methods:</b> Over three months, email invitations to publish outside the author's field were documented and analysed thematically and through reflexive journaling.<b>Results:</b> Five main themes in publication invitations were identified: emphasising novelty, promising rapid publication, appealing to research impact, flattering language, and persistent messaging. Reflexive analysis revealed complex factors shaping responses, including publication pressures, desires for prestige, and tensions between disciplinary norms and interdisciplinary collaboration. While invitations may present opportunities for novel collaborations, they often reflect predatory publishing practices.<b>Conclusions:</b> Navigating this landscape requires careful discernment, commitment to academic integrity, and reflexivity about one's positionality. The study underscores the need for researchers to critically interrogate the motivations behind such invitations. Further research could explore decision-making processes across disciplines and implications for academic publishing integrity and equity.</p>","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"1-21"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2024.2419823","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICAL ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: This autoethnographic study examines email invitations for health researchers to publish in journals outside their expertise, exploring implications for interdisciplinary research and knowledge production.Methods: Over three months, email invitations to publish outside the author's field were documented and analysed thematically and through reflexive journaling.Results: Five main themes in publication invitations were identified: emphasising novelty, promising rapid publication, appealing to research impact, flattering language, and persistent messaging. Reflexive analysis revealed complex factors shaping responses, including publication pressures, desires for prestige, and tensions between disciplinary norms and interdisciplinary collaboration. While invitations may present opportunities for novel collaborations, they often reflect predatory publishing practices.Conclusions: Navigating this landscape requires careful discernment, commitment to academic integrity, and reflexivity about one's positionality. The study underscores the need for researchers to critically interrogate the motivations behind such invitations. Further research could explore decision-making processes across disciplines and implications for academic publishing integrity and equity.

跨越学科界限:学术出版邀请的人种学探索。
背景:这是一项自述式研究:这项自述式研究考察了健康研究人员在其专业领域之外的期刊上发表论文的电子邮件邀请,探讨了对跨学科研究和知识生产的影响:方法:在三个月的时间里,记录了作者在其专业领域之外发表论文的电子邮件邀请,并通过反思性札记对其进行了专题分析:结果:确定了发表论文邀请函的五大主题:强调新颖性、承诺快速发表、以研究影响力为诉求、谄媚的语言和持续的信息传递。反思性分析揭示了影响回应的复杂因素,包括出版压力、对声望的渴望以及学科规范与跨学科合作之间的紧张关系。虽然邀请可能会带来新的合作机会,但它们往往反映了掠夺性的出版实践:在这种情况下,需要仔细辨别,恪守学术诚信,并对自己的立场进行反思。本研究强调,研究人员需要批判性地审视此类邀请背后的动机。进一步的研究可以探讨各学科的决策过程以及对学术出版诚信和公平的影响。
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
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
14.70%
发文量
49
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Accountability in Research: Policies and Quality Assurance is devoted to the examination and critical analysis of systems for maximizing integrity in the conduct of research. It provides an interdisciplinary, international forum for the development of ethics, procedures, standards policies, and concepts to encourage the ethical conduct of research and to enhance the validity of research results. The journal welcomes views on advancing the integrity of research in the fields of general and multidisciplinary sciences, medicine, law, economics, statistics, management studies, public policy, politics, sociology, history, psychology, philosophy, ethics, and information science. All submitted manuscripts are subject to initial appraisal by the Editor, and if found suitable for further consideration, to peer review by independent, anonymous expert referees.
×
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