Publish or perish: how Central and Eastern European economists have dealt with the ever-increasing academic publishing requirements 2000–2015

GranăźAy, Martin; Vveinhardt, Jolita; źUmilo, ăźRika

doi:10.1007/s11192-017-2332-z

Cited by 57 publications

(65 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Since then, the Czech researchers and academics are wasting their precious time on pointless debates and mutual accusations of "predatory" publishing. In fact, this trend can be also observed in other Central and Eastern European countries [3].…”

supporting

confidence: 62%

Innovations and academic publishing: who will cast the first stone?

Molchanovа¹,

Chunikhina²,

Strielkowski³

2017

MMI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

supporting

confidence: 62%

Innovations and academic publishing: who will cast the first stone?

Molchanovа¹,

Chunikhina²,

Strielkowski³

2017

MMI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The above‐mentioned studies do include, for example, rejection risk as a factor among many others, but researchers may be under considerable pressure to publish, and therefore, the issue of simply getting a paper published may disrupt the ideal criteria for judging a journal. The pressure to publish and the existence of predatory journals are believed to be related (Grančay, Vveinhardt, & Šumilo, ; McCann & Polacsek, ; Moher & Srivastava, ).…”

Section: Deciding On a Publication Outletmentioning

confidence: 99%

Why do researchers decide to publish in questionable journals? A review of the literature

Frandsen

2019

Learned Publishing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Peer review is a cornerstone of scientific publication, and consequently, predatory journals are feared to be a threat to the credibility of science as they perform no or low‐quality peer review. The question of why researchers decide to publish in a questionable journal remains relatively unexplored. This paper provides an overview of the existing literature on why researchers decide to publish papers in questionable journals, specifically whether or not they search for a low‐barrier way to getting published while being aware that the chosen journal probably does not adhere to acceptable academic standards. The choice of a publication outlet can be seen as a submission tree that consists of various incentives, and explaining why authors publish in deceptive journals may thus consist of a combination of awareness and motivational factors. Awareness and motivation of diligent authors is very different from that of unethical authors. Unethical authors may use a lack of awareness to excuse their actions, but they may actively search for a low‐barrier way to getting published. As there are different types of authors who publish in deceptive journals, we need different approaches to solve the problem.

show abstract

“…Selection among scientists should, in principle, be based on merit; however, it is mostly based on some quantifiable achievement, such as number of papers, number of independent citations, cumulative impact factor, h-index, etc. This was the case in the West for decades, and now also in Central and Eastern Europe there is an increased pressure to publish internationally [29,30]. These numbers can hardly reflect on the scientific potential of the scientist in question as they measure the ability of generating these numbers.…”

Section: Publish or Perishmentioning

confidence: 99%

Publish and Who Should Perish: You or Science?

Kun

2018

Publications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Something is wrong with science as there is an increasing amount of unreliable, manipulated and outright faked results appearing in the literature. Here I argue that this is a direct consequence of the pay-structure and the assessment system employed in academia and it could be remedied by changing hiring, advancement, and funding criteria. Scientists are paid below average relative to their level of education, unless they are at the top or can secure grants that allow for higher salaries. Positions and grants are mostly awarded based on bibliometric numbers. Consequently, there is a strong competition to accumulate numbers of papers, impact factors, and citations. Those who can increase their value efficiently will be rewarded and the accumulation of higher values will become easier (the Matthew effect). Higher bibliometric numbers can be obtained by unethical or questionable practices, which might tempt some people. If assessments did not employ bibliometric numbers, then these practices would not have a benefit, and would fade out. Throughout the text, data from Hungary, which are similar to data from elsewhere, supplement the argument.

show abstract

Publish or perish: how Central and Eastern European economists have dealt with the ever-increasing academic publishing requirements 2000–2015

Cited by 57 publications

References 43 publications

Innovations and academic publishing: who will cast the first stone?

Innovations and academic publishing: who will cast the first stone?

Why do researchers decide to publish in questionable journals? A review of the literature

Publish and Who Should Perish: You or Science?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About