Publication incentives based on journal rankings disadvantage local publications

Lee, Alan T. K.; Simon, Carol A.

doi:10.17159/sajs.2018/a0289

Cited by 13 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The pressure to publish combined with incentives for publication can drive a focus on quantity and not quality. This has been argued in various publications (see, for example, CHE 2016; Lee and Simon 2018;Tomaselli 2018) and emerged strongly in our data.…”

Section: Incentives Are An Expectationsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…The implementation of the funding incentive as part of the block grant has correlated with a rapid increase in research publication output in the South African higher education sector (CHE 2016;DHET 2013;Lee and Simon 2018;Pouris 2012). At the time of the implementation of this formula in 2005, the number of publication units for the sector was 7 230; in the years since, publication output has risen dramatically, with 18 872 accredited publication units being recorded for 2017 (DHET 2019b).…”

Section: Questioning Causal Claimsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Unintended Consequences of Using Direct Incentives to Drive the Complex Task of Research Dissemination

Muthama

McKenna

2020

EaC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Universities have used an array of incentives to increase academic publications, which are highly rewarded in the South African higher education funding formula. While all universities use indirect incentives, such as linking promotion and probation to publication, the mechanisms used in some institutions have taken a very direct form, whereby authors are paid to publish. This process has paralleled a large rise in publication outputs alongside increased concerns about quality. Significantly, there are ethical questions to be asked when knowledge dissemination is so explicitly linked to financial reward through the payment of commission to academics. Based on an analysis of institutional policies and data from an online survey and interviews with academics from seven South African universities, we argue that when money is the main means used to encourage academics to contribute to knowledge, numerous unintended consequences may emerge. These include a focus on quantity rather than the quality of research, a rise in predatory publishing, and resentment among academics. We argue that incentives, in particular direct payment for publications, undermine the academic project by positioning publications in terms of exchange-value rather than their use-value as a contribution to knowledge building.

show abstract

Section: Incentives Are An Expectationsupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Questioning Causal Claimsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Unintended Consequences of Using Direct Incentives to Drive the Complex Task of Research Dissemination

Muthama

McKenna

2020

EaC

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are a variety of variations of impact factor measurements, which all basically measure the same xiv thing with different angles. For instance, Scimago rates a journal by the prestige of the other journals citing the work, albeit this measure is clearly biased against African journals (Lee and Simon 2018). This metric is also particularly odorous and insulting to the honour of Ostrich as it lists Ostrich in the category of 'ecology, evolution, behaviour and systematics', while other ornithological journals are also listed as 'animal science and zoology'.…”

Section: The Impact Factor Trapmentioning

confidence: 99%

A celebration of 90 years of Ostrich: a review of past, present, and future directions

Lee

2020

Ostrich

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

View related articles View Crossmark data Citing articles: 1 View citing articles EDITORIAL A celebration of 90 years of Ostrich: a review of past, present, and future directions iii The year 2020 is the 90th anniversary of Ostrich: Journal of African Ornithology. This is an estimable age for a journal, but as a consequence the origins and evolution of the journal are somewhat shrouded in time for younger ornithologists, or not known at all to those focusing their ornithological interests in Africa but based elsewhere. The journal recently achieved its highest 5-year impact factor ever in 2019, after achieving its highest ever 2-year impact factor for 2016. Altogether, it is thus fitting to undertake some research to answer fundamental questions of the journal's history to inform the modern reader on the origins and changes that the journal has experienced over the course of its history. In relation to other histories of African ornithology, this article focuses specifically on the journal, rather than the societies to which it has been affiliated. The journal has over 3000 articles that are digitally indexed since its inception in 1930. We use this database to explore some trends and themes of the evolution of Ostrich over its sometimes-turbulent history, placing it in the context of modern ornithology, contributors, publishing, and where it should be headed into the future. Introduction Ostrich, the scientific journal of BirdLife South Africa, has for a long time advertised itself as the leading journal of African Ornithology. But where did it come from and how did it get there? In this review, I explore the Ostrich archives to compare where the journal is now in relation to what was published in the past. The purpose of this article is not a history of ornithology, or even South African ornithology (for that please read Roy Siegfried's (2016) Levaillant's Legacy or Richard Dean's (2017) Warriors, Dilettantes and Businessmen), or the history of the South African Ornithological Society (SAOS, now BirdLife South Africa), although Ostrich history is intertwined with the SAOS for the first few decades of its existence. For that history, Ashton's (1980) article on the topic is still the most relevant, focusing on the society, prominent members, presidents, and past editors of Ostrich. Since most preeminent ornithologists of this century favour international journals for publishing their research, we also cannot pretend that this review represents the status of research in Africa (that is best read in Beale's (2018a) Trends and themes in African ornithology). Instead, this article is more aligned to 'Sixty years of Ostrich' (Craig 1988), in terms of a reflection of where Ostrich is now in the context of research in Africa and the context in which Ostrich finds itself: rated as one of the world's top 20 ornithological journals, but competing unevenly with international journals due to a narrower niche and impact factor trap, which I will explain later in this article. Thirty years ago, a central consideration for an a...

show abstract

“…Measurement formulae are indicative of highly competitive societies where information and knowledge exhibit a rapid half-life, in which national policy is hurriedly and often opportunistically implemented between national elections. Echoing Le Roux ( 2006), Lee and Simon (2018) observe that the trend for ranking of articles as is now done at some universities risks intellectual recolonisation. The overlay of financially weighted national incentive schemes will further disadvantage local journals by effectively leaving them with the "leftovers" (Gibbs 1995).…”

Section: Metrics and Imagined Valuementioning

confidence: 99%

“…How "reputable" is quantified differs depending on the index applied by the academic auditor. The term "reputable" is drawn from a 2017 University of KwaZulu-Natal circular that made this distinction (see Lee and Simon 2018).…”

Section: Metricsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Humanities, Citations and Currency: Hierarchies of Value and Enabled Recolonisation

Tomaselli

2019

Critical Arts

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A comparative analysis examines the relevance of journal measurement indices for the humanities and the sciences. The analysis explains how different measurements work, what they measure and their impact on the integrity of research, paradigm change and citation levels. The increasing use by university auditors of impact factors as performance management and research output indicators is critically examined with regard to implications for the humanities. The effect of this neoliberal approach on African-based academic developments is examined, as are the intellectually re-colonising effects of such systems.

show abstract

Publication incentives based on journal rankings disadvantage local publications

Cited by 13 publications

References 12 publications

The Unintended Consequences of Using Direct Incentives to Drive the Complex Task of Research Dissemination

The Unintended Consequences of Using Direct Incentives to Drive the Complex Task of Research Dissemination

A celebration of 90 years of Ostrich: a review of past, present, and future directions

Humanities, Citations and Currency: Hierarchies of Value and Enabled Recolonisation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About