Related papers: Distinguishing articles in questionable and non-qu…
A key feature of questionable journals is a lack of adequate peer review of their articles. Content of thus unknown quality may be utilised by unsuspecting practitioners or incorporated into peer-reviewed research, becoming legitimised. It…
This paper presents the results and further development of a survey sent to 11,799 Spanish faculty members and researchers from various fields of the social sciences and the humanities, obtaining a total of 45.6% (5,368 responses) usable…
Purpose: Journal Impact Factors and other citation-based indicators are widely used and abused to help select journals to publish in or to estimate the value of a published article. Nevertheless, citation rates primarily reflect scholarly…
Questionable publications have been accused of "greedy" practices; however, their influence on academia has not been gauged. Here, we probe the impact of questionable publications through a systematic and comprehensive analysis with various…
Purpose: Scholars often aim to conduct high quality research and their success is judged primarily by peer reviewers. Research quality is difficult for either group to identify, however, and misunderstandings can reduce the efficiency of…
Citation metrics are becoming pervasive in the quantitative evaluation of scholars, journals and institutions. More then ever before, hiring, promotion, and funding decisions rely on a variety of impact metrics that cannot disentangle…
The Journal Impact Factor and other indicators that assess the average citation rate of articles in a journal are consulted by many academics and research evaluators, despite initiatives against overreliance on them. Despite this, there is…
Condensing the work of any academic scientist into a one-dimensional measure of scientific quality is a difficult problem. Here, we employ Bayesian statistics to analyze several different measures of quality. Specifically, we determine each…
The journal impact factor (JIF) is often equated with journal quality and the quality of the peer review of the papers submitted to the journal. We examined the association between the content of peer review and JIF by analysing 10,000 peer…
Artificial intelligence and social computing rely on hundreds of thousands of content reviewers to classify high volumes of harmful and forbidden content. Many workers report long-term, potentially irreversible psychological harm. This work…
Is it possible to reliably evaluate the quality of peer reviews? We study this question driven by two primary motivations -- incentivizing high-quality reviewing using assessed quality of reviews and measuring changes to review quality in…
Context: Quality requirements (QRs) are a topic of constant discussions both in industry and academia. Debates entwine around the definition of quality requirements, the way how to handle them, or their importance for project success. While…
Evaluation of journals for quality is one of the dominant themes of bibliometrics since journals are the primary venue of vetting and distribution of scholarship. There are many criticisms of quantifying journal impact with bibliometrics…
We conducted a large-scale analysis of around 10,000 scientific articles, from the period 2007-2016, to study the bibliometric or formal aspects influencing citations. A transversal analysis was conducted disaggregating the articles into…
Accurately assigning the document type of review articles in citation index databases like Web of Science(WoS) and Scopus is important. This study aims to investigate the document type assignation of review articles in web of Science,…
Bibliometric analysis has firmly conquered its place as an instrument for evaluation and international comparison of performance levels. Consequently, differences in coverage by standard bibliometric databases installed a dichotomy between…
Countries and authors in the academic periphery occasionally have been criticized for contributing to the expansion of questionable publishing because they share a major fraction of papers in questionable journals. On the other side, topics…
This paper describes, develops, and validates SciLens, a method to evaluate the quality of scientific news articles. The starting point for our work are structured methodologies that define a series of quality aspects for manually…
Co-authored articles tend to be more cited in many academic fields, but is this because they tend to be higher quality or is it an audience effect: increased awareness through multiple author networks? We address this unknown with the…
In the evaluation of scientific publications' impact, the interplay between intrinsic quality and non-scientific factors remains a subject of debate. While peer review traditionally assesses quality, bibliometric techniques gauge scholarly…