Globalization of the social sciences in Eastern Europe: genuine breakthrough or a slippery slope of the research evaluation practice?

Psychological research and practice in former Yugoslavia and its successors

This paper presents a brief history of Yugoslav psychology and a review of the current state of psychological research and practice in the former Yugoslav countries. Bibliometric mapping was used to explore the knowledge domain and international visibility of psychological research in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, North Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, and Slovenia. Judging by the number of papers visible in Scopus, psychological research activity in these countries is similar to the other former communist countries. In a relative sense, it is even higher in Slovenia and Croatia. However, psychologists still rely heavily on national journals indexed in Scopus when publishing their papers. Regarding psychological practice, former Yugoslav countries are facing challenges that are more or less typical for all small countries in the global scientific and economic market. Keeping in mind all the obstacles and traumas in the past decades, it should be considered a success that psychology in the former Yugoslav countries is now a fully established profession and a recognized scientific discipline.

Understanding the increasing market share of the academic publisher “Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute” in the publication output of Central and Eastern European countries: a case study of Hungary

As the open access movement has gained widespread popularity in the scientific community, academic publishers have gradually adapted to the new environment. The pioneer open access journals have turned themselves into megajournals, and the subscription-based publishers have established open access branches and have turned subscription-based journals into hybrid ones. Maybe the most dramatic outcome of the open access boom is the market entry of such fast-growing open access publishers as Frontiers and Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI). By 2021, in terms of the number of papers published, MDPI has become one of the largest academic publishers worldwide. However, the publisher’s market shares across countries and regions show an uneven pattern. Whereas in such scientific powers as the United States and China, MDPI has remained a relatively small-scale player, it has gained a high market share in Europe, particularly in the Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries. In 2021, 28 percent of the SCI/SSCI papers authored/co-authored by researchers from CEE countries were published in MDPI journals, a share that was as high as the combined share of papers published by Elsevier and Springer Nature, the two largest academic publishers in the world. This paper seeks to find an explanation for the extensively growing share of MDPI in the publication outputs of CEE countries by choosing Hungary as a case study. To do this, by employing data analysis, some unique features of MDPI will be revealed. Then, we will present the results of a questionnaire survey conducted among Hungary-based researchers regarding MDPI and the factors that motivated them to publish in MDPI journals. Our results show that researchers generally consider MDPI journals’ sufficiently prestigious, emphasizing the importance of the inclusion of MDPI journals in Scopus and Web of Science databases and their high ranks and impacts. However, most researchers posit that the quick turnaround time that MDPI journals offer is the top driver of publishing in such journals.

Globalization of scientific communication: Evidence from authors in academic journals by country of origin

This study measures the tendency to publish in international scientific journals. For each of nearly 35,000 Scopus-indexed journals, we derive seven globalization indicators based on the composition of authors by country of origin and other characteristics. These are subsequently scaled up to the level of 174 countries and 27 disciplines between 2005 and 2017. The results indicate that advanced countries maintain high globalization of scientific communication that is not varying across disciplines. Social sciences and health sciences are less globalized than physical and life sciences. Countries of the former Soviet bloc score far lower on the globalization measures, especially in social sciences or health sciences. Russia remains among the least globalized during the whole period, with no upward trend. Contrary, China has profoundly globalized its science system, gradually moving from the lowest globalization figures to the world average. The article concludes with reflections on measurement issues and policy implications.

Implications of Publication Requirements for the Research Output of Ukrainian Academics in Scopus in 1999–2019

Purpose

This article explores the implications of publication requirements for the research output of Ukrainian academics in Scopus in 1999–2019. As such it contributes to the existing body of knowledge on quantitative and qualitative effects of research evaluation policies.

Design/methodology/approach

Three metrics were chosen to analyse the implications of publication requirements for the quality of research output: publications in predatory journals, publications in local journals and publications per SNIP quartile from the disciplinary perspective.

Findings

Study results highlight, that, firstly, publications of Ukrainian authors in predatory journals rose to 1% in 2019. Secondly, the share of publications in local journals reached the peak of 47.3% in 2015. In 2019 it fell to 31.8%. Thirdly, though the total number of publications has risen dramatically since 2011, but the share of Q3+Q4 has exceeded the share of Q1+Q2. To summarise, the study findings highligh, that research evaluation policies are required to contain not only quantitative but also qualitative criteria.

Research limitation

The study does not explore in detail the effects of a particular type of publication requirements.

Practical implications

The findings of the study have practical implications for policymakers and university managers aimed to develop research evaluation policies.

Originality/value

This paper gains insights into the effects of publication requirements on the research output of Ukrainian academics in Scopus.

Expert judgments versus publication-based metrics: do the two methods produce identical results in measuring academic reputation?

Purpose

This study aims to assess the validity of citation metrics based on the disciplinary representative survey.

Design/methodology/approach

The present project compared citation rankings for individual scientists with expert judgments collected through a survey of 818 Russian sociologists. The Russian Index of Science Citation was used to construct the general population of 3,689 Russian sociologists, to whom the survey was sent by email. The regression analyses of bibliometric indicators and peer review scores for 723 names of scholars mentioned in the survey have been undertaken.

Findings

Findings suggest that scientometric indicators predict with significant accuracy the names of the most influential sociologists and those scholars who are not mentioned while they are less relevant for prediction names which received moderate attention in the survey.

Originality/value

This study contributes to the research on the validity of citation metrics by focusing on scientometric indicators, not limited to traditional metrics but including non-standard publication metrics and indicators of potential metric abuse. Besides, the study presents the national bibliometric data source that is especially important for non-Western higher education systems, less presented in the Web of Science or Scopus.

Journal article publishing in the social sciences and humanities: A comparison of Web of Science coverage for five European countries

This study compares publication pattern dynamics in the social sciences and humanities in five European countries. Three are Central and Eastern European countries that share a similar cultural and political heritage (the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Poland). The other two are Flanders (Belgium) and Norway, representing Western Europe and the Nordics, respectively. We analysed 449,409 publications from 2013–2016 and found that, despite persisting differences between the two groups of countries across all disciplines, publication patterns in the Central and Eastern European countries are becoming more similar to those in their Western and Nordic counterparts. Articles from the Central and Eastern European countries are increasingly published in journals indexed in Web of Science and also in journals with the highest citation impacts. There are, however, clear differences between social science and humanities disciplines, which need to be considered in research evaluation and science policy.

Characterizing research leadership on geographically weighted collaboration network

Research collaborations, especially long-distance and international collaborations, have become increasingly prevalent worldwide. Recent studies highlighted the significant role of research leadership in collaborations. However, existing measures of the research leadership do not take into account the intensity of leadership in the co-authorship network. More importantly, the spatial features, which influence the collaboration patterns and research outcomes, have not been incorporated in measuring the research leadership. To fill the gap, we construct an institution-level weighted co-authorship network that integrates two types of weight on the edges: the intensity of collaborations and the spatial score (the geographical distance adjusted by the cross-linguistic-border nature). Based on this network, we propose a novel metric, namely the spatial research leadership rank, to identify the leading institutions while considering both the collaboration intensity and the spatial features. The leadership of an institution is measured by the following three criteria: (a) the institution frequently plays the corresponding rule in papers with other institutions; (b) the institution frequently plays the corresponding rule in longer distance and even cross-linguistic-border collaborations; (c) the participating institutions led by the institution have high leadership status themselves. Harnessing a dataset of 323,146 journal publications in pharmaceutical sciences during 2010-2018, we perform a comprehensive analysis of the geographical distribution and dynamic patterns of research leadership flows at the institution level. The results demonstrate that the SpatialLeaderRank outperforms baseline metrics in predicting the scholarly impact of institutions. And the result remains robust in the field of Information Science and Library Science.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11192-021-03943-w.

An Overview of the Dynamics of Relative Research Performance in Central-Eastern Europe Using a Ranking-Based Analysis Derived from SCImago Data

In recent times, rankings seem to play an increasingly important role, influencing the lives of individual researchers or academics and their institutions. Individual and institutional rankings used for promotion and research or academic funding seem to illustrate more and more the “publish or perish” mantra, relying sometimes almost exclusively on publications and their citations. Eastern Europe found itself part of this new world after a period of isolation, uneven for the countries within the area. The present study uses SCImago data to perform a regional analysis of individual and aggregated domains, for individual countries and the entire region, based on a novel “adjusted citation index”, in order to measure the performance and identify, using correlations with additional data and information, the mechanisms that can increase the research performance of a country. In a nutshell, the results indicate that the national research policies are responsible for performance. Adaptive research policies simulate a real performance, in comparison with more restrictive ones, which are more likely to stimulate unethical behaviors such as self-citations or citation stacking, especially when used for the assessment of researchers. The importance of the findings lies in the possibility of replicating the methodology, adapting it to different spatial scales.