Scientific publications are of central importance in research evaluation. Therefore, changes in the academic publishing system have a direct impact on research evaluation systems. Open access policies and mandates are significantly changing the traditional publishing system, to which the academic community and publishers are responding with different strategies. While publishers are developing new business models to increase profits, researchers are endeavouring to increase the number of their publications in a "publish or perish" culture.
Against this backdrop, the latest calls for a reform of research evaluation are aimed at prioritising scientific quality over quantity. Conflicts arise when the economic and scientific orientations of publishers and researchers clash. In addition, questionable publication practices occur more frequently when academic careers and profitable business models take centre stage.
This project uses a mixed-methods approach to analyse research evaluation systems in the context of recent open access policies. The aim of the project is to provide empirical evidence regarding the collision of economic and scientific interests with a focus on the close relationship between publications and research evaluation. In the context of Open Access, changes in publication behaviour on research evaluation systems are examined in order to identify possible conflicts and dysfunctionalities.
The results are of great importance for stakeholders in the fields of science policy, scientific communication and research evaluation.
Project participants
Prof. Dr Isabella Peters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, Kiel, Web Science
Prof. Dr Stefanie Haustein, University of Ottawa/CDN,vFaculty of Arts, School of Information Studies
PD Dr Niels Taubert, Bielefeld University, Institute for Interdisciplinary Studies of Science
Duration
48 months from 2024
