Book reviews in academic journals: patterns and dynamics

Liu, Weishu; Ding, Yishan; Gu, Meng

doi:10.1007/s11192-016-2172-2

Cited by 17 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Besides the aforementioned barriers linked to perceptions, there are other institutional barriers hindering the uptake of OA in certain fields, such as the fact that there is not always funding available to cover the expenses incurred for gold access to specific articles and the fact that many great works in fields, such as humanities, actually take the form of monographs (Eve & Willinsky, ; Liu, Ding, & Gu, ). Hybrid OA, that is, articles published openly on the web within subscription‐access journals funded by article processing charge (APC), is very much dependent on funding availability associated with specific disciplines (Laakso & Björk, ; Solomon & Björk, ).…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Open access publications in sciences and social sciences: A comparative analysis

Liu

2017

Learned Publishing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, we conduct a comparative analysis to examine the characteristics and evolutionary trends of open access (OA) publications in natural and social sciences. We use data recorded by Science Citation Index Expanded, Social Sciences Citation Index, and Journal Citation Reports during 2001–2015 as the main source. We then comparatively analyse the characteristics of natural and social sciences in terms of historical evolution, main contributors, and distribution of OA journals and publications across different languages, disciplines, and impact factor quartiles. Our results suggest that both natural and social sciences experienced dramatic growth of OA journals since 2009, but the share of social science OA journals within journal impact factor quartile 1 is much lower than that of natural sciences. While natural and social sciences share some similarities in OA publishing activities, such as main countries of contribution, they differ greatly in dimensions such as OA ratio across specific disciplines, countries, and publishing languages. We acknowledge that OA publishing offers a level playing field for traditionally disadvantaged languages, countries, and scientific disciplines, but meanwhile, the advancement of high‐quality OA publishing needs more targeted and sophisticated approaches to tackle differences in natural and social sciences.

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Open access publications in sciences and social sciences: A comparative analysis

Liu

2017

Learned Publishing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Book reviews have been an important channel of communication in social sciences and humanities but quite unusual in natural sciences (Liu, Ding & Gu, 2017). Since the creation of the RLP, these reviews have been a distinguishing mark on the journal and have contributed to the dissemination of those reviewed books.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Fiftieth Anniversary of the Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología: A Bibliometric Analysis

Salas

Vega-Arce

González

et al. 2019

RLP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to conduct a bibliometric analysis of the Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología (RLP) journal in commemoration of its fiftieth anniversary in order to discover its evolution as a journal and its scientific production. We extracted a dataset from the Web of Science's principal collection from 1975 to 2017. This contained a total sample of 2,163 scientific documents, which were processed using Excel and SciMat programmes. The bibliometric indicators used were H-Classics, TC2, identification of the most commonly cited authors and journals, and references. We used Lotka's Law to analyse research productivity. Results showed that the content included 48.6% scientific articles and 42.1% book reviews. Spain had the highest number of articles published. Burrhus Skinner, Rubén Ardila, Rogelio Díaz Guerrero, and Albert Bandura were the most commonly cited authors. Analyses revealed certain strengths of and challenges faced by the RLP. Future research should compare these results with journals from other countries.

show abstract

“…This may underestimate the use of non‐English languages in scholarly communication since non‐indexation does not mean that the journals do not exist or are not of local or regional importance. In addition, non‐journal‐based literature, such as books and monographs, are also much more important in social sciences and arts and humanities than in the sciences (Liu, Ding, & Gu, ; Zhou, Thijs, & Glanzel, ), which also affect how we can interpret our findings. This study focuses on journal citation indexes, which may be biased against social sciences and arts and humanities.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The changing role of non-English papers in scholarly communication: Evidence from Web of Science's three journal citation indexes

Liu

2016

Learned Publishing

Self Cite

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Non‐English languages are widely used, but their roles in scholarly communication are relatively under‐explored. By using Web of Science's Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE, 1900–2015), Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI, 1900–2015), and Arts and Humanities Citation Index (A&HCI, 1975–2015), this study probes the patterns and dynamics of non‐English papers by year, citation index, and discipline using bibliometric analysis. The analyses show that English is increasingly being used as the dominating language from natural sciences and social sciences to arts and humanities. Around 97% of the papers in SCIE, 95% of the papers in SSCI, and 73% of the papers in A&HCI during the past decade were in English. However, other languages such as German and French were also used as important academic languages in sciences and social sciences during the first half of the 20th century, 1970s, and 1980s. Unlike natural science and social science disciplines, non‐English papers have consistently played important role in arts and humanities disciplines from the beginning of 1975. Although the shares of non‐English papers in SCIE and SSCI databases have been limited during the past decade, a large number of non‐English papers can be found in some applied disciplines of sciences and social sciences.

show abstract

Book reviews in academic journals: patterns and dynamics

Cited by 17 publications

References 22 publications

Open access publications in sciences and social sciences: A comparative analysis

Open access publications in sciences and social sciences: A comparative analysis

The Fiftieth Anniversary of the Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología: A Bibliometric Analysis

The changing role of non-English papers in scholarly communication: Evidence from Web of Science's three journal citation indexes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About