Weekly reading 30.2017

Kim Holmberg, Stefanie Haustein, Daniel Beucke, Michael Mimouni, Eyal Braun, Francis B. Mimouni, Daniel Mimouni, Eytan Z. Blumenthal, Kevin Carey

Social Media Metrics as Indicators of Repository Impact

Kim Holmberg, Stefanie Haustein, Daniel Beucke

The note

First of all, the altmetrics is the term that describe every metric of impact different than the number of citations.

The authors described how the altmetrics could be implemented into the institutional repositories of scientific works. After that, it would be possible not only to check almost without any delay an impact of an article, but also of everything that has been storied in the repository (f. e. raw data or slides).

Twitter – microblogging platform has also been described be the authors, as an important resource of impact data. However, it is very hard to check what particular kind of impact does every tweet deliver. It could be part of a fruitful discussion or just a message created by some bot, that has no value. It is relatively easy to gather data from Twitter with the API.

Reference managers (f.e. Mendeley) are the important sources of data about the scientific papers. According to a cited research it is far easier to predict a future citation with the data from reference manager, than from tweets.

There is the whole area that is not explored yet. Slides repositories and data repositories could deliver some extra data about the impact of scientific work. One has to remember also about the mainstream media, because some research are described in the news channels.

According to the authors it is far too early to use altmetrics as a part of a researcher evaluation process. However, they can provide a useful data on an institutional level.


Beall’s List Removed: What Stands Between Us and Open Access Predators?

Michael Mimouni, Eyal Braun, Francis B. Mimouni, Daniel Mimouni, Eytan Z. Blumenthal

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjmed.2017.03.040

The note

The paper is a statement of researchers who see a problem of the predatory journals and their role in erosion of the scientific community.

The OMICS Publishing Group is also mentioned as a large company the make profit of a poor quality scientific papers often written by a researchers who have to publish because of a tenure or an academic promotion.

There is an information about Beall’s list and his blog that has been shut down in January 2017. There were a list of predatory publishers on that blog, which is now offline. It is possible to have an access to the list, but via internet archive websites.

The authors believe that there should be prepared a regularly updated website with a list of potential predatory publishers and it should be good for the whole scientific community.


A Peek Inside the Strange World of Fake Academia

Kevin Carey

Permalink: https://nyti.ms/2k1gbvt

The note

The author described a few examples of how the fake academia works.

First of all, he signed up to a website of a OMICS company that organise many scientific conferences in very attractive places (f.e. Barcelona, Spain). After a couple of minutes he received a call from a company employee with an information about the conference. He could send a paper that would be reviewed in an hour. A sent abstract was prepared on an autocomplete function on a smartphone.

Without a degree the author was able to attend the conference, however he had to pay the 599 USD of the conference fee.

The author wrote that the line between fake and real academia is very often blurred. For example some poor quality papers from predatory journals could be published in less prestigious, but legit journals.

The conference websites are written in poor English, similar to the Nigerian scams. Moreover, researcher that is stated as a keynote or a member of the scientific boards is not aware of it.

The bottom line

The fake academia gives the fake security to the researchers that need more guidance and help to conduct research on a better level. Researchers are very often deceived to pay for the publication after sending it. In the light of all those examples maybe prestigious publishers or an association of the editors should create an institution with a team of people that could trace and gather the information about fake publishers and fake scientific conference.


Scientometrics in a changing research landscape

Lutz Bornmann, Loet Leydesdorff

DOI: 10.15252/embr.201439608