Recognition of scholarly publications from the researchers' perspective - Results of a survey in Austria
Creators: name: Schilhan, Lisa
name: Kaier, Christian
name: Brohmer, Hilmar
name: Lackner, Karin
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2024
Subjects: scholarly communication
science communication
publishing
research assessment

description: In an exploratory study conducted among researchers at Austrian universities in summer 2023, we investigated what constitutes a “scholarly publication” from the researchers’ perspective and how this relates to research assessment criteria.

Responses from a convenience sample of over 600 researchers from a wide range of disciplines allow us to draw conclusions about:

1) which characteristics or criteria researchers consider important for a work to be classified as a scholarly publication,

2) who, in their opinion, decides whether a work will be acknowledged as a scholarly publication,

3) which target groups are addressed by scholarly publications in their field,

4) which types of work are considered to be scholarly publications by their research community, and

5) which publication types, in their opinion, should be more strongly recognised in research assessment in the future.

Methodology:

Participants were asked to indicate their preferences on rating scales, which were then ranked according to their mean values. Differences between relevant subgroups, such as scientific disciplines, academic positions, and age groups were analysed by conducting an analysis of variances. The survey was conducted as an open science survey; the design and research data will be available on Zenodo. The survey can be replicated and/or adapted by other libraries or institutions.

Results:

Key results show that transparent and comprehensible methodology, adherence to good scientific practice, identifiable authors and comprehensible argumentation are seen as the most important criteria for scholarly publications, whereas editorial review and publisher review (as opposed to peer review) are considered less relevant characteristics. Surprisingly, criteria such as prior knowledge of readers or the reputation of publishers and journals were also not rated as particularly important.

While researchers across all disciplines mentioned peer-reviewed journal articles as the most widely acknowledged publication type, notable differences occur throughout the disciplines concerning other publication types. Researchers also indicated that research data and teaching materials (including Open Educational Resources) should be more strongly recognised in the future. In contrast to what we had expected, the results differ only marginally between age groups and career stages, even with regard to the recognition of other publication types in the future.

Discussion:

The results provide information on current practices and developments in scholarly communication that can contribute to the current debate on alternative research assessment. This presentation will highlight key findings of the study and encourage discussion on the development and future recognition of publication types. It will also address the possible impact of the perception of “scholarly publications” on libraries, such as effects on collection development, the transformation to open access, publication funding through library budgets and library services for researcher support throughout the publication process.