Perceptions of Arab researchers regarding publishing scientific research: A cross-sectional study.

IF 2.8 1区哲学 Q1 MEDICAL ETHICS

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance Pub Date : 2025-04-21 DOI:10.1080/08989621.2025.2489544

Mamoun Ahram, Ahmed Samir Abdelhafiz, Zeinab Mohammed, Samar Abd ElHafeez, Alya Elgamri, Karima El Rhazi, Henry J Silverman

{"title":"Perceptions of Arab researchers regarding publishing scientific research: A cross-sectional study.","authors":"Mamoun Ahram, Ahmed Samir Abdelhafiz, Zeinab Mohammed, Samar Abd ElHafeez, Alya Elgamri, Karima El Rhazi, Henry J Silverman","doi":"10.1080/08989621.2025.2489544","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Researchers in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) confront multifactorial challenges when publishing their manuscripts. Here, we aimed to quantify Arab researchers' perceptions of these challenges.Materials and methods: We distributed an online questionnaire to Arab researchers from 17 countries, the majority of which were LMICs.Results: Among 286 respondents, 71.7% experienced rejection of at least one manuscript. The main reasons for manuscript rejection included being outside the journals' scopes (46.1%) and lacking novelty (35.1%). Over one-third of the respondents believed they might have faced bias in the review process being of Arab origin. More than 60% thought a Western coauthor would make their manuscripts be reviewed more favorably. Moreover, 60% thought it would be easier to publish in open-access journals. Over 75% of our respondents were aware of predatory journals, and an alarming 17.1% published in such journals.Conclusion: To improve the quality of scholarly publications and address publishing challenges, we propose strengthening research training, enhancing language support, and increasing the representation of LMIC researchers in editorial roles. These measures aim to foster inclusivity in peer review and ensure a more diverse academic publishing landscape.","PeriodicalId":50927,"journal":{"name":"Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance","volume":" ","pages":"1-19"},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-21","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/10.1080/08989621.2025.2489544","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: Researchers in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) confront multifactorial challenges when publishing their manuscripts. Here, we aimed to quantify Arab researchers' perceptions of these challenges.

Materials and methods: We distributed an online questionnaire to Arab researchers from 17 countries, the majority of which were LMICs.

Results: Among 286 respondents, 71.7% experienced rejection of at least one manuscript. The main reasons for manuscript rejection included being outside the journals' scopes (46.1%) and lacking novelty (35.1%). Over one-third of the respondents believed they might have faced bias in the review process being of Arab origin. More than 60% thought a Western coauthor would make their manuscripts be reviewed more favorably. Moreover, 60% thought it would be easier to publish in open-access journals. Over 75% of our respondents were aware of predatory journals, and an alarming 17.1% published in such journals.

Conclusion: To improve the quality of scholarly publications and address publishing challenges, we propose strengthening research training, enhancing language support, and increasing the representation of LMIC researchers in editorial roles. These measures aim to foster inclusivity in peer review and ensure a more diverse academic publishing landscape.

查看原文本刊更多论文

阿拉伯研究人员对发表科学研究的看法：一项横断面研究。

背景：低收入和中等收入国家（LMICs）的研究人员在发表论文时面临多因素挑战。在这里，我们旨在量化阿拉伯研究人员对这些挑战的看法。材料和方法：我们向来自17个国家的阿拉伯研究人员分发了一份在线问卷，其中大多数是中低收入国家。结果：286名被调查者中，71.7%的人至少有过一次退稿经历。论文被拒的主要原因包括超出期刊范围（46.1%）和缺乏新颖性（35.1%）。超过三分之一的受访者认为，他们可能在审查过程中受到阿拉伯裔的偏见。超过60%的人认为西方合著者会让他们的手稿得到更有利的评价。此外，60%的人认为在开放获取期刊上发表论文会更容易。超过75%的受访者知道掠夺性期刊，17.1%的受访者在此类期刊上发表过文章。结论：为了提高学术出版物的质量和应对出版挑战，我们建议加强研究培训，加强语言支持，增加LMIC研究人员在编辑角色中的代表性。这些措施旨在促进同行评议的包容性，确保学术出版环境更加多样化。

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

Accountability in Research-Policies and Quality Assurance MEDICAL ETHICS-

CiteScore

4.90

自引率

14.70%

发文量

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.