Achieving a Professorship with Proper Academic Merit: Discouraging Questionable Publishing

IF 1.2 4区 管理学 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Tove Faber Frandsen, R. Lamptey, E. M. Borteye, V. Teye
{"title":"Achieving a Professorship with Proper Academic Merit: Discouraging Questionable Publishing","authors":"Tove Faber Frandsen, R. Lamptey, E. M. Borteye, V. Teye","doi":"10.3138/jsp-2021-0021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:There are frequent discussions in many research communities about publishing in predatory and questionable outlets. It is necessary to address the researchers who publish in these publications, since this problem could be resolved if researchers stopped engaging with them. One of the factors contributing to an author's decision to engage with these journals is the advantage of having more publications and editorial board involvement when they apply for a faculty position or a promotion. Fast-tracking promotions using questionable publications is an increasing problem, as scholars see the strategy working well for their colleagues. Universities are increasingly being called upon to take action. Promotion guidelines are vital for setting expectations, and more specifically pressures and incentives, when addressing the issue of questionable journals. In the case study presented in this article, new promotion guidelines have been developed at Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology in Ghana to discourage faculty members from publishing in questionable journals. A verification process for all publications listed in promotion applications has been implemented. Since the implementation of this scheme in October 2019, 221 researchers have applied for promotion. Our analysis shows that one fifth of submitted publications do not meet the new criteria. Furthermore, we find no correlation between the proportion of verified publications and an applicant's college or total number of listed publications. The implications of these findings are discussed.","PeriodicalId":44613,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Scholarly Publishing","volume":"52 1","pages":"155 - 167"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Scholarly Publishing","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3138/jsp-2021-0021","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Abstract:There are frequent discussions in many research communities about publishing in predatory and questionable outlets. It is necessary to address the researchers who publish in these publications, since this problem could be resolved if researchers stopped engaging with them. One of the factors contributing to an author's decision to engage with these journals is the advantage of having more publications and editorial board involvement when they apply for a faculty position or a promotion. Fast-tracking promotions using questionable publications is an increasing problem, as scholars see the strategy working well for their colleagues. Universities are increasingly being called upon to take action. Promotion guidelines are vital for setting expectations, and more specifically pressures and incentives, when addressing the issue of questionable journals. In the case study presented in this article, new promotion guidelines have been developed at Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology in Ghana to discourage faculty members from publishing in questionable journals. A verification process for all publications listed in promotion applications has been implemented. Since the implementation of this scheme in October 2019, 221 researchers have applied for promotion. Our analysis shows that one fifth of submitted publications do not meet the new criteria. Furthermore, we find no correlation between the proportion of verified publications and an applicant's college or total number of listed publications. The implications of these findings are discussed.
获得具有适当学术价值的教授职位:阻止有问题的出版
摘要:在许多研究团体中,关于在掠夺性和有问题的渠道上发表论文的讨论频繁。有必要解决在这些出版物上发表文章的研究人员,因为如果研究人员停止与他们接触,这个问题就可以解决。影响作者决定与这些期刊合作的因素之一是,当他们申请教师职位或晋升时,有更多的出版物和编辑委员会参与的优势。利用有问题的出版物快速晋升的问题日益严重,因为学者们看到这种策略对他们的同事很有效。越来越多的人呼吁大学采取行动。在处理问题期刊问题时,推广指南对于设定期望,更具体地说是压力和激励是至关重要的。在本文提出的案例研究中,加纳Kwame Nkrumah科技大学制定了新的促进指导方针,以阻止教师在有问题的期刊上发表文章。已对促销申请书中所列的所有出版物实施核查程序。自2019年10月实施该计划以来,已有221名研究人员申请晋升。我们的分析表明,提交的出版物中有五分之一不符合新标准。此外,我们发现验证出版物的比例与申请人的学院或列出的出版物总数之间没有相关性。讨论了这些发现的意义。
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
2.50
自引率
15.40%
发文量
12
期刊介绍: For more than 40 years, the Journal of Scholarly Publishing has been the authoritative voice of academic publishing. The journal combines philosophical analysis with practical advice and aspires to explain, argue, discuss, and question the large collection of new topics that continually arise in the publishing field. JSP has also examined the future of scholarly publishing, scholarship on the web, digitization, copyright, editorial policies, computer applications, marketing, and pricing models. It is the indispensable resource for academics and publishers that addresses the new challenges resulting from changes in technology and funding and from innovations in production and publishing.
×
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