The Scholarly Communication Research Group is an interdisciplinary team of scholars based in Poznań, Poland, interested in crossing disciplinary boundaries in research on scholarly communication.
We address research problems in light of frontier publications, as well as more classical works in sociology of science, higher education research, social studies of science, evaluation studies, critical university studies, and bibliometrics. Predominantly, we focus on the problems of quantification, social construction of measurement and assessment procedures in research evaluation and its consequences for academic labour, issues of the development of science and research systems at the global peripheries.
The group is led by Professor Emanuel Kulczycki at the Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań – one of the largest and the best Polish universities.
Summary of our research:
Dr. Fraud sting operation
In a sting operation involving 360 journals, one in three ‘predatory’ journals approached by a fake, unqualified applicant offered her a position on their editorial board. None of the 120 journals ranked as quality publications, sampled from the Journal Citation Reports ‘whitelist’, did. The authors hope that their study will alert others to the problem of academic journals that do not provide quality control. However, awareness alone is not enough, they say. “Those who reward academics for publishing must make efforts to assess journal quality and to reward only best practices.”
Publication patterns in social sciences and humanities are related not only to discipline but also to each country’s cultural and historic heritage. Therefore, internationalization policies in non-English speaking countries should be designed with consideration of current publication patterns. We suggest that the role of national databases, which cover all publication channels important for the SSH, should be increased in research evaluation systems, funding-schemes, and university rankings.
Open identity labels
Open-identity label, that is a practice of disclosing the reviewers’ names of scholarly book publications, is a type of peer-review label. We suggest using the open-identity label as a delineation criterion in book-evaluation systems in countries where such labels and systems are operated. We believe that such labels can be used, but only as one of many indicators in evaluation and funding systems that produce scholarly books. We analyzed perceptions of peer-review and open-identity labelling among 600 authors and reviewers 875 reviewers of books published by 20 large Polish publishers.
Our research is supported by: