National Lists of Scholarly Publication Channels: An Overview and Recommendations for Their Construction and Maintenance

Abstract

PurposeThis paper presents an overview of different kinds of lists of scholarly publication channels and of experiences related to the construction and maintenance of national lists supporting performance-based research funding systems. It also contributes with a set of recommendations for the construction and maintenance of national lists of journals and book publishers.Design/methodology/approachThe study is based on analysis of previously published studies, policy papers, and reported experiences related to the construction and use of lists of scholarly publication channels.FindingsSeveral countries have systems for research funding and/or evaluation, that involve the use of national lists of scholarly publication channels (mainly journals and publishers). Typically, such lists are selective (do not include all scholarly or non-scholarly channels) and differentiated (distinguish between channels of different levels and quality). At the same time, most lists are embedded in a system that encompasses multiple or all disciplines. This raises the question how such lists can be organized and maintained to ensure that all relevant disciplines and all types of research are adequately represented.Research limitationThe conclusions and recommendations of the study are based on the authors’ interpretation of a complex and sometimes controversial process with many different stakeholders involved.Practical implicationsThe recommendations and the related background information provided in this paper enable mutual learning that may feed into improvements in the construction and maintenance of national and other lists of scholarly publication channels in any geographical context. This may foster a development of responsible evaluation practices.Originality/valueThis paper presents the first general overview and typology of different kinds of publication channel lists, provides insights on expert-based versus metrics-based evaluation, and formulates a set of recommendations for the responsible construction and maintenance of publication channel lists.

Journal lists in social sciences and the spectrum of quality standards

“…Lists of scholarly journals have existed since at least the 19 th century, while the first journal ranking was produced in 1926 (Pölönen et al, 2021). Nowadays, their use in funding, evaluation and planning of research is widespread.…”

“…Journal lists can be characterized according to multiple dimensions. The following typology is mostly based on Pölönen et al (2021).…”

“…2.1), although some dimensions-such as quality control or metrics-are more commonly applied than others. Many of the national lists reviewed by Pölönen et al (2021) treat peer review as the main criterion, usually in addition to some more technical requirements (e.g., ISSN). Lists without selectivity like Ulrich's or ISSN.org, are generally not used in evaluation settings.…”

“…Likewise, the use of journal lists is common in evaluation procedures at the national or institutional level. Following the comprehensive overview of national scholarly publication channel lists by Pölönen et al (2021), some national lists are described below as examples of how journal lists inform and support research assessment and funding distribution.…”

Local use of metrics for the research assessment of academics: the case of Poland

“…Australia since 2017). National lists of journals and publishers have been used to indicate which publications can be counted in the evaluation of institutions in various countries (Pölönen et al, 2020). Only articles published in specific lists of journals or books published by listed publishers can be counted as outputs of a given institution.…”