Under repair: A publication ethics and research record in the making

Jacob, Marie-Andrée

doi:10.1177/0306312718824663

Cited by 15 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such an inquiry into the practicalities of ‘being ethical’ can draw on a rich body of existing work in STS and related fields (Fassin, 2014; Jacob, 2019; Lambek, 2010). Studying healthcare practitioners in Dutch hospitals, for example, Pols (2014: 82, emphasis in the original) proposes an approach to ethics as a situated practice that does not place normativity in the world of facts, but aims to analyse ‘the different and sometimes conflicting notions of what is good care within care practices’.…”

Section: From Ethics To Ethical Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rethinking gaming: The ethical work of optimization in web search engines

Ziewitz

2019

Soc Stud Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When measures come to matter, those measured find themselves in a precarious situation. On the one hand, they have a strong incentive to respond to measurement so as to score a favourable rating. On the other hand, too much of an adjustment runs the risk of being flagged and penalized by system operators as an attempt to ‘game the system’. Measures, the story goes, are most useful when they depict those measured as they usually are and not how they intend to be. In this article, I explore the practices and politics of optimization in the case of web search engines. Drawing on materials from ethnographic fieldwork with search engine optimization (SEO) consultants in the United Kingdom, I show how maximizing a website’s visibility in search results involves navigating the shifting boundaries between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ optimization. Specifically, I am interested in the ethical work performed as SEO consultants artfully arrange themselves to cope with moral ambiguities provoked and delegated by the operators of the search engine. Building on studies of ethics as a practical accomplishment, I suggest that the ethicality of optimization has itself become a site of governance and contestation. Studying such practices of ‘being ethical’ not only offers opportunities for rethinking popular tropes like ‘gaming the system’, but also draws attention to often-overlooked struggles for authority at the margins of contemporary ranking schemes.

show abstract

Section: From Ethics To Ethical Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rethinking gaming: The ethical work of optimization in web search engines

Ziewitz

2019

Soc Stud Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, some innovations widely discussed in the academic literature, such as registered reports or open peer review, were sporadically put forward by the interviewer. With our work we follow the tradition of ethnographic fieldwork at publishers or publishing related organisations, for example by Hirschauer [27] and Jacob [28]. In addition, we conducted three interviews with (managing) editors of journals not closely related to such large publishers, mainly for contrast, aiming to get a sense of generalisability beyond large, commercial publishers.…”

Section: Methodological Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Innovating editorial practices: academic publishers at work

Horbach

Halffman

2020

Res Integr Peer Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Triggered by a series of controversies and diversifying expectations of editorial practices, several innovative peer review procedures and supporting technologies have been proposed. However, adoption of these new initiatives seems slow. This raises questions about the wider conditions for peer review change and about the considerations that inform decisions to innovate. We set out to study the structure of commercial publishers’ editorial process, to reveal how the benefits of peer review innovations are understood, and to describe the considerations that inform the implementation of innovations. Methods We carried out field visits to the editorial office of two large academic publishers housing the editorial staff of several hundreds of journals, to study their editorial process, and interviewed editors not affiliated with large publishers. Field notes were transcribed and analysed using coding software. Results At the publishers we analysed, the decision-making structure seems to show both clear patterns of hierarchy and layering of the different editorial practices. While information about new initiatives circulates widely, their implementation depends on assessment of stakeholder’s wishes, impact on reputation, efficiency and implementation costs, with final decisions left to managers at the top of the internal hierarchy. Main tensions arise between commercial and substantial arguments. The editorial process is closely connected to commercial practices of creating business value, and the very specific terms in which business value is understood, such as reputation considerations and the urge to increase efficiency. Journals independent of large commercial publishers tend to have less hierarchically structured processes, report more flexibility to implement innovations, and to a greater extent decouple commercial and editorial perspectives. Conclusion Our study demonstrates that peer review innovations are partly to be understood in light of commercial considerations related to reputation, efficiency and implementations costs. These arguments extend beyond previously studied topics in publishing economics, including publishers’ choice for business or publication models and reach into the very heart of the editorial and peer review process.

show abstract

“…In addition, some innovations widely discussed in the academic literature, such as registered reports or open peer review, were sporadically put forward by the interviewer. With our work we follow the tradition of ethnographic eldwork at publishers or publishing related organisations, for example by Hirschauer (27) and Jacob (28). In addition, we conducted three interviews with (managing) editors of journals not closely related to such large publishers, mainly for contrast, aiming to get a sense of generalisability beyond large, commercial publishers.…”

Section: Methodological Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Innovating Editorial Practices: Academic Publishers at Work

Horbach

Halffman

2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract Background: Triggered by a series of controversies and diversifying expectations of editorial practices, several innovative peer review procedures and supporting technologies have been proposed. However, adoption of these new initiatives seems slow. This raises questions about the wider conditions for peer review change and about the considerations that inform decisions to innovate. We set out to study the structure of commercial publishers’ editorial process, to reveal how the benefits of peer review innovations are understood, and to describe the considerations that inform the implementation of innovations Methods: We carried out field visits to the editorial office of two large academic publishers housing the editorial staff of several hundreds of journals, to study their editorial process, and interviewed editors not affiliated with large publishers. Field notes were transcribed and analysed using coding software..Results: at the publishers we analysed, the decision-making structure seems to show both clear patterns of hierarchy and layering of the different editorial practices. While information about new initiatives circulates widely, their implementation depends on assessment of stakeholder’s wishes, impact on reputation, efficiency and implementation costs, with final decisions left to managers at the top of the internal hierarchy. Main tensions arise between commercial and substantial arguments. The editorial process is closely connected to commercial practices of creating business value, and the very specific terms in which business value is understood, such as reputation considerations and the urge to increase efficiency. Journals independent of large commercial publishers tend to have less hierarchically structured processes, report more flexibility to implement innovations, and to a greater extent decouple commercial and editorial perspectives.Conclusion: Our study demonstrates that peer review innovations are partly to be understood in light of commercial considerations related to reputation, efficiency and implementations costs. These arguments extend beyond previously studied topics in publishing economics, including publishers’ choice for business or publication models and reach into the very heart of the editorial and peer review process.

show abstract

Under repair: A publication ethics and research record in the making

Cited by 15 publications

References 50 publications

Rethinking gaming: The ethical work of optimization in web search engines

Rethinking gaming: The ethical work of optimization in web search engines

Innovating editorial practices: academic publishers at work

Innovating Editorial Practices: Academic Publishers at Work

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About