年轻的研究人员在决定阅读和引用什么以及在哪里发表时对可信度的评估不同吗

D. Nicholas, H. Jamali, A. Watkinson, Eti Herman, C. Tenopir, Rachel Volentine, Suzie L. Allard, K. Levine
{"title":"年轻的研究人员在决定阅读和引用什么以及在哪里发表时对可信度的评估不同吗","authors":"D. Nicholas, H. Jamali, A. Watkinson, Eti Herman, C. Tenopir, Rachel Volentine, Suzie L. Allard, K. Levine","doi":"10.5865/IJKCT.2015.5.2.045","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"An international survey of over 3600 academic researchers examined how trustworthiness is determined when making decisions on scholarly reading, citing, and publishing in the digital age and whether social media and open access publications are having an impact on judgements. In general, the study found that traditional scholarly methods and criteria remain important across the board. However, there are significant differences between younger (age 30 & under) and older researchers (over 30). Thus younger researchers: a) expend less effort to obtain information and more likely to compromise on quality in their selections; b) view open access publishing much more positively as it offers them more choices and helps to establish their reputation more quickly; c) compensate for their lack of experience by relying more heavily on trust markers and proxies, such as impact factors; d) use all the outlets available in order to improve the chances of getting their work published and, in this respect, make the most use of the social media with which they are more familiar.","PeriodicalId":53292,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Knowledge Content Development and Technology","volume":"5 1","pages":"45-63"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"34","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Do Younger Researchers Assess Trustworthiness Differently When Deciding What to Read and Cite and Where to Publish\",\"authors\":\"D. Nicholas, H. Jamali, A. Watkinson, Eti Herman, C. Tenopir, Rachel Volentine, Suzie L. Allard, K. Levine\",\"doi\":\"10.5865/IJKCT.2015.5.2.045\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"An international survey of over 3600 academic researchers examined how trustworthiness is determined when making decisions on scholarly reading, citing, and publishing in the digital age and whether social media and open access publications are having an impact on judgements. In general, the study found that traditional scholarly methods and criteria remain important across the board. However, there are significant differences between younger (age 30 & under) and older researchers (over 30). Thus younger researchers: a) expend less effort to obtain information and more likely to compromise on quality in their selections; b) view open access publishing much more positively as it offers them more choices and helps to establish their reputation more quickly; c) compensate for their lack of experience by relying more heavily on trust markers and proxies, such as impact factors; d) use all the outlets available in order to improve the chances of getting their work published and, in this respect, make the most use of the social media with which they are more familiar.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53292,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Knowledge Content Development and Technology\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"45-63\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-12-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"34\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Knowledge Content Development and Technology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5865/IJKCT.2015.5.2.045\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Knowledge Content Development and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5865/IJKCT.2015.5.2.045","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 34

摘要

一项针对3600多名学术研究人员的国际调查研究了在数字时代,在做出学术阅读、引用和出版决策时,如何确定可信度,以及社交媒体和开放获取出版物是否对判断产生影响。总的来说,研究发现传统的学术方法和标准仍然很重要。然而,年轻(30岁及以下)和年长(30岁以上)的研究人员之间存在显著差异。因此,年轻的研究人员:a)花费较少的精力获取信息,更有可能在选择的质量上妥协;B)更积极地看待开放获取出版,因为它为他们提供了更多的选择,并帮助他们更快地建立声誉;C)通过更多地依赖信任标记和代理(如影响因子)来弥补他们缺乏经验;D)利用所有可用的渠道来提高他们的作品发表的机会,在这方面,充分利用他们更熟悉的社会媒体。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Do Younger Researchers Assess Trustworthiness Differently When Deciding What to Read and Cite and Where to Publish
An international survey of over 3600 academic researchers examined how trustworthiness is determined when making decisions on scholarly reading, citing, and publishing in the digital age and whether social media and open access publications are having an impact on judgements. In general, the study found that traditional scholarly methods and criteria remain important across the board. However, there are significant differences between younger (age 30 & under) and older researchers (over 30). Thus younger researchers: a) expend less effort to obtain information and more likely to compromise on quality in their selections; b) view open access publishing much more positively as it offers them more choices and helps to establish their reputation more quickly; c) compensate for their lack of experience by relying more heavily on trust markers and proxies, such as impact factors; d) use all the outlets available in order to improve the chances of getting their work published and, in this respect, make the most use of the social media with which they are more familiar.
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
审稿时长
5 weeks
×
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