Academia struggles to produce innovative work leading to highimpact publications. In the meantime, the goal of every researcher is to make as significant an impact as is possible, gauged mainly by a ...high number of citations. Another parameter is the visibility of the conferences or journals that researchers choose to publish their findings.
The IEEE Professional Communication Society promotes that technical and scientific communication is an essential part of engineering. Engineering students are required to write reports, research ...papers, theses, and dissertations. After you graduate, you will be asked to write many other types of documents.
Scientific publishing is the ultimate product of scientist work. Number of publications and their quoting are measures of scientist success while unpublished researches are invisible to the ...scientific community, and as such nonexistent. Researchers in their work rely on their predecessors, while the extent of use of one scientist work, as a source for the work of other authors is the verification of its contributions to the growth of human knowledge. If the author has published an article in a scientific journal it cannot publish the article in any other journal h with a few minor adjustments or without quoting parts of the first article, which are used in another article. Copyright infringement occurs when the author of a new article with or without the mentioning the author used substantial portions of previously published articles, including tables and figures. Scientific institutions and universities should,in accordance with the principles of Good Scientific Practice (GSP) and Good Laboratory Practices (GLP) have a center for monitoring,security, promotion and development of quality research. Establish rules and compliance to rules of good scientific practice are the obligations of each research institutions,universities and every individual-researchers,regardless of which area of science is investigated. In this way, internal quality control ensures that a research institution such as a university, assume responsibility for creating an environment that promotes standards of excellence, intellectual honesty and legality. Although the truth should be the aim of scientific research, it is not guiding fact for all scientists. The best way to reach the truth in its study and to avoid the methodological and ethical mistakes is to consistently apply scientific methods and ethical standards in research. Although variously defined plagiarism is basically intended to deceive the reader's own scientific contribution. There is no general regulation of control of scientific research and intellectual honesty of researchers which would be absolutely applicable in all situations and in all research institutions. A special form of plagiarism is self-plagiarism. Scientists need to take into consideration this form of plagiarism, though for now there is an attitude as much as their own words can be used without the word about plagiarism. If the authors cite their own research facilities already stated then they should be put in quote sand cite the source in which it was published. Science should not be exempt from disclosure and sanctioning plagiarism. In the fight against intellectual dishonesty on ethics education in science has a significant place. A general understanding of ethics in scientific research work in all its stages had to be acquired during the undergraduate course and continue to intensify. It is also important ethical aspect of the publishing industry,especially in small and developing economies,because the issuer has an educational role in the development of the scientific community that aspires to relish so. In this paper author describe his experiences in discovering of plagiarism as Editor-in-Chief of three indexed medical journals with presentations of several examples of plagiarism recorded in countries in Southeastern Europe.
The main objective of the open access (OA) movement is to make scientific literature freely available to everyone. This may be of particular importance to researchers in lower-income countries, who ...often face barriers due to high subscription costs. In this article, we address this issue by analysing over time the reference lists of scientific publications around the world. Our study focuses on key issues, including whether researchers from lower-income countries reference fewer publications in their research and how this trend evolves over time. We also investigate whether researchers from lower-income countries rely more on the literature that is openly available through different OA routes compared with other researchers. Our study revealed that the proportion of OA references has increased over time for all publications and country groups. However, publications from lower-income countries have seen a higher growth rate of OA-based references, suggesting that the emergence of OA publishing has been particularly advantageous to researchers in these countries.
Some acronyms are useful and are widely understood, but many of the acronyms used in scientific papers hinder understanding and contribute to the increasing fragmentation of science. Here we report ...the results of an analysis of more than 24 million article titles and 18 million article abstracts published between 1950 and 2019. There was at least one acronym in 19% of the titles and 73% of the abstracts. Acronym use has also increased over time, but the re-use of acronyms has declined. We found that from more than one million unique acronyms in our data, just over 2,000 (0.2%) were used regularly, and most acronyms (79%) appeared fewer than 10 times. Acronyms are not the biggest current problem in science communication, but reducing their use is a simple change that would help readers and potentially increase the value of science.
•Dental articles are published within presumed predatory journals.•Comparable online reach of presumed legitimate and predatory publications.•Infiltration of over one-third of presumed predatory ...journals in PubMed.•The majority of PP publications were identified in non-specialty dental journals.•Researchers and readers need to vigilantly evaluate journal of publication.
We aimed to assess the extent of social media sharing of presumed predatory (PP) dental journals and to compare level of engagement, type of accounts and characteristics of the articles published in presumed legitimate (PL) and PP journals.
Six hashtags were searched across three social media platforms (Instagram, Facebook and Twitter). Data extraction was performed and journals were classified into PP or PL in a multistep approach using MEDLINE, Beall's list and Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). A checklist was created and used for studies not found in the aforementioned recognized databases.
A total of 1742 posts were identified, with the majority (94%) found on Instagram. Of the identified journals, 15.6% were PP. Over one-third of articles from PP journals (35.42%) were indexed on PubMed. The majority of presumed legitimate publications were published in dental specialty only journals (56.44%), compared to 24% in the PP group. The majority of accounts were those of healthcare professionals with most publications related to prosthodontics and implantology (26.3%) and restorative and esthetic dentistry (14.4%), in PL and PP groups, respectively. Similar median number of followers/friends and comments were found among the PL and PP groups.
Our findings highlight that presumed predatory publications have comparable reach to PL journals on social media risking the sharing of unreliable and misleading information.
Researchers, students and social media users should be capable of identifying presumed predatory dental publications. Means of moderating the influence of these publications should be explored.
•We assist in the diffusion of quantitative national research assessment exercises.•Such exercises could incentivize strategic behaviours, favouring quantity over impact or vice versa.•We ...investigated the quality for quantity trade-off in scientific publishing of almost 30,000 Italian professors.•Controlling for authors’ individual characteristics, a negative effect of quantity over impact emerges.
The rise of quantitative research evaluations has led researchers to adopt publication strategies that enable the pursuit of entry and career progression within institutions. Depending on the performance evaluation criteria adopted, researchers emphasize more on publication quantity, impact, prestige of hosting journals, or seek a combination. What we investigate in this paper is the nature of the impact for quantity trade-off with, in particular, control for the moderating role of the personal characteristics of authors. The dataset concerns approximately 29,000 Italian professors representing 200 scientific fields. As necessary, the analyses are field normalized. The evidence seems to support the presence of an impact for quantity trade-off. While single-variate analyses show a positive correlation between the two dimensions, a more complex econometric model, controlling for a range of individual characteristics of researchers, indicates a negative marginal effect of the size of a scholar's scientific output on average impact.
Novelty is a core value in science, and a reliable measurement of novelty is crucial. This study proposes a new approach of measuring the novelty of scientific articles based on both citation data ...and text data. The proposed approach considers an article to be novel if it cites a combination of semantically distant references. To this end, we first assign a word embedding-a vector representation of each vocabulary-to each cited reference on the basis of text information included in the reference. With these vectors, a distance between every pair of references is computed. Finally, the novelty of a focal document is evaluated by summarizing the distances between all references. The approach draws on limited text information (the titles of references) and publicly shared library for word embeddings, which minimizes the requirement of data access and computational cost. We share the code, with which one can compute the novelty score of a document of interest only by having the focal document's reference list. We validate the proposed measure through three exercises. First, we confirm that word embeddings can be used to quantify semantic distances between documents by comparing with an established bibliometric distance measure. Second, we confirm the criterion-related validity of the proposed novelty measure with self-reported novelty scores collected from a questionnaire survey. Finally, as novelty is known to be correlated with future citation impact, we confirm that the proposed measure can predict future citation.
Chemistry is a reproducible science whose pillars - synthesis and analysis - actually comprise a huge collection of highly reproducible experimental methods to synthesize and analyze substances. The ...historical development of chemistry, furthermore, shows that reproducibility of methods has been the companion of novelty and creative innovation. The “publish or perish” principle dominating global academia since over two decades, however, intrinsically contributes to the publication of non-reproducible research outcomes also in chemistry. A study on reproducibility of chemistry research seems therefore timely, especially now that chemists are slowly but inevitably adopting open science and its tools such as the preprint, open access, and data sharing. We conclude presenting three simple guidelines for enhanced publication of research findings in chemistry.
PDF
