46
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares

      To submit to the journal, please click here

      We invite news and articles concerning all aspects of academic and professional publishing. Papers are welcomed from across the scholarly publishing community.

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Normative drift and self‐correction in scholarly book publishing: The case of Makerere University

      1
      Learned Publishing
      John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
      scholarly book publishing, norms of science, predatory publishing

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          University academics face multiple pressures to publish. These pressures emanate from contexts with different, often competing, social norms, which result in academics publishing for reasons that may run counter to accepted scientific practice. This paper asks what decisions are being taken by academics when it comes to their choice of scholarly book publisher. An analysis of books selected from more than 2,500 self‐reported scholarly publications produced by academics at Makerere University in Uganda from 2011 to 2017 shows that 31 scholarly books were published. Of these books, more than half (54%) were published by publishers that do not follow accepted scholarly publishing practice. Findings also show that there was a sharp decline in books published with suspect publishers in the second half of the 7‐year period. The article discusses possible reasons for the selection of suspect publishers and considers four factors that may account for the observable decline: (1) a cyclical downturn, (2) improved research management and reporting, (3) explication of the norms of science, and (4) self‐correction.

          Related collections

          Most cited references40

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Institutional Logics and the Historical Contingency of Power in Organizations: Executive Succession in the Higher Education Publishing Industry, 1958– 1990

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Institutional Work: Refocusing Institutional Studies of Organization

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              ‘Predatory’ open access: a longitudinal study of article volumes and market characteristics

              Background A negative consequence of the rapid growth of scholarly open access publishing funded by article processing charges is the emergence of publishers and journals with highly questionable marketing and peer review practices. These so-called predatory publishers are causing unfounded negative publicity for open access publishing in general. Reports about this branch of e-business have so far mainly concentrated on exposing lacking peer review and scandals involving publishers and journals. There is a lack of comprehensive studies about several aspects of this phenomenon, including extent and regional distribution. Methods After an initial scan of all predatory publishers and journals included in the so-called Beall’s list, a sample of 613 journals was constructed using a stratified sampling method from the total of over 11,000 journals identified. Information about the subject field, country of publisher, article processing charge and article volumes published between 2010 and 2014 were manually collected from the journal websites. For a subset of journals, individual articles were sampled in order to study the country affiliation of authors and the publication delays. Results Over the studied period, predatory journals have rapidly increased their publication volumes from 53,000 in 2010 to an estimated 420,000 articles in 2014, published by around 8,000 active journals. Early on, publishers with more than 100 journals dominated the market, but since 2012 publishers in the 10–99 journal size category have captured the largest market share. The regional distribution of both the publisher’s country and authorship is highly skewed, in particular Asia and Africa contributed three quarters of authors. Authors paid an average article processing charge of 178 USD per article for articles typically published within 2 to 3 months of submission. Conclusions Despite a total number of journals and publishing volumes comparable to respectable (indexed by the Directory of Open Access Journals) open access journals, the problem of predatory open access seems highly contained to just a few countries, where the academic evaluation practices strongly favor international publication, but without further quality checks.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Learned Publishing
                Learned Publishing
                John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
                0953-1513
                1741-4857
                July 2020
                February 23 2020
                July 2020
                : 33
                : 3
                : 259-268
                Affiliations
                [1 ]DST‐NRF Centre of Excellence in Scientometrics and STI Policy, Centre for Research on Evaluation, Science and Technology Stellenbosch University Stellenbosch South Africa
                Article
                10.1002/leap.1292
                48b8bfa8-dcf7-421a-8e4d-8d8041d02346
                © 2020

                http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor

                http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1

                History

                Assessment, Evaluation & Research methods,Intellectual property law,Information & Library science,Communication & Media studies
                predatory publishing,scholarly book publishing,norms of science

                Comments

                Comment on this article