Prioritization of Indicators of the Scholarly Publication System in Iran

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Ph.D. in Knowledge and Information Science, Research Institution for Information Science and Technology (IranDoc), Tehran, Iran

2 Assistant Professor, Research Institution for Information Science and Technology (IranDoc), Tehran, Iran

3 Associate Professor of Human Science Faculty, Islamic Azad University, Yadegar Imam Khomeini (RAH) Branch, Shahr-e-Rey, Tehran, Iran

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study is to prioritize the indicators of the scholarly publication system for implementing this system in Iran.
Methodology: A qualitative method was used to collect data, and a descriptive method was used to analyze the findings. The statistical population of the research is scholarly publishing experts. The sample includes 19 experts who were selected by snowball sampling. A semi-structured interview was used in this research. The research questions were formulated based on the components and indicators of the scholarly publication system; professors and experts confirmed their validity in two consecutive stages. The interviews continued until theoretical saturation was achieved. The research questions include 12 components: access, communication, control, infrastructure, language, materials (information resources), support, technology, economics, evaluation, education, and ethics. Most of these components include indicators such as form, type, scope, and format, covering 39 indicators. A quantitative method was used to extract the data, and MAXQDA software was used to analyze them.
Findings: The research funding showed that in the access component, indicators of access type and scope of access; in communication and control components, indicators of format; In the infrastructure component, the form of the infrastructure; in the language component, the scope of language; in the support component, the indicators of form and type of support; in the technology component, the form of technology; in the economics component, financing; in the evaluation component, the form and format of evaluation are in the priority of implementing the national scholarly publication system. Therefore, in order to implement the national scholarly publication system, the components of technology, education, ethics, and their indicators do not need to be prioritized, but other components must be implemented based on prioritization.
Conclusion: The results of the research indicate that 21 indicators out of 39 ones were prioritized to implement the national scholarly publication system. The components of technology, education, ethics, and all its indicators are necessary to design this system, but the indicators of other components should be considered based on the priorities set. According to the economic, technical and cultural conditions, prioritizing the identified indicators of the scholarly publication system helps the countries and scientific communities start the basic steps for the implementation of the national scholarly publication system to take advantage of its benefits such as improving the quality of scientific outputs, supporting publishing processes, observing ethical principles, developing scientific communication, integrated access to all scholarly outputs, identifying investment opportunities in scientific publication, forecasting future developments and crises in different dimension of scholarly publication ecosystem and reducing costs.

Keywords


اکبری، عسکر؛ نوشین‌­فرد، فاطمه؛ حریری، نجلا (1397). شناسایی و اولویت‌بندی موانع جریان دانش در کتابخانه‌های دانشگاهی بر اساس مدل بلوغ مدیریت دانش مرکز بهره‌وری و کیفیت آمریکا. اطلاع­‌رسانی، 8(2)، 129-148.
بهمنی، زهرا (1398). طراحی و پیاده­‌سازی یک سیستم بازیابی اسناد چاپی فارسی. مطالعات ملی کتابداری و سازمان‌دهی اطلاعات، 30(4)، 46-65.
بیرانوند، علی؛ رنجبر، پروانه (1389) بررسی موانع و مشکلات موجود در کتابخانه‌­های دانشگاهی منطقه غرب کشور جهت پیاده‌سازی نظام همکاری بین کتابخانه‌­ای و خدمات تحویل مدرک. فصلنامه دانش‌­شناسی (علوم کتابداری و اطلاع‌رسانی و فناوری اطلاعات)، 2(8)، 35-48.
حافظ‌­نیا، محمدرضا (1377). مقدمه‌­ای بر روش تحقیق در علوم انسانی. تهران: سمت.
خدمتگزار، حمیدرضا؛ منصفی‌گهر، سارا؛ علیپور حافظی، مهدی؛ ارشادی، محمدجواد؛ مؤمنی، عصمت (1400). شناسایی و اولویت‌بندی فناوری‌های نوین در مدیریت کتابخانه‌های عمومی ایران. تحقیقات اطلاع‌رسانی و کتابخانه‌های عمومی، ۲۷(۴)، ۶۵۰-۶۱۱.
ربیعی، علی؛ حسینی، میرزا حسن؛ خواجوی، زینب (1388). طراحی مدل پیاده‌­سازی نظام مدیریت دانش در سازمان­‌های دولتی (مطالعه موردی شهرداری تهران). پژوهش­‌های مدیریت، 2(6)، 159-175.
فراش‌باشی آستانه، محبوبه؛ سعادت علیجانى، علیرضا؛ ایمانی، سیده الهه (1396). معمارى اطلاعات و پیاده­‌سازى آن در سیستم‌هاى یکپارچه کتابخانه‌اى در سیستم مرکز اطلاع‌رسانى دانشگاه فردوسى مشهد (سیماد). پژوهش­نامه پردازش و مدیریت اطلاعات، 33(1)، 315-334.
فرخزاد، پرویز (1384). راهنمای پژوهش تاریخی (کتابخانه‌­ای). تهران: طهوری.
همراهی، افروز؛ پورنقی، رؤیا؛ مطلبی، داریوش (1401). تحلیل کیفی پایگاه‌های نشر علمی بر اساس ابعاد نظام نشر علمی. پژوهشنامه پردازش و مدیریت اطلاعات. زودآیند
References
Akbari, A., Nooshinfard, F., & Hariri, N. (2017). Identifying and prioritizing the barriers to knowledge flow in university libraries based on the maturity model of knowledge management belonged to the American Productivity and Quality Center. Library and Information Sciences, 8(2), 129-148. (in Persian)
Anderson, K. (2015). Peer review - A publisher value-add? Or essential to the scientific communication system? Information Services and Use, 35(3), 171-174.
Bahmani, Z. (2018). A System for Printed Persian Documents. Librarianship and information organization studies, 30(4), 46-65. (in Persian)
Biranvand, A., & Ranjbar, P. (2009). Implementing system of interlibrary cooperation and document delivery services: a study of barriers and problems available in academic libraries of west region of Iran. Quarterly Knowledge and Information Management Journal, 2(8), 35-48. (in Persian)
Bozzato, V., Gnoato, M., Vilia, A., & Apostolico, M. (2021). Intellectual property protection for scholarly publishing in the Italian framework: A globally open approach for medical and life sciences authors. Italian Journal of Medicine, 15(2), 77-84.
Çakmak, T. (2020). Implementation process of a journal management system: Information world journal and open journal systems. Bilgi Dunyasi, 21(2), 373-384.
Confraria, H., & Vargas, F. (2019). Scientific systems in Latin America: performance, networks, and collaborations with industry. Journal of Technology Transfer, 44(3), 874-915.
Dartus, J., Saab, M., Martinot, P., Putman, S., Erivan, R., & Devos, P. (2020). Rate of publication in predatory journals by orthopedic surgeon’s members of the French orthopedic and traumatology society (SOFCOT): A follow-up note. Orthopaedics & Traumatology: Surgery & Research, 106(8), 1457-1461.‏
Farashbashi Astana, M., Saadat Alijani, A., & Imani, S. E. (2016). Information architecture and its implementation in integrated library systems in the information center system of Ferdowsi University of Mashhad (SIMAD). Research Journal of Information Processing and Management, 33(1), 315-334. (in Persian)
Faria, J. R., & Mixon, F. G. (2021). The Marginal Impact of a Publication on Citations, and Its Effect on Academic Pay. Scientometrics, 126(9), 8217-8226.
Farrokhzad, P. (2006). Guide to historical (library) research. Tehran: Tahouri. (in Persian)
Fassoulaki, A., Staikou, C., & Micha, G. (2021). Impact of Altmetrics in evaluation of scientific journals, research outputs and scientists' careers: Views of editors of high impact anaesthesia, critical care and pain medicine journals. Indian Journal of Anaesthesia, 65(12), 868-873.
Ferligoj, A., Kronegger, L., Mali, F., Snijders, T. A. B., & Doreian, P. (2015). Scientific collaboration dynamics in a national scientific system. Scientometrics, 104(3), 985-1012.
Fernandez-Llimos, F., Salgado, T. M., & Tonin, F. S. (2020). How many manuscripts should I peer review per year? Pharmacy Practice, 18(1).
Fortney, C. A. (2021). Importance of publication of articles discussing ethics and ethical challenges. Advances in Neonatal Care, 21(6), 425-426.
González, S. C. (2019). Scholarly publications and evaluation systems: what are they and what are they for?. Palabra Clave, 8(2), e066.
Hafeznia, M. R. (2004). An introduction to the research method in humanities. Tehran: SAMT Publications. (in Persian)
Hamrahi, A., Pournaghi, R., & Metabhi, D. (2022). Qualitative Analysis of the Scholarly Publication System Dimensions in the Scholarly Publication Databases. Information processing and management research paper. (in Persian)
Hill, C., & Thabet, R. (2021). Publication challenges facing doctoral students: perspective and analysis from the UAE. Quality in Higher Education, 27(3), 324-337.
Khedmatgozar, H. R., Monsefi Gahar, S., Alipour-Hafezi, M., Ershadi, M. J., & Momeni, E. (2022). Identification and Prioritization of the State-of-the-Art Technologies in the Management of Iranian Public Libraries. Research on Information Science & Public Libraries. 27(4), 611-650. (in Persian)
Kirtania, D. K. (2021). Growth and Development of Indian Open Access Scholarly Publications: A Bibliometric Assessment. Library Philosophy and Practice, 6034, 1-15.
Lacináková, M. (2021). Proposal for scientific system of transcription of Arabic into Slovak according to the standard norm and for partial vocalisation. Part 1: Arabic text regardless of its Slovak syntactic surroundings. Slovenska Rec, 86(1), 36-54.
Mayr, P., Frommholz, I., Cabanac, G., Chandrasekaran, M. K., Jaidka, K., Kan, M.Y., & Wolfram, D. (2018). Introduction to the special issue on bibliometric-enhanced information retrieval and natural language processing for digital libraries (BIRNDL). International Journal on Digital Libraries, 19(2-3), 107-111.
Mir Zamani, S., Abazari, Z., Hariri, N., & Riahinia, N. (2022). Developing a knowledge Management Model in the Metropolitan Municipalities of Iran. Sciences and Techniques of Information Management, 8(2), 468-483. (in Persian)
Moskovkin, V. M., & Serkina, O. V. )2016(. Is sustainable development of scientific systems possible in the neo-liberal agenda? Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, 16(1), 1-9.
Ortega, J. A., Pedreira, O., & Piattini, M. (2021). A different perspective for an Adaptive IT Governance Model. 16th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies, CISTI, 1-6.
Plantin, J. C., Lagoze, C., & Edwards, P. N. (2018). Re-integrating scholarly infrastructure: The ambiguous role of data sharing platforms. Big Data and Society.
Richardson, B. (2020). Interviews with practitioners in the United Kingdom reveal effective strategies for open access outreach to researchers. Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, 15(2), 171-173.
Rubio, D., Berg-Weger, M., Tebb, S., Lee, E., & Rauch, S. (2003). Objectifyng content validity: Conducting a content validity study in social work research. Social Work Research, 27(2), 94-104.
Serpa, S., Sá, M. J., Santos, A. I., & Ferreira, C. M. (2020). Challenges for theacademic editor in the scientific publication. Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 9(3), 12-16.
Siler, K. (2017). Future Challenges and Opportunities in Academic Publishing. Canadian Journal of Sociology, 42(1), 83-114.
Sivakumar, E., Chawla, P., & Ganesan, G. (2021). Challenges in Scholarly Communication and Scientific Publication Present Scenario and Opportunities through Blockchain Solutions. ACM International Conference Proceeding Series. 496-503
Slingsby, J. A. (2020). Forest restoration or propaganda? The need for Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) scores to uphold research integrity. South African Journal of Science, 116(7-8), 1-4.
Stephen, D., & Stahlschmidt, S. (2021). Performance and structures of the German science system. Commission of Experts for Research and Innovation, Berlin, 1-34.
Tijdink, J. K., Horbach, S. P. J. M., Nuijten, M. B., & O’Neill, G. (2021). Towards a Research Agenda for Promoting Responsible Research Practices. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics, 16(4), 450-460.
Vasilevsky, N. A., Hosseini, M., Teplitzky, S., Ilik, V., Mohammadi, E., Schneider, J., & Holmes, K. L. (2021). Is authorship sufficient for today's collaborative research? A call for contributor roles. Accountability in Research, 28(1), 23-43.‏
Vogt, L., Souza, J. D., Stocker, M., & Auer, S. (2020). Toward representing research contributions in scholarly knowledge graphs using knowledge graph cells Proceedings of the ACM. IEEE Joint Conference on Digital Libraries, 107-116.
Wang, J., Halffman, W., & Zwart, H. (2021). The Chinese scientific publication system: Specific features, specific challenges. Learned Publishing, 34(2), 105-115.
Yoon, S. W., Han, H., Han, C. S. H., & Chai, D. S. (2021). The Power of Ethics and Standards When the Scholarly System Fails. Human Resource Development Review, 20(2), 136–142.