Scholarly communication and matters of trust and authority: A comparative analysis of Malaysian and Chinese researchers

Scholarly communication and matters of trust and authority: A comparative analysis of Malaysian and Chinese researchers





Scholarly communication andmatters of trust and authority:A comparative analysis ofMalaysian and Chinese researchers
A. Abrizah (1,3), Jie Xu(2) and David Nicholas(3)
1 Department of Library & Information Science,Faculty of Computer Science & Information Technology University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, MALAYSIA

2 School of Information Management, Wuhan University, CHINA

3 CIBER Research Ltd., Newbury, Berkshire, UNITED KINGDOM

e-mail: abrizah@um.edu.my (corresponding author);xuj@whu.edu.cn (corresponding author); Dave.Nicholas@ciber-research.eu
ABSTRACT

The study is a follow up of CIBER’s exploratory research on Trust and Authority in ScholarlyCommunications conducted in 2012-2013, investigating Malaysia, a country currently on the‘periphery’ of the scholarly endeavor and comparing with China, now stands and globally to the USA interms of scientific output. Over 500 Malaysian researchers were surveyed about the opinions ontrustworthiness when it came to their scholarly use/reading, citing and publishing. A high proportionof respondents were affiliated to research-intensive universities, with the early career researchers and physical sciences being very well-represented. The attitudes and behaviours of Malaysian researcherswere compared with an earlier study of more than 660 Chinese, the methods and questions of whichwere replicated from the CIBER study. Results indicate that the measures of establishing trust andauthority in scholarly communication do not seem to have differed profoundly in Malaysia and China.

Keywords: Publication behavior; Citation behaviour; Scholarly communication; Trust and authority;Social media; Open access publishing.




Download the full paper from this link
https://www.academia.edu/35196204/Scholarly_communication_and_matters_of_trust_and_authority_A_comparative_analysis_of_Malaysian_and_Chinese_researchers?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

MDPI: A huge Predatory Publisher. It is clear MDPI is a predatory publisher and its journal Sustainability is a clear example of it.

It is clear that MDPI is a predatory publisher and its journal Sustainability is a clear example of it. See, for example, Sustainabilty scheduled for 2019 more than 680 special issues (plus 12 regular issues). More Details: http://widgren.blogspot.com/2019/02/is-mdpi-serious-publisher-or-predatory.html I was asked to review some articles for the MDPI journal, Diagnostics, about 2 years ago. The review process went smoothly and I was impressed at the speed the journal took from submission, to Editor consideration to send out for review, review by 2 or 3 reviewers, the response of the authors and subsequent re-review process to decision. The whole process time was about one month. Later, they contacted me to join the Diagnostics Editorial Board - that was in January 2019. Since then, I have been contacted about once or twice every 3 months to assess whether an article should go out for review. The Publishers never sent articles for review if I had indicated that they should not go...
Read more

David Publisher: The most fake and predatory publisher that we have ever found http://www.davidpublisher.com/

David Publisher:  The most fake and predatory publisher that we have ever found  http://www.davidpublisher.com/ We sent to them a fake article from copy-paste of some newspaper and we received LETTER OF ACCEPTANCE after 6 days We believe that David Publisher is the most fake and predatory publisher that we have ever found   See also http://ethandoylewhite.blogspot.com/2013/11/theres-new-scam-targeting-academics-and.html
Read more

Unethical Attacks to Open Access Publishing by Librarians: The Jeffrey Beall’s case.

Unethical Attacks to Open Access Publishing by Librarians: The Jeffrey Beall’s case. Mario E. Alonso, Francisco Pedro M. Lopez Abstract —In this paper we examine the phenomenon of several attempts to destroy the Open Access Publishing from various librarians. The was against Open Access (OA) publishing started with the librarian Jeffrey Beall who is a librarian at Auraria Library at the University of Colorado, Denver, USA. However, after some years the common sense among the scholars is that Jeffrey Beall does not have the necessary qualifications to evaluate the various publishers and journals as well as several voices exist that claim that Jeffrey Beall is permanently bribed. Several librarians consider Open Access publishers to be a threat to their profession because there is less need for a library or librarian if academic journals are available free on the Internet. At one point, this so-called “Beall’s List” blog even stated that publishers would be removed from the list if t...
Read more