Multilingual publishing in the social sciences and humanities: A seven-country European study

Indian languages, print journals and the UGC-CARE project

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to examine Indian language journals published in Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences (AHSS) included in the UGC-CARE list, which is an initiative of the University Grants Commission (UGC) of India. This study argues that although these journals do not appear in international databases, they are valuable because they frequently publish and have published for years, opinions, memoirs and critical review articles, especially the local culture.

Design/methodology/approach

This study examines 298 journals categorised into two groups: monolingual (189) and multilingual (109). The first group included 189 journals published in 15 Indian languages. Monolingual journals were examined using five criteria: year of publication, subject area, frequency, language and geographical zone of the publisher. Multilingual journals analysed as per languages covered.

Findings

The analysis reveals that the UGC-CARE List includes journals published between 1899 and 2019. The most common languages are Hindi (67), Urdu (31), Sanskrit (9) and Marathi (26). The frequency of majority (114) of journals is quarterly. Associations, universities, individual publishers and learned societies as publishers are dominant. Analysis of multilingual journals indicated that the highest number of journals (34) are published in English and Hindi.

Practical implications

Journals that fulfil the stringer criteria of three UGC-CARE journal analysis protocols find a place in the CARE List. The list is dynamic and is updated quarterly to maintain its currency and therefore its credibility. The list is available at http://ugccare.unipune.ac.in and is the list preferred by Indian Higher Education Institutes.

Originality/value

UGC-CARE List includes journals published by Indian publishers especially in the fields of Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences. It is the first initiative to battle against the predatory journals and effort to bring the Indian legacy of journals on the world map of journals and periodicals.

Research performance and scholarly communication profile of competitive research funding: the case of Academy of Finland

The Academy of Finland (AKA), Finland’s major public research funding agency, uses a Web of Science (WoS) based bibliometric indicator to assess the performance of research it has funded. We use an alternative methodology to compare (1) the research performance and (2) the scholarly communication profile of AKA-funded research to the Finnish universities’ entire output across the major fields of arts and sciences. Our data consists of 142,742 publications (years 2015–2018) registered in the national information service, which integrates Current Research Information System (CRIS) data of 13 Finnish universities. Research performance is analyzed using the Finnish community-curated expert-based rating of publication channels (so-called JUFO). Our results show that compared to the Finnish universities’ entire output a larger share of AKA-funded research is published in leading JUFO rated journals and book publishers. JUFO and WoS-based indicators produced consonant results regarding the performance of AKA-funded research. Analysis of publication profiles shows that AKA-funded research is more focused than the universities’ output on using peer-reviewed publications, articles published in journals, English language, foreign publishers and open access publishing. We conclude that the CRIS-based publication data can support multidimensional assessments of research performance and scholarly communication profiles, potentially also in other countries and institutions. CRIS development and maintenance require multi-stakeholder commitment, resources and incentives to ensure data quality and coverage. To fully recognize diverse open science practices and to enable international comparisons, CRISs need further development and integration as data sources.

Local emergence, global expansion: understanding the structural evolution of a bi-lingual national research landscape

Research institutions organize their scientific activities in an increasingly diverse landscape. In matters of global interest, research relies on an ever-more cross-disciplinary background, which reveals intriguing questions concerning the local dynamics vs. global audiences. This paper proposes new methodological tools to assess, from a strategic perspective, the evolution of a given research landscape. It relies on the Global Research Institute of Paris’ recent experience, a new interdisciplinary Institute focusing on globalization topics beyond the usual economic meaning. The Institute leans on a broad and diverse set of research units of the Université de Paris and relates to the broad landscape of social sciences in France. This article charts the evolution of French authors’ scientific publications on the Institute’s thematic interests in French and English. It focuses on the structural features of the debate, namely the volume, the underlying historical semantic structure, and its main thematic domains. The paper offers significant evidence to understand knowledge circulation dynamics and links that non-speaking countries’ scientific literature builds with the English one.

Academic vs. biological age in research on academic careers: a large-scale study with implications for scientifically developing systems

Biological age is an important sociodemographic factor in studies on academic careers (research productivity, scholarly impact, and collaboration patterns). It is assumed that the academic age, or the time elapsed from the first publication, is a good proxy for biological age. In this study, we analyze the limitations of the proxy in academic career studies, using as an example the entire population of Polish academic scientists and scholars visible in the last decade in global science and holding at least a PhD (N = 20,569). The proxy works well for science, technology, engineering, mathematics, and medicine (STEMM) disciplines; however, for non-STEMM disciplines (particularly for humanities and social sciences), it has a dramatically worse performance. This negative conclusion is particularly important for systems that have only recently visible in global academic journals. The micro-level data suggest a delayed participation of social scientists and humanists in global science networks, with practical implications for predicting biological age from academic age. We calculate correlation coefficients, present contingency analysis of academic career stages with academic positions and age groups, and create a linear multivariate regression model. Our research suggests that in scientifically developing countries, academic age as a proxy for biological age should be used more cautiously than in advanced countries: ideally, it should be used only for STEMM disciplines.

The Uptake and Impact of a Label for Peer-Reviewed Books

This article presents an analysis of the uptake of the GPRC label (Guaranteed Peer Reviewed Content label) since its introduction in 2010 until 2019. GPRC is a label for books that have been peer reviewed introduced by the Flemish publishers association. The GPRC label allows locally published scholarly books to be included in the regional database for the Social Sciences and Humanities which is used in the Flemish performance-based research funding system. Ten years after the start of the GPRC label, this is the first systematic analysis of the uptake of the label. We use a mix of qualitative and quantitative methods. Our two main data sources are the Flemish regional database for the Social Sciences and Humanities, which currently includes 2,580 GPRC-labeled publications, and three interviews with experts on the GPRC label. Firstly, we study the importance of the label in the Flemish performance-based research funding system. Secondly, we analyse the label in terms of its possible effect on multilingualism and the local or international orientation of publications. Thirdly, we analyse to what extent the label has been used by the different disciplines. Lastly, we discuss the potential implications of the label for the peer review process among book publishers. We find that the GPRC label is of limited importance to the Flemish performance-based research funding system. However, we also conclude that the label has a specific use for locally oriented book publications and in particular for the discipline Law. Furthermore, by requiring publishers to adhere to a formalized peer review procedure, the label affects the peer review practices of local publishers because not all book publishers were using a formal system of peer review before the introduction of the label and even at those publishers who already practiced peer review, the label may have required the publishers to make these procedures more uniform.

Impact and visibility of Norwegian, Finnish and Spanish journals in the fields of humanities

This article analyses the impact and visibility of scholarly journals in the humanities that are publishing in the national languages in Finland, Norway and Spain. Three types of publishers are considered: commercial publishers, scholarly society as publisher, and research organizations as publishers. Indicators of visibility and impact were obtained from Web of Science, SCOPUS, Google Metrics, Scimago Journal Rank and Journal Citation Report. The findings compiled show that in Spain the categories “History and Archaeology” and “Language and Literature” account for almost 70% of the journals analysed, while the other countries offer a more homogeneous distribution. In Finland, the scholarly society publisher is predominant, in Spain, research organization as publishers, mostly universities, have a greater weighting, while in Norway, the commercial publishers take centre stage. The results show that journals from Finland and Norway will have reduced possibilities in terms of impact and visibility, since the vernacular language appeals to a smaller readership. Conversely, the Spanish journals are more attractive for indexing in commercial databases. Distribution in open access ranges from 64 to 70% in Norwegian and Finish journals, and to 91% in Spanish journals. The existence of DOI range from 31 to 41% in Nordic journals to 60% in Spanish journals and has a more widespread bearing on the citations received in all three countries (journals with DOI and open access are cited more frequently).

National Lists of Scholarly Publication Channels: An Overview and Recommendations for Their Construction and Maintenance

Purpose

This paper presents an overview of different kinds of lists of scholarly publication channels and of experiences related to the construction and maintenance of national lists supporting performance-based research funding systems. It also contributes with a set of recommendations for the construction and maintenance of national lists of journals and book publishers.

Design/methodology/approach

The study is based on analysis of previously published studies, policy papers, and reported experiences related to the construction and use of lists of scholarly publication channels.

Findings

Several countries have systems for research funding and/or evaluation, that involve the use of national lists of scholarly publication channels (mainly journals and publishers). Typically, such lists are selective (do not include all scholarly or non-scholarly channels) and differentiated (distinguish between channels of different levels and quality). At the same time, most lists are embedded in a system that encompasses multiple or all disciplines. This raises the question how such lists can be organized and maintained to ensure that all relevant disciplines and all types of research are adequately represented.

Research limitation

The conclusions and recommendations of the study are based on the authors’ interpretation of a complex and sometimes controversial process with many different stakeholders involved.

Practical implications

The recommendations and the related background information provided in this paper enable mutual learning that may feed into improvements in the construction and maintenance of national and other lists of scholarly publication channels in any geographical context. This may foster a development of responsible evaluation practices.

Originality/value

This paper presents the first general overview and typology of different kinds of publication channel lists, provides insights on expert-based versus metrics-based evaluation, and formulates a set of recommendations for the responsible construction and maintenance of publication channel lists.

Historical Bibliometrics Using Google Scholar: The Case of Roman Law, 1727–2016

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to investigate the historical and linguistic coverage of Google Scholar, using publications in the field of Roman law as an example.

Design/methodology/approach

To create a dataset of Roman law publications, we retrieved a total of 21,300 records of publications, published between years 1500 and 2016, with title including words denoting “Roman law” in English, French, German, Italian, and Spanish.

Findings

We were able to find publications dating back to 1727. The largest number of publications and authors date to the late 19th century, and this peak might be explained by the role of Roman law in French legal education at the time. Furthermore, we found exceptionally skewed concentration of publications to authors, as well as of citations to publications. We speculate that this could be explained by the long time-frame of the study, and the importance of classic works.

Research limitation

Major limitations, and potential future work, relate to data quality, and cleaning, disambiguation of publications and authors, as well as comparing coverage with other data sources.

Practical implications

We find Google Scholar to be a promising data source for historical bibliometrics. This approach may help bridge the gap between bibliometrics and the “digital humanities”.

Originality/value

Earlier studies have focused mainly on Google Scholar's coverage of publications and citations in general, or in specific fields. The historical coverage has, however, received less attention.