Why researchers publish in non-mainstream journals: Training, knowledge bridging, and gap filling

Research Policy

Volumn 46, Issue 9, 2017, Pages 1666-1680

  Chavarro, Diego ^a   Tang, Puay ^a   Ràfols, Ismael ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SUSSEX   (United Kingdom)

^b INGENIO CSIC UPV Technical University of Valencia   (Spain)

Author keywords

Mainstream journals; Non mainstream journals; Publication patterns; Research evaluation; Science communication system; Universalism

Indexed keywords

FUNCTION EVALUATION; PUBLISHING;

MAINSTREAM JOURNALS; NON-MAINSTREAM JOURNALS; PUBLICATION PATTERNS; RESEARCH EVALUATION; SCIENCE COMMUNICATIONS; UNIVERSALISM;

QUALITY CONTROL;

EID: 85028430772     PISSN: 00487333     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.respol.2017.08.002     Document Type: Article

References (71)

1. Aguado-López, E., Becerril-García, A., Arriola, M., Martínez-Domínguez, N.D., Iberoamérica en la ciencia de corriente principal (Thomson Reuters/Scopus): una región fragmentada. Interciencia 39:8 (2014), 570–579.
2. Arvanitis, R., Gaillac, J., Proceedings of the International Conference on Science Indicators for Developing Countries. Éditions De l'ORSTOM, Paris, 1992 (Available at:) http://horizon.documentation.ird.fr/exl-doc/pleins_textes/pleins_textes_6/colloques2/36935.pdf.
3. Bazerman, C., Shaping Written Knowledge: The Genre and Activity of the Experimental Article in Science. 1988, University of Wisconsin press, Madison, WI.
4. Benítez, É., García, C., The history of research on oil palm bud rot (Elaeis guineensis Jacq.) in Colombia. Agrono. Colomb. 32:3 (2014), 390–398.
5. Bianco, M., Gras, N., Sutz, J., Academic Evaluation: Universal Instrument? Tool for Development?. 2016, Minerva, 1–23, 10.1007/s11024-016-9306-9J.
6. Bortagaray, I., Ordóñez-Matamoros, H.G., Introduction to the special issue of the review of policy research: innovation, innovation policy, and social inclusion in developing countries. Rev. Policy Res. 29 (2012), 669–671.
7. Braun, V., Clarke, V., Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 3:2 (2006), 77–101, 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
8. Burrows, Roger, Living with the h-index? Metric assemblages in the contemporary academy. Sociol. Rev. 60:2 (2012), 355–372.
9. Chavarro, D., Tang, P., Rafols, I., Interdisciplinarity and research on local issues: evidence from a developing country. Res. Eval. 23 (2014), 195–209, 10.1093/reseval/rvu012.
10. Chavarro, D., Universalism and Particularism: Explaining the Emergence and Development of Regional Indexing Systems (doctoral Thesis). 2017, SPRU − University of Sussex, Brighton, UK (Retrieved from SPRU thesis collection).
11. Cole, S., The hierarchy of the sciences?. Am. J. Sociol. 89:1 (1983), 111–139.
12. Crane, D., The gatekeepers of science: some factors affecting the selection of articles for scientific journals. Am. Sociol. 2 (1967), 195–201.
13. San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment. (Retrieved from:) http://www.ascb.org/dora/.
14. Davila, C., The current state of business history in Latin America: business history in Latin America. Aust. Econ. Hist. Rev. 53:2 (2013), 109–120, 10.1111/aehr.12006.
15. Davis, C., Eisemon, T., Mainstream and non mainstream scientific literature in four peripheral Asian scientific communities. Scientometrics 15:3 (1989), 215–239.
16. Delgado, G., Forero, E., Ponce, W., Mondragon, F., et al. Carta dirigida al subdirector de Colciencias. Propuesta ajuste publindex-colciencias. El Espectador. 2016 (Retrieved from) https://innovacionyciencia.com/blog/carta_dirigida_al_subdirector_de_colciencias_propuesta_ajuste_publindex_colciencias.
17. Quem Somos − Portal Embrapa. (Retrieved from:) https://www.embrapa.br/quem-somos.
18. Estrada-Mejía, C., Forero-Pineda, C., The quest for visibility of scientific journals in Latin America. Learn. Publ. 23 (2010), 237–252.
19. Evans, J.A., Shim, J.M., Ioannidis, J.P., Attention to local health burden and the global disparity of health research. PLoS One, 9(4), 2014, e90147.
20. Fry, J., Oppenheim-DIS, C., Creaser, C., Johnson, W., Summers, M., White-LISU, S., et al. Communicating Knowledge: How and Why Researchers Publish and Disseminate Their Findings. JISC: Supporting Paper, 2. 2009 (Retrieved:) http://www.rin.ac.uk/system/files/attachments/Communicating-knowledge-focus-groups.pdf.
21. Gómez-Morales, Y., Restrepo, E., Vargas, E., Vélez cuartas, G., et al. ¿Cuál es la mejor forma para medir el desarrollo científico en el país? El Espectador. 2016 (Retrieved from:) http://www.elespectador.com/noticias/ciencia/cual-mejor-forma-medir-el-desarrollo-cientifico-el-pais-articulo-650615.
22. Garfield, E., Quantitative analysis of the scientific literature and its implications for science policymaking in Latin America and the Caribbean. Relation 29 (1995), 87–95.
23. Garfield, E., A statistically valid definition of bias is needed to determine whether the Science Citation Index discriminates against third world journals. Curr. Sci. 73:8 (1997), 639–641.
24. Gibbs, W.W., Lost science in the third world. Sci. Am. 273 (1995), 92–99.
25. Gläser, J., Laudel, G., Governing science. Eur. J. Sociol. 57 (2016), 117–168, 10.1017/S0003975616000047.
26. Guédon, J.C., In Oldenburg's Long Shadow: Librarians, Research Scientists, Publishers, and the Control of Scientific Publishing. 2001, Association of Research Libraries, Washington, DC.
27. Guédon, J.C., Open Access and the Divide Between ‘mainstream’ and Peripheral Science. 2007 (Retrieved from:) http://eprints.rclis.org/10778/1/Brazil-final.pdf.
28. Hess, D., Alternative Pathways in Science and Industry. 2007, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
29. Hess, D., Undone Science: Social Movements, Mobilized Publics, and Industrial Transitions. 2016, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
30. Hicks, D., Wouters, P., Waltman, L., de Rijcke, S., Rafols, I., Bibliometrics: the Leiden manifesto for research metrics. Nature 520 (2015), 429–431, 10.1038/520429a.
31. Hicks, D., The four literatures of social science. Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research, 2004, Springer, Netherlands, 473–496.
32. Klein, D., Chiang, E., The social science citation index: a black box with an ideological bias?. Econ. J. Watch 1:1 (2004), 134–165.
33. Larivière, V., Macaluso, B., Improving the coverage of social science and humanities researchers’ output: the case of the Érudit journal platform. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 62:12 (2011), 2437–2442, 10.1002/asi.21632.
34. Larivière, V., Haustein, S., Mongeon, P., The oligopoly of Academic Publishers in the digital era. PLoS One 10 (2015), 1–15, 10.1371/journal.pone.0127502.
35. Lemarchand, G., National Science, Technology and Innovation Systems in Latin America and the Caribbean. 2010, Unesco, Montevideo, Urugay.
36. Lemarchand, G., The long-term dynamics of co-authorship scientific networks: Iberoamerican countries (1973–2010). Res. Policy 41:2 (2012), 291–305, 10.1016/j.respol.2011.10.009.
37. Lillis, T., Curry, M., Academic Writing in a Global Context. 2010, Routledge, Abingdon.
38. Martin, F.N., Abad, Z.G., Balci, Y., Ivors, K., Identification and detection of Phytophthora: reviewing our progress, identifying our needs. Plant Dis. 96:8 (2012), 1080–1103.
39. Meneghini, R., Packer, A.L., Is there science beyond English? Initiatives to increase the quality and visibility of non-English publications might help to break down language barriers in scientific communication. EMBO Rep. 8 (2007), 112–116, 10.1038/sj.embor.7400906.
40. Meneghini, R., Mugnaini, R., Packer, A.L., International versus national oriented Brazilian scientific journals. A scientometric analysis based on SciELO and JCR-ISI databases. Scientometrics 69 (2006), 529–538.
41. Merton, R., The normative structure of science. Storer, N., (eds.) The Sociology of Science, 1973, The University of Chicago Press, Chigago and London, 267–278.
42. Merton, R., The Matthew effect in science. Storer, N., (eds.) The Sociology of Science, 1973, The University of Chicago Press, Chigago and London, 439–460.
43. Moravcsik, M., In the beholder's eye: a possible reinterpretation of Velho's results on Brazilian agricultural research. Scientometrics 11:1–2 (1987), 53–57.
44. Mugnaini, Rogério, Journal evaluation cycle in brazil: virtuous path or patchwork?. XVI Encontro Nacional de Pesquisa em Ciência da Informação, Joao Pessoa, September, 2015.
45. Myers, G., Texts as knowledge claims: the social construction of two biology articles. Soc. Stud. Sci. 15 (1985), 593–630.
46. Nagpaul, P., Contribution of Indian universities to the mainstream scientific literature: a bibliometric assessment. Scientometrics 32:1 (1995), 11–36, 10.1007/BF02020186.
47. Indicadores De Ciencia Y Tecnología. 2015, OCyT, Bogotá, Colombia (Retrieved from:) http://ocyt.org.co/Portals/0/LibrosPDF/indicadores%202015_web.pdf.
48. Ordóñez-Matamoros, H.G., Cozzens, S.E., Garcia, M., International Co-authorship and research team performance in Colombia. Rev. Policy Res. 27:4 (2010), 415–431.
49. Paradeise, C., Thoenig, J.C., Academic institutions in search of quality: local orders and global standards. Organ. Stud. 34:2 (2013), 189–218.
50. Piñeiro, C., Hicks, D., Reception of Spanish sociology by domestic and foreign audiences differs and has consequences for evaluation. Res. Eval. 24:1 (2014), 78–89.
51. Rafols, I., Leydesdorff, L., O'Hare, A., Nightingale, P., Stirling, A., How journal rankings can suppress interdisciplinary research: a comparison between Innovation Studies and Business & Management. Res. Policy 41:7 (2012), 1262–1282, 10.1016/j.respol.2012.03.015.
52. Rafols, I., Ciarli, T., Chavarro, D., Under-reporting Research Relevant to Local Needs in the Global South. Database Biases in the Representation of Knowledge on Rice, Contested Agronomy Conference, Brighton, UK, 2016 (Retrieved from:) https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/c784/ac36533a87934e4be48d814c3ced3243f57a.pdf.
53. Rafols, I., Molas-Gallart, J., Chavarro, D., Robinson-Garcia, N., On the Dominance of Quantitative Evaluation in ‘Peripheral’ Countries: Auditing Research with Technologies of Distance. 2016, SSRN (Retrieved from:) https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers2.cfm?abstract_id=2818335.
54. Sarria, G.A., Torres, G.A., Aya, H.A., Ariza, J.G., Rodríguez, J., Martínez, G., Phytophthora sp. es el responsable de las lesiones iniciales de la Pudrición del cogollo (PC) de la Palma de aceite en Colombia. Rev. Palmas 29:3 (2008), 31–41.
55. Sarria, G.A., Torres, G.A., Vélez, D.C., Rodríguez, J., Noreña, C., Varon, F., et al. Caracterización morfológica y molecular de Phytophthora palmivora agente causal de las lesiones iniciales de la Pudrición del cogollo (PC) de la palma de aceite en Colombia. Fitopatol. Colomb., 32(2), 2008, 43.
56. Scielo, Rebuttal to the Blog Post Is SciELO a Publication Favela? Authored by Jeffrey Beall. 2015 (Retrieved from:) https://blogdodijaci.blogspot.com.es/2015/08/nota-de-repudio-ao-artigo-is-scielo.html.
57. Spinak, E., Quantitative analyses of scientific literature and their validity for judging Latin American production. Boletín de la Oficina Sanitaria Panamericana (OSP) 120 (1996), 139–147.
58. Stirling, A., Towards Innovation Democracy? Participation, Responsibility and Precaution in the Politics of Science and Technology, STEPS Working Paper 78. 2015, STEPS Centre, Brighton (Retrieved from:) http://steps-centre.org/publication/innovation-democracy-stirling/.
59. Testa, J., The Thomson Reuters Journal Selection Process. 2014 (Retrieved from:) http://wokinfo.com/essays/journal-selection-process/.
60. Torres, G.A., Sarria, G.A., Varon, F., Coffey, M.D., Elliott, M.L., Martinez, G., First report of bud rot caused by Phytophthora palmivora on African oil palm in Colombia. Plant Dis., 94(9), 2010, 1163.
61. van Leeuwen, T., Moed, H., Tijssen, R., Visser, M., van Raan, A., Language biases in the coverage of the science citation index and its consequences for international comparisons of national research performance. Scientometrics 51:1 (2001), 335–346.
62. Velho, L., Science in the Periphery: a Study of the Agricultural Scientific Community in Brazilian Universities (doctoral Thesis). 1985, SPRU − University of Sussex, Brighton, UK (Retrieved from SPRU thesis collection).
63. Velho, L., Krige, J., Publication and citation practices of Brazilian agricultural scientists. Social Stud. Sci. 14:1 (1984), 45–62.
64. Vessuri, H., Guédon, J.C., Cetto, A.M., Excellence or quality? Impact of the current competition regime on science and scientific publishing in Latin America and its implications for development. Curr. Sociol. 62:5 (2014), 647–665, 10.1177/0011392113512839.
65. Vessuri, H., Recent strategies for adding value to scientific journals in Latin America. Scientometrics 34:1 (1995), 139–161.
66. Whitley, R., Gläser, J., (eds.) The Changing Governance of the Sciences: the Advent of Research Evaluation Systems, 2007, Springer, Dordrecht, the Netherlands.
67. Whitley, R., Gläser, J., Organising Science: The Increasingly Formal Structuring of Academic Research − Sub-theme 17 of the EGOS Conference. 2012 (Retrieved from:) http://www.egos2012. net/2011/06/organising-science-the-increasingly-formal-structuring-of-academic-research/.
68. Wilsdon, J., Allen, L., Belfiore, E., Campbell, P., Curry, S., Hill, S., et al. The Metric Tide. Independent Review of the Role of Metrics in Research Assessment and Management. 2015, 10.13140/RG.2.1.4929.1363.
69. Wilson, E.O., Sociobiology: The New Synthesis. 25th anniversary ed., 2000, Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.
70. World Bank and IFC, The World Bank Group Framework and IFC Strategy for Engagement in the Palm Oil Sector. 2011 (Retrieved from:) http://www.ifc.org/wps/wcm/connect/159dce004ea3bd0fb359f71dc0e8434d/WBG+Framework+and+IFC+Strategy_FINAL_FOR+WEB.pdf?MOD=AJPERES.
71. Yin, R., Case Study Research: Design and Methods. 4th ed., 2009, Sage, Los Angeles, CL.