Generative artificial intelligence (AI) technologies like ChatGPT, have significantly impacted academic writing and publishing through their ability to generate content at levels comparable to or surpassing human writers. Through a review of recent interdisciplinary literature, this paper examines ethical considerations surrounding the integration of AI into academia, focusing on the potential for this technology to be used for scholarly misconduct and necessary oversight when using it for writing, editing, and reviewing of scholarly papers. The findings highlight the need for collaborative approaches to AI usage among publishers, editors, reviewers, and authors to ensure that this technology is used ethically and productively.
A gender equality paradox in academic publishing: Countries with a higher proportion of female first-authored journal articles have larger first author gender disparities between fields
Who Owns the Knowledge? Copyright, GenAI, and the Future of Academic Publishing
Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS), Leiden University（莱顿大学科学技术研究中心（CWTS））；Institute for the Study of Science, Russian Academy of Sciences（俄罗斯科学院科学研究所）
Women make up a shrinking portion of physics faculty in senior positions, a phenomenon known as a "leaky pipeline." While fixing this problem has been a priority in academic institutions, efforts have been stymied by the diverse sources of leaks. In this paper we identify a bias potentially contributing to the leaky pipeline. We analyze bibliographic data provided by the American Physical Society (APS), a leading publisher of physics research. By inferring the gender of authors from names, we are able to measure the fraction of women authors over past decades. We show that the more selective, …
In this transformative world, changes are happening in all the fields, including scholarly communications are trending in the academic area of publication and access to the resources, especially emerging the wave of open access, open science and open research. The study aims to investigate the digital publishing behaviour of manuscript authors. This study applied a quantitative approach and survey questionnaire method. The researcher collected the data from 251 authors, editors, and peer-reviewers from 45 countries worldwide. The research mainly focuses on the importance, need, and author pref…
Making a Name for Myself: On Academic Naming Policies and their Impact
University of Hamburg（汉堡大学）；Heidelberg Institute for Theoretical Studies（海德堡理论研究所）；University of Bremen（不来梅大学）；Carnegie Mellon University（卡内基梅隆大学）；Queer in AI；University of Oxford（牛津大学）
Unlike most bibliometric studies focusing on publications, taking Big Data research as a case study, we introduce a novel bibliometric approach to unfold the status of a given scientific community from an individual level perspective. We study the academic age, production, and research focus of the community of authors active in Big Data research. Artificial Intelligence (AI) is selected as a reference area for comparative purposes. Results show that the academic realm of "Big Data" is a growing topic with an expanding community of authors, particularly of new authors every year. Compared to A…
The effect of the Indonesian higher education evaluation system on conference proceedings publications
印度尼西亚展示了一种独特的会议记录出版模式，有别于全球和区域规范。会议论文集现在是主要引文数据库的一个组成部分，本研究在学术职业发展和印度尼西亚政府政策的背景下研究了它们的逐步覆盖范围。Web of Science（WoS）、Scopus和Dimensions的分析结果显示，会议记录比例的增加远远超过全球标准，在任何其他东南亚国家都没有看到。在载有大多数印度尼西亚会议记录文件的会议系列中，最近印度尼西亚的代表人数有所增加，在印度尼西亚主办的会议比例也有所增加。2012年和2014年的地方政策文件和指导方针似乎鼓励学术界增加高影响力国际索引来源的研究产出，但没有对文件类型进行任何区分。结论表明，学者们可能已经找到了优势，通过发表会议论文，更快，更容易发表比期刊文章在学术界的层次推进。这项研究对研究评估领域的决策者很重要，因为它突出了被评估者学术出版行为的潜在变化。
In today's academic publishing model, especially in Computer Science, conferences commonly constitute the main platforms for releasing the latest peer-reviewed advancements in their respective fields. However, choosing a suitable academic venue for publishing one's research can represent a challenging task considering the plethora of available conferences, particularly for those at the start of their academic careers, or for those seeking to publish outside of their usual domain. In this paper, we propose GraphConfRec, a conference recommender system which combines SciGraph and graph neural ne…
We present the results of a large-scale study of potentially predatory journals (PPJ) represented in the Scopus database, which is widely used for research evaluation. Both journal metrics and country, disciplinary data have been evaluated for different groups of PPJ: those listed by Jeffrey Beall and those delisted by Scopus because of "publication concerns". Our results show that even after years of delisting, PPJ are still highly visible in the Scopus database with hundreds of active potentially predatory journals. PPJ papers are continuously produced by all major countries, but with differ…
How difficult is it for an early career academic to climb the ranks of their discipline? We tackle this question with a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of 57 disciplines, examining the publications of more than 5 million authors whose careers started between 1986 and 2008. We calibrate a simple random walk model over historical data of ranking mobility, which we use to (1) identify which strata of academic impact rankings are the most/least mobile and (2) study the temporal evolution of mobility. By focusing our analysis on cohorts of authors starting their careers in the same year, we fin…
This short paper introduces the u-index, a simple and objective metric to evaluate the impact and relevance of academic research output, as a possible alternative to widespread metrics such as the h-index or the i10-index. The proposed index is designed to address possible issues with standard metrics such as inflated ratings resulting from self-citations or by means of extended co-authorship numbers where every citation has the same impact as for works written by smaller groups, despite limited individual contributions. The new index makes also possible to differentiate scholars who would oth…
