按期刊数量计算,世界上最大的100家科学出版商是谁?网络抓取方法

Andreas Nishikawa-Pacher
{"title":"按期刊数量计算,世界上最大的100家科学出版商是谁?网络抓取方法","authors":"Andreas Nishikawa-Pacher","doi":"10.1108/jd-04-2022-0083","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeHow to obtain a list of the 100 largest scientific publishers sorted by journal count? Existing databases are unhelpful as each of them inhere biased omissions and data quality flaws. This paper tries to fill this gap with an alternative approach.Design/methodology/approachThe content coverages of Scopus, Publons, DOAJ and SherpaRomeo were first used to extract a preliminary list of publishers that supposedly possess at least 15 journals. Second, the publishers' websites were scraped to fetch their portfolios and, thus, their “true” journal counts.FindingsThe outcome is a list of the 100 largest publishers comprising 28.060 scholarly journals, with the largest publishing 3.763 journals, and the smallest carrying 76 titles. The usual “oligopoly” of major publishing companies leads the list, but it also contains 17 university presses from the Global South, and, surprisingly, 31 predatory publishers that together publish 4.606 journals.Research limitations/implicationsAdditional data sources could be used to mitigate remaining biases; it is difficult to disambiguate publisher names and their imprints; and the dataset carries a non-uniform distribution, thus risking the omission of data points in the lower range.Practical implicationsThe dataset can serve as a useful basis for comprehensive meta-scientific surveys on the publisher-level.Originality/valueThe catalogue can be deemed more inclusive and diverse than other ones because many of the publishers would have been overlooked if one had drawn from merely one or two sources. The list is freely accessible and invites regular updates. The approach used here (webscraping) has seldomly been used in meta-scientific surveys.","PeriodicalId":402385,"journal":{"name":"J. Documentation","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"10","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Who are the 100 largest scientific publishers by journal count? A webscraping approach\",\"authors\":\"Andreas Nishikawa-Pacher\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/jd-04-2022-0083\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"PurposeHow to obtain a list of the 100 largest scientific publishers sorted by journal count? Existing databases are unhelpful as each of them inhere biased omissions and data quality flaws. This paper tries to fill this gap with an alternative approach.Design/methodology/approachThe content coverages of Scopus, Publons, DOAJ and SherpaRomeo were first used to extract a preliminary list of publishers that supposedly possess at least 15 journals. Second, the publishers' websites were scraped to fetch their portfolios and, thus, their “true” journal counts.FindingsThe outcome is a list of the 100 largest publishers comprising 28.060 scholarly journals, with the largest publishing 3.763 journals, and the smallest carrying 76 titles. The usual “oligopoly” of major publishing companies leads the list, but it also contains 17 university presses from the Global South, and, surprisingly, 31 predatory publishers that together publish 4.606 journals.Research limitations/implicationsAdditional data sources could be used to mitigate remaining biases; it is difficult to disambiguate publisher names and their imprints; and the dataset carries a non-uniform distribution, thus risking the omission of data points in the lower range.Practical implicationsThe dataset can serve as a useful basis for comprehensive meta-scientific surveys on the publisher-level.Originality/valueThe catalogue can be deemed more inclusive and diverse than other ones because many of the publishers would have been overlooked if one had drawn from merely one or two sources. The list is freely accessible and invites regular updates. The approach used here (webscraping) has seldomly been used in meta-scientific surveys.\",\"PeriodicalId\":402385,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"J. Documentation\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-09-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"10\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"J. Documentation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/jd-04-2022-0083\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"J. Documentation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jd-04-2022-0083","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

摘要

目的:如何获得按期刊数量排序的100家最大的科学出版商名单?现有的数据库是无用的,因为每个数据库都有固有的偏见遗漏和数据质量缺陷。本文试图用另一种方法来填补这一空白。设计/方法/方法首先使用Scopus、Publons、DOAJ和SherpaRomeo的内容覆盖来提取一个初步的出版商列表,这些出版商应该拥有至少15种期刊。其次,出版商的网站被抓取以获取他们的投资组合,从而获得他们的“真实”期刊数量。结果是100家最大的出版商的名单,包括28060种学术期刊,最大的出版商出版了3763种期刊,最小的出版商出版了76种期刊。主要出版公司通常是“寡头垄断”的,但它也包括来自全球南方的17所大学出版社,以及令人惊讶的是,31家掠夺性出版商共出版了4606种期刊。研究的局限性/意义额外的数据来源可以用来减轻剩余的偏差;很难消除出版商名称及其印记的歧义;并且数据集具有非均匀分布,因此有可能遗漏较低范围的数据点。该数据集可以作为在出版商层面进行综合元科学调查的有用基础。这个目录可以被认为比其他目录更具包容性和多样性,因为如果一个人只从一两个来源中提取,许多出版商就会被忽视。该列表可免费访问,并邀请定期更新。这里使用的方法(网络抓取)很少在元科学调查中使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Who are the 100 largest scientific publishers by journal count? A webscraping approach
PurposeHow to obtain a list of the 100 largest scientific publishers sorted by journal count? Existing databases are unhelpful as each of them inhere biased omissions and data quality flaws. This paper tries to fill this gap with an alternative approach.Design/methodology/approachThe content coverages of Scopus, Publons, DOAJ and SherpaRomeo were first used to extract a preliminary list of publishers that supposedly possess at least 15 journals. Second, the publishers' websites were scraped to fetch their portfolios and, thus, their “true” journal counts.FindingsThe outcome is a list of the 100 largest publishers comprising 28.060 scholarly journals, with the largest publishing 3.763 journals, and the smallest carrying 76 titles. The usual “oligopoly” of major publishing companies leads the list, but it also contains 17 university presses from the Global South, and, surprisingly, 31 predatory publishers that together publish 4.606 journals.Research limitations/implicationsAdditional data sources could be used to mitigate remaining biases; it is difficult to disambiguate publisher names and their imprints; and the dataset carries a non-uniform distribution, thus risking the omission of data points in the lower range.Practical implicationsThe dataset can serve as a useful basis for comprehensive meta-scientific surveys on the publisher-level.Originality/valueThe catalogue can be deemed more inclusive and diverse than other ones because many of the publishers would have been overlooked if one had drawn from merely one or two sources. The list is freely accessible and invites regular updates. The approach used here (webscraping) has seldomly been used in meta-scientific surveys.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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