Academic capacity building: holding up a mirror

Scientometrics

Volumn 106, Issue 3, 2016, Pages 1277-1280

  Van der Stocken, Tom ^a   Hugé, Jean ^b   Deboelpaep, Evelien ^a   Vanhove, Maarten P M ^c,d,e   Janssens de Bisthoven, Luc ^c   Koedam, Nico ^a  

^a VRIJE UNIVERSITEIT BRUSSEL   (Belgium)

^b UNIVERSITÉ LIBRE DE BRUXELLES   (Belgium)

^c ROYAL BELGIAN INSTITUTE OF NATURAL SCIENCES   (Belgium)

^d MASARYK UNIVERSITY   (Czech Republic)

^e UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Authorship; Development; Ethical publishing: Mathilda effect; LMIC; Matthew effect; Scientific publication

Indexed keywords

EID: 84958679870     PISSN: 01389130     EISSN: 15882861     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11192-015-1811-3     Document Type: Letter

References (17)

1. Ana, J., Koehlmoos, T., Smith, R., & Yan, L. L. (2013). Research misconduct in low- and middle-income countries. PLoS Medicine,10(3), e1001315. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001315.
2. Beall, J. (2012). Predatory publishers are corrupting open access. Nature,489(7415), 179.
3. Beall, J. (2015). The “Metric” system: Yet more chaos in Scholarly publishing. Journal of Physical Chemistry Letters,6, 2020–2021.
4. Chu, K. M., Jayaraman, S., Kyamanywa, P., & Ntakiyiruta, G. (2014). Building research capacity in Africa: Equity and global health collaborations. PLoS Medicine,11(3), e1001612. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001612.
5. Clement, T. P. (2014). Authorship matrix: A rational approach to quantify individual contributions and responsibilities in multi-author scientific articles. Science and Engineering Ethics,20(2), 345–361.
6. Dahdouh-Guebas, F., Ahimbisibwe, J., Van Moll, R., & Koedam, N. (2003). Neo-colonial science by the most industrialised upon the least developed countries in peer-review publishing. Scientometrics,56(3), 329–343.
7. Fanelli, D. (2009). How many scientists fabricate and falsify research? A systematic review and meta-analysis of survey data. PLoS ONE, 4(5), e5738. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0005738.
8. Janssens de Bisthoven, L. (2009). Supporting development relevant research. In International symposium evaluation of development research, Royal Academy for Overseas Sciences Brussels, pp. 65–74.
9. Macilwain, C. (2013). Halt to avalanche of performance metrics. Nature,500, 255.
10. Marušić, A., Bošnjak, L., & Jerončić, A. (2011). A systematic review of research on the meaning, ethics and practices of authorship across scholarly disciplines. PLoS ONE,6(9), e23477. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0023477.
11. Merton, R. K. (1968). The Matthew effect in science. Science,159, 56–63.
12. Osborne, J. W., & Holland, A. (2009). What is authorship, and what should it be? A survey of prominent guidelines for determining authorship in scientific publications. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation,14(15), 1–19.
13. Pielke, R. A, Jr. (2007). The honest broker making sense of science in policy and politics. New York: Cambridge University Press.
14. Rossiter, M. W. (1993). The Matthew/Matilda effect in science. Social Studies of Science,23, 325–341.
15. Van Dalen, H. P., & Henkens, K. (2012). Intended and unintended consequences of a publish or-perish culture: A worldwide survey. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,63(7), 1282–1293.
16. Wilsdon, J. (2015). We need a measured approach to metrics. Nature,523, 129.
17. Xin, H. (2006). Scandals shake Chinese science. Science,312, 1464–1466.