Listening to authors, the main purpose of a traditional journal seems to be serving as a (very expensive) career advancement device (‘cad’, for short, if you permit me). This is exemplified by the phenomenon that many authors of articles made openly available to anyone via so-called ‘preprint servers’ (such as arXiv), often in multiple versions, up until a ‘final’ one (and so fulfil the need to communicate their results), nonetheless submit their articles to journals for what can only be described as obtaining ‘public approbation’ (often expressed in terms of the journal’s impact factor), which they hope will increase their promotion and funding chances.
It is academia itself, specifically in its reward and award systems, that maintains this situation. It needs to change and the habit of resources made available for research being wasted to prop up the publishing system needs to stop. Jan Velterop > On 1 May 2015, at 13:47, Jacinto Dávila <jacinto.dav...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thank you Éric. Very nice examples. > > However, I still wonder if there is some intrinsic value in the concept of > journal that one may miss. A journal is not just a collection of papers. > Maybe when we count journals we somehow measure their review processes. > > El 30/4/2015 1:07, "Éric Archambault" <eric.archamba...@science-metrix.com > <mailto:eric.archamba...@science-metrix.com>> escribió: > If one wants to see how excluding foreign references can have adverse effects > on citation analysis, here the list of references for a randomly picked up > Japanese paper. > > > > Most, if not all, Japanese language references are currently ignored in > citation analysis, this science is considered non-existent. The paper, and > the references. > > > > https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jssp/30/1/30_30.1/_article/references > <https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/jssp/30/1/30_30.1/_article/references> > > > Gibb, R., Ercoline, B., & Scharff, L. (2011). Spatial disorientation: Decades > of pilot fatalities. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 82, > 717–724. > <https://jlc.jst.go.jp/DN/JALC/10007449771?type=list&lang=en&from=J-STAGE&dispptn=1> > Howard, I. P. (1982). Human visual orientation. John Wiley & Sons. > 乾 敏郎・小川健二（2010）．認知発達の神経基盤―生後8ヶ月まで― 心理学評論，52, 576–608. > 石井正則（1998）．神経・前庭系・空間識について 宇宙開発事業団（編） 宇宙医学・生理学（III-A） 社会保険出版社 pp. 29–41. > Kanas, N. & Manzey, D. (2008). Space psychology and psychiatry (2nd ed.). > Springer. > 木下冨雄（1993）．相対判断の理論―意味、基準系、動き― 京都大学定年退官記念講演録 > 木下冨雄（2009）．宇宙問題への人文・社会科学からのアプローチ―高等研報告書0804― 国際高等研究所・宇宙航空研究開発機構（編） 国際高等研究所 > 古賀一男（2011）．知覚の正体 河出書房新社 > Leonov, A. & Scott, D. (2006). Two sides of the moon. St. Marti's Griffin. > 中川久定（2009）．第3回インタビュー（対話） 木下冨雄（編著） 宇宙問題への人文・社会科学からのアプローチ―高等研報告書0804― > 国際高等研究所・宇宙航空研究開発機構 pp. 376–378. > 牧野達郎・下條信輔・古賀一男（1998）．知覚の可塑性と行動適応 ブレーン出版 > 宮辻和貴・田辺 智・金子公宥（2005）．宇宙船内「体操」のエネルギー消費量に関する研究 体育学研究，50, 201–206. > Oman, C. M. (2003). Human visual orientation in weightlessness. In L. Harris > & M. Jenkin, (Eds.), Levels of Perception. New York, Springer Verlag. pp. > 375–398. > Ross, H. E. (1974). Behaviour and perception in strange environments. Allen > and Unwin. > Small, R. L., Oman, C. M., & Jones, T. D. (2012). Space shuttle flight crew > spatial orientation survey results. Aviation, Space, and Environmental > Medicine, 83, 383–387. > <https://jlc.jst.go.jp/DN/JALC/10011723096?type=list&lang=en&from=J-STAGE&dispptn=1> > 立花正一（2009）．人類が宇宙に居住するための医学・精神心理の課題 木下冨雄（編著）宇宙問題への人文・社会科学からのアプローチ―高等研報告書0804― > 国際高等研究所・宇宙航空研究開発機構 pp. 258–259. > 立花 隆（1983）．宇宙からの帰還 中央公論社 > Vakoch, D. A. (Ed.) (2011). Psychology of space exploration, contemporary > research in historical perspective. National Aeronautics and Space > Administration. pp. 85–86. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From: goal-boun...@eprints.org <mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org> > [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org <mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org>] On Behalf > Of Éric Archambault > Sent: April-29-15 5:40 PM > To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) > Subject: [GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals > > > > Paul > > > > I think librarians are still highly concerned about journals, as opposed to > papers. The reason is that this is how their invoices are structured – they > buy journals and now bunches of journals. But this is changing because > end-users increasingly do not see journals, they see results in the Web of > Science, Scopus, Google Scholar, and universities’ discovery systems. These > results are usually smaller, more atomistic units - they are papers, > conference papers, book chapters, etc. > > > > Thus, the use of search engines, as opposed to browsing on the shelves of > libraries is progressively shifting the relevant unit towards papers as > opposed to journals. Still, journals will continue to play a very important > role as they confer prestige to papers, and guide authors’ and readers’ > decisions. > > > > > > From: goal-boun...@eprints.org <mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org> > [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org <mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org>] On Behalf > Of Uhlir, Paul > Sent: April-29-15 4:09 PM > To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) > Subject: [GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals > > > > Good question. And while we're at it, why after 20 years do we still use a > stovepiped, disaggregated, print model construct as the primary vehicle for > digitally networked scholarly communication? > > > > Paul F. Uhlir, J.D. > Scholar, National Academy of Sciences, and > Consultant, Data Policy and Management > 4643 Aspen Hill Court > Annandale, VA 22003 > USA > Tel. 703 941 0817; Cell +1 703 217 5143 <tel:%2B1%20703%20217%205143> > Skype: pfuhlir; Email: pfuh...@gmail.com <mailto:pfuh...@gmail.com> > Web: http://www.paulfuhlir.com <http://www.paulfuhlir.com/>; Twitter: > @paulfuhlir > > > > From: goal-boun...@eprints.org <mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org> > [goal-boun...@eprints.org <mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org>] On Behalf Of > Jacinto Dávila [jacinto.dav...@gmail.com <mailto:jacinto.dav...@gmail.com>] > Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2015 12:54 PM > To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) > Subject: [GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals > > May I ask a couple of naïve questions? > > Why do we count journals? If we are all looking forward to a global, > hopefully distributed archive of knowledge, shouldn't we counting papers or > some other way of displaying solutions? > > El 29/4/2015 11:13, "Bosman, J.M. (Jeroen)" <j.bos...@uu.nl > <mailto:j.bos...@uu.nl>> escribió: > > I’ve always been amazed how Thomson/ISI categorized English language > journals (mostly published in de US/UK) as “international journals” and all > other journals as “regional journals”. Should ask them. > > > > BTW Eric could you elaborate on what you say in your last sentence? Will > Science Metrix launch a bibliometrics service based on GS data or do I have > to interpret your words in another way? > > > > Jeroen > > > > <image001.jpg> 101 innovations in scholarly communication > <http://innoscholcomm.silk.co/> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Jeroen Bosman, faculty liaison for the Faculty of Geosciences > > Utrecht University Library <http://www.uu.nl/library> > email: j.bos...@uu.nl <mailto:j.bos...@uu.nl> > telephone: +31.30.2536613 <tel:%2B31.30.2536613> > mail: Postbus 80124, 3508 TC, Utrecht, The Netherlands > > visiting address: room 2.50, Heidelberglaan 3, Utrecht > > web: Jeroen Bosman > <http://www.uu.nl/university/library/en/disciplines/geo/Pages/ContactBosman.aspx> > twitter @jeroenbosman/ @geolibrarianUBU > > profiles: : Academia <http://uu.academia.edu/JeroenBosman> / Google Scholar > <http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=-IfPy3IAAAAJ&hl=en> / ISNI > <http://www.isni.org/0000000028810209> / > > Mendeley <http://www.mendeley.com/profiles/jeroen-bosman/> / > MicrosoftAcademic > <http://academic.research.microsoft.com/Author/51538592/jeroen-bosman> / > ORCID <http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5796-2727> / ResearcherID > <http://www.researcherid.com/ProfileView.action?queryString=KG0UuZjN5WmCiHc%252FMC4oLVEKrQQu%252BpzQ8%252F9yrRrmi8Y%253D&Init=Yes&SrcApp=CR&returnCode=ROUTER.Success&SID=N27lOD6EgipnADLnAbK> > / > > ResearchGate <http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jeroen_Bosman/> / Scopus > <http://www.scopus.com/authid/detail.url?authorId=7003519484> / Slideshare > <http://www.slideshare.net/hierohiero> / VIAF > <http://viaf.org/viaf/36099266/> / Worldcat > <http://www.worldcat.org/wcidentities/lccn-n91-100619> > blogging at: I&M 2.0 <http://im2punt0.wordpress.com/> / Ref4UU > <http://ref4uu.blogspot.com/> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Trees say printing is a thing of the past > > > > From: goal-boun...@eprints.org <mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org> > [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org <mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org>] On Behalf > Of Éric Archambault > Sent: woensdag 29 april 2015 0:08 > To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) > Subject: [GOAL] Re: Number of Open Access journals > > > > Jean-Claude has an excellent point. > > > > Our current outlook is extremely Western-centric. When I was in SPRU, > professors (can’t remember if it was Pavitt or Ben Martin) used to joke that > bibliometric measurement was highly influenced by the linguistic capacity of > housewives in Philadelphia. Though today there might have been a shift > towards Manila for data entry, it remains that bibliographic databases > present a truncated view of the world, and bibliometrics a distorted, > pro-Western/Northern Hemisphere biased view of science. If one can > potentially advance the idea that all ground breaking science eventually > makes it to Western journals, and that this is what current databases are > reflecting, it would still remain that normal science follows similar rules > in Russia, Japan, and China and yet a huge part of that content still goes > unaccounted for. A normal US or UK paper is not any better than a normal > Brazilian, Chinese, or Russian paper yet the former are frequently counted, > the latter more frequently not. The low impact of non-Western countries is in > part a reflection of the exclusion of journals published in non-English > speaking countries, and Jean-Claude is right to say there are thousands of > them. > > > > The effect on measurement is poisonous because national level self-citations > are frequently excluded when journals are not published in English-language > journal. If one wants to see the effect of removing national self-citation, > try removing them altogether and you’ll see how badly clobbered the US > ends-up in terms of relate impact. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not suggesting to > measure that way as it would be unwise (I always advocate the inclusion of > self-citations at all levels even though everyone knows some authors and > journals are narcissistic and playing the number game – self citations are an > essential part of the knowledge-building edifice and excluding them > potentially create more problems than it solves), but it is a valid > experiment to show how bad the situation currently is because we count only > publications from half of the journals published, and that half is anything > but randomly selected. For those who want to see the effect, I can send you a > table – among countries with 45,000 papers or more, and adjusted for scale, > the US ranked 22nd (after Japan, the Czech Republic and Mexico) if only > citations from other countries were included. We never published that paper > as we thought it was brain damaged to exclude national self-citation. Yet, by > excluding many many locally published journals from citation counts, this is > what the advanced analytics that come out of dominant bibliographic databases > do, and this is a sin that we, bibliometricians, commit every day. > > > > Hopefully open access will play a huge role in reducing the distortion field. > I can confirm there is more than 50,000 scholarly and scientific journals the > world over, not by any measure all open access, but all peer or quality > reviewed according to the norms of scholarly and scientific communication in > all fields of academia. Stay tuned, more neutral metrics are going to be > available in the near future. > > > > Eric Archambault > > > > From: goal-boun...@eprints.org <mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org> > [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org <mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org>] On Behalf > Of Jean-Claude Guédon > Sent: April-28-15 9:07 AM > To: goal@eprints.org <mailto:goal@eprints.org> > Subject: [GOAL] Number of Open Access journals > > > > I have repeatedly criticized the numbers of journals used to describe > scientific and scholarly publishing in the world. I have also regularly > criticized the use of lists such as the Web of Science, Scopus and Ulrich's > as being largely centred on the North Atlantic and/or OECD countries.As a > counter to such numbers, I have pointed out that Latin America alone, as > indicated by the Latindex vetted list, can sport over 6,000 titles. > Presumably, if Asia and Africa did the same kind of work, numbers of > 25-27,000 titles for the whole world would look funny. > > Another way to look at this is through disciplines or study areas. No one, I > suspect, would argue that Classics (Latin and Greek) is a large speciality in > the world of learning. Typically, classics departments are small and tend to > disappear. Nonetheless, one can find a list of 1498 journal in this field, > and that list is limited to open access journals. > > http://ancientworldonline.blogspot.ca/2012/07/alphabetical-list-of-open-access.html > > <http://ancientworldonline.blogspot.ca/2012/07/alphabetical-list-of-open-access.html> > > > The list dates from the summer of 2012. There may be a few more or a few less > since, but the least one may add is that such a number reveals a publishing > activity that reaches well beyond expectations (at least mine). > > Conclusion: scholarly journal publishing is a lot more complex than what is > provided by most scientometric studies. > > And a final question: who is advantaged by the illusory simplicity of the > publishing landscape? > > -- > > > Jean-Claude Guédon > Professeur titulaire > Littérature comparée > Université de Montréal > > > > _______________________________________________ > GOAL mailing list > GOAL@eprints.org <mailto:GOAL@eprints.org> > http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal > <http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal> > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/> > Version: 2015.0.5863 / Virus Database: 4331/9577 - Release Date: 04/19/15 > Internal Virus Database is out of date. > > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/> > Version: 2015.0.5863 / Virus Database: 4331/9577 - Release Date: 04/19/15 > Internal Virus Database is out of date. > > > _______________________________________________ > GOAL mailing list > GOAL@eprints.org <mailto:GOAL@eprints.org> > http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal > <http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal> > > _______________________________________________ > GOAL mailing list > GOAL@eprints.org > http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
_______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
