1. 13.07.2020
Dr. Ulrich Herb
scidecode.com
Publication Strategies in the Social and Cultural Sciences
Europa-Universität Viadrina
Viadrina Center for Graduate Studies (VCGS)

2. Agenda: Day One
• Publishing in the social sciences and cultural sciences
• Quality control in publishing
• Impact metrics and rankings
Slide 2

3. Why to publish?
Slide 3

4. Groups: Why to publish?
Slide 4

5. Individual relevance
Publish or Perish
 A scientist's career depends on hers/his reputation.
 A scientist's reputation is determined by hers/his scientific impact.
 The scientific impact is primarily determined by hers/his publication pattern.
 How much is published, on what topic, with whom and where?
Slide 5

6. Organizational relevance
University evaluation and performance-based allocation of resources
influence
• material and personnel resources for scientific institutions
• choice of research priorities & topics
Common criteria
• number of graduations
• volume of third-party funds raised
• publication patterns
Slide 6

7. Types of publications
Slide 7

8. History: Scientific publishing
Emergence of scientific journals in the 17th century
Origin: Letter correspondence, almanacs and meeting records of scientific
societies
• 1665: Henry Oldenburg founds Philosophical Transactions and sends
excerpts of submitted documents
• 1765: the Royal Society takes over the Philosophical Transactions and
introduces a formalized review
• Publication density of the early journals (intervals between issues) depends
on the rhythm of the post coach traffic
s. Fröhlich (2009)
Slide 8

9. Groups: Types of publications
Slide 9

10. Types of publications
• Monographs
• Journal article
• Conference proceedings
• Contributions in conference proceedings
• Anthologies
• Contributions in anthologies
• Commemorative publications
• Contributions to commemorative publications
• Grey literature
• Encyclopedia articles
• Reviews
• Interviews
Slide 10

11. Publishing in the social and cultural sciences
Slide 11

12. Common publication types
Slide 12

13. Frequently read publication types
Slide 13

14. Publishing in the Social Sciences and Humanities
"With the growing number of publications, standardized selection procedures
are gaining importance. The quality of a text per se is then less important than
the seal of quality recognized by the scientific community in the form of the
reputation or impact of the journal or publisher, and in the form of review
procedures as a pre-selection for the recipients. The latter can no longer
deviate from the preselections because they have become a social fact.
(Münch 2009, p. 70 f.)
Slide 14

15. Publishing in the Social Sciences and Humanities
Slide 15
Political science, survey among members of the DVPW
(Deutsche Vereinigung für politische Wissenschaften)
(Faas & Schmitt-Beck, 2009)
Type Share
Contribution to an anthology 7.6
Journal article (peer reviewed) 4.6
Journal article (non peer reviewed) 5.8
Monographs 2.8
Anthologies 3.3
Others 6

16. Publishing in the Social Sciences and Humanities
Plümper & Schimmelfennig, 2007
The higher the publication output, the more likely and faster scientists are to be
considered for a professorship.
Faas & Schmitt-Beck, 2009
• Measurement of academic performance in political science is usually done
by the Social Science Citation Index
• Peer-reviewed journal articles and monographs enjoy the highest reputation
among political scientists
Plümper, 2003
Trend: Increase in the number of journal articles and their importance
Slide 16

17. Publishing in the Social Sciences and Humanities
Engels et al., 2012
• Publication output grows faster in the Social Sciences than in the
humanities.
• A steady increase in the number and the proportion of publications in
English is observed.
• No overall shift away from book publishing is observed.
• In the humanities, the share of book publications even seems to be
increasing.
Slide 17

18. Publishing in the Social Sciences and Humanities
Sivertsen, 2016
“… publications in journals and series represent a little more than half of the
publications in the humanities and two-thirds of the publications in the social
sciences (…) . There are, however, just as wide differences within each of
the two major areas: Only 45 % of the publications in History are in journals,
compared to 61 % in Linguistics. In Sociology, only 46 % of the publications
are in journals, compared to 75 % in Economics.”
Sivertsen, 2019
Slide 18

19. Publishing in the Social Sciences and Humanities
Sum up
• Publication output grows faster in STM than in the Social Sciences and
even more faster than in the humanities.
• A steady increase in the number and the proportion of publications in
English is observed.
• No overall shift away from book publishing is observed (especially in the
Humanities).
• In the Social Sciences an increase in the number of journal articles can be
observed.
• In the Humanities, the share of book publications even seems to be
increasing.
• Peer review appears to be an important quality criterion.
Slide 19

20. Quality control in publishing
Slide 20

21. Quality control
for scientific documents is usually carried out through peer review:
Editorial Review
 mainly journal articles, contributions to anthologies
Review by Program Committee
 mainly conference proceedings, contributions to conference proceedings
Peer Review
 mainly journal articles, contributions to anthologies, contributions to
conference proceedings
Slide 21

22. Peer Review: Group phase
Slide 22

23. Peer Review and its variants
Peer Review = review of submissions by experts (peers) appointed by the
editor(s) of the journal (conference proceedings, anthology)
Depending on the result of the review, the text is rejected, the author(s) is/are
asked to revise it or the text is accepted for publication (possibly after prior
revision).
Timescales vary greatly depending on the discipline.
Slide 23

24. Peer Review and its variants
Variants
 single blind
submitting authors do not know the reviewers
 double blind
submitting authors and reviewers are unknown to each other
 triple blind
submitting authors and reviewers are unknown to one another, additionally the
authors are unknown to the editors
Slide 24

25. Peer Review Critique: Empirical findings
Peer Review
favors
• articles by prestigious authors,
• articles by authors from prestigious institutions,
• articles that do not challenge common concepts.
discriminates
• submissions from competing colleagues/ theories/ institutions
Reviewers sometimes even reject submissions, just to submit them
later for publication oneself
Fröhlich (2003, 2006); Ross (2006)
Slide 25

26. Peer Review Critique: Empirical Findings
Submissions by prestigious scientists, which have already been published in
journals and are resubmitted as works by unknown authors and with slightly
changed titles, are usually not recognized as resubmissions, but are rejected or
accepted.
When submitting fictional manuscripts, reviewers often fail to notice errors.
Fröhlich (2003, 2006); Ross (2006)
Slide 26

27. Peer Review Critique: Empirical Findings
Peer review is influenced by …
 Network effects
 Gender bias (male reviewers prefer male submissions)
 Language bias in favor of native English speakers
 Age bias: Younger experts judge more rigidly than older ones.
Fröhlich (2003, 2006); Ross (2006)
Slide 27

28. Alternatives to classical peer review?
Slide 28

29. Peer Review Alternatives: Group phase
Slide 29

30. Open Review, a success:
Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
Pöschl (2004), editor of Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics ACP
An effective classical peer review is
• in times of the "least publishing unit" strategy
• rapidly increasing publication volumes and
• shortened time spans for peer review
hardly possible.
Slide 30

31. Open Review, a success:
Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
Open Review at Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
• Submissions are available Open Access
• Reviews are also available Open Access
• Reviews can be anonymous or non-anonymous
• Final articles are published Open Access and linked to submissions and
reviews
Slide 31

32. Open Review, a success:
Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
Advantages of the method (Pöschl 2004, 2006a, 2006b)
• peer review comments become part of the scientific discourse
• Open Access to reviews ensures efficiency of the review/ avoids duplication
of work
• transparency of publication prevents the submission of inferior papers/
results in higher efficiency
• protection against plagiarism: citable publication of the submission
documents priority claim
• ensures fast feedback from the community
Slide 32

33. Quality measurement of scientific publications
Slide 33

34. Quality measurement
Citation based impact:
Journal Impact Factor & h-Index
Slide 34

35. Bibliometrics
Quality and reputation are usually assessed through impact.
Impact is determined via citations
a) to journals in which scientists publish, e.g. Journal Impact Factor (JIF)
b) to publications of a scientist e.g. Hirsch Index (h-Index), publication frequency,
normalized number of publications, number of citations, average number of
citations per paper ...
Slide 35

36. Journal Impact Factor
Formula: JIF for journal X for the year Y
Number of times citeable and non-citeable items published in journal X in the two
preceding years before year Y were cited by indexed journals during year Y
---------------------------------------------------
Number of citeable published in the journal X in the two preceding years before
year Y
Database: Journal Citation Reports, http://apps.isiknowledge.com/
Slide 36

37. Journal Impact Factor
Formula: JIF 2019
Number of times citeable and non-citeable items published in journal X in 2017
and 2018 were cited by indexed journals during 2019
---------------------------------------------------
Number of times citeable items published in the journal X in the 2017 and 2018
Database: Journal Citation Reports, https://jcr.clarivate.com/
Slide 37

38. Journal Impact Factor
Criticism:
(Campbell 2005, 2008; Dong, Loh, & Mondry 2005; Fröhlich 1999; Seglen 1997, 1998)
 Limited scope / exclusion of entire document types: grey literature, books, most
web publications.
 Only journals indexed in the Journal Citation Report JCR are covered.
 Language bias in favor of English language journals: Journals in other
languages have a lower JIF.
 JIF refers to journals, not articles: Usually a small number of very frequently
cited articles leads to a high value for the journal
Slide 38

39. Journal Impact Factor
Criticism:
(Campbell 2005, 2008; Dong, Loh, & Mondry 2005; Fröhlich 1999; Seglen 1997, 1998)
 Ignorance of citation cycles in different disciplines: Discrimination of journals
from disciplines with cycles > 2 years (e.g. mathematics, humanities)
 Manipulable
 Confundation of popularity and quality
Slide 39

40. Hirsch-Index
Calculation:
An author has an index h if h of his total N publications have at least h citations
each and the other (N-h) publications have less than h citations.
Slide 40
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/H-Index

41. Hirsch-Index
Calculation:
An author has an index h if h of his total N publications have at least h citations
each and the other (N-h) publications have less than h citations.
Slide 41
http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/H-Index
An author has an h-index of 8 if he has
published 8 papers that have been cited at
least 8 times each.

42. Hirsch-Index
Comparison h-index/JIF:
Slide 42
Number of Citations per Publication
Publications Author A Author B Author C Author D
1 4 50 800 1.000
2 4 50 1 1.000
3 4 49 1 975
4 4 38 1 3
5 1 4 1 3
6 0 4 1 3
7 0 4 1 3
8 0 4 0 3
9 0 4 0 3
10 0 4 0 3
Hirsch-Index ? ? ? ?

43. Hirsch-Index
Comparison h-index/JIF:
Slide 43
Number of Citations per Publication
Publications Author A Author B Author C Author D
1 4 50 800 1.000
2 4 50 1 1.000
3 4 49 1 975
4 4 38 1 3
5 1 4 1 3
6 0 4 1 3
7 0 4 1 3
8 0 4 0 3
9 0 4 0 3
10 0 4 0 3
Hirsch-Index 4 ? ? ?

44. Hirsch-Index
Comparison h-index/JIF:
Slide 44
Number of Citations per Publication
Publications Author A Author B Author C Author D
1 4 50 800 1.000
2 4 50 1 1.000
3 4 49 1 975
4 4 38 1 3
5 1 4 1 3
6 0 4 1 3
7 0 4 1 3
8 0 4 0 3
9 0 4 0 3
10 0 4 0 3
Hirsch-Index 4 4 ? ?

45. Hirsch-Index
Comparison h-index/JIF:
Slide 45
Number of Citations per Publication
Publications Author A Author B Author C Author D
1 4 50 800 1.000
2 4 50 1 1.000
3 4 49 1 975
4 4 38 1 3
5 1 4 1 3
6 0 4 1 3
7 0 4 1 3
8 0 4 0 3
9 0 4 0 3
10 0 4 0 3
Hirsch-Index 4 4 1 ?

46. Hirsch-Index
Comparison h-index/JIF:
Slide 46
Number of Citations per Publication
Publications Author A Author B Author C Author D
1 4 50 800 1.000
2 4 50 1 1.000
3 4 49 1 975
4 4 38 1 3
5 1 4 1 3
6 0 4 1 3
7 0 4 1 3
8 0 4 0 3
9 0 4 0 3
10 0 4 0 3
Hirsch-Index 4 4 1 3

47. Hirsch-Index
Comparison h-index/JIF:
• Hirsch (h-) Index refers to authors and not to journals
• Data basis not clearly defined
Web Of Science, https://www.webofknowledge.com
Scopus, http://ww.scopus.com
Google Scholar, http://scholar.google.com
…
Features
Advantage: Citation of a single, much-cited publication does not have any effect.
Disadvantage: innovative approaches are not considered.
Slide 47

48. Hirsch-Index
Web Of Science, https://www.webofknowledge.com
Scopus, http://ww.scopus.com
Google Scholar, http://scholar.google.com
…
Features
Advantage: Citation of a single, much-cited publication does not have any effect.
Disadvantage: innovative approaches are not considered.
Slide 48

49. Ratings & Rankings
Slide 49

50. Rating & Rankings: Group phase
Slide 50

51. Ratings & Ranking
Multidisciplinary
Anne Harzing‘s Journal Quality List
https://harzing.com/resources/journal-quality-list
Journal Impact Factor JIF
https://jcr.clarivate.com/
Scimago Journal Rank
https://www.scimagojr.com/
GoogleScholar
https://scholar.google.de/citations?view_op=top_venues&hl=de
Please keep in mind: Most impact databases rely on automatic procedures and need
DOIs to identify publications and citations!
Slide 51

52. Social Sciences
GESIS List (Mostly German):
https://www.gesis.org/fileadmin/upload/dienstleistung/fachinformationen/db_infosysteme/
Zeitschriften.pdf
ISA Journal List
https://www.isa-sociology.org/en/opportunities/publication-opportunities/list-of-the-
selected-journals
Jerry A. Jacobs: Journal Rankings in Sociology (2016)
https://sociology.sas.upenn.edu/sites/default/files/Journal%20Rankings%20in%20Sociolo
gy%20november%202015.pdf
Ratings & Ranking
Slide 52

53. Humanities/ Cultural Sciences
European Reference Index for the Humanities (ERIH):
https://dbh.nsd.uib.no/publiseringskanaler/erihplus/
Humanities Journals Wiki
https://humanitiesjournals.fandom.com/wiki/Comparative_Literature,_Cultural_Studies_an
d_Theory_Journals
Journal Ranking of the NYU Shanghai
https://shanghai.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/media/Journal%20Ranking_Cultural%20Studie
s.pdf
MLA Directory of Periodicals
https://apps.mla.org/cgi-shl/docstudio/docs.pl?login&msg=requirelogin&xurl=dop
Ratings & Ranking
Slide 53

54. Blogs …
Slide 54

55. Blogs allowing guest postings
Open Edition
https://www.openedition.org/
Hypothesis.org
https://hypotheses.org/
LSE Impact Blog
https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsocialsciences/
Slide 55

56. Take home messages so far …
Slide 56

57. Take home messages
 Increasing importance of journal articles and English language without
parallel loss of importance of other publication types in other languages
(especially in the Humanities)
 Despite all the dysfunctionalities of peer review, peer reviewed publications
gain higher reputation
 Citations are indicators/ key metrics for relevance and supposed quality
 You benefit not only from the citations of your texts, but also from the
reputation of the publishers and journals in which you publish - rely on
rankings and ratings.
 If in doubt, publish in journals / with publishers who assign DOIs to
publications, since citations to publications are usually identified via DOIs.
 To link citations on your articles to your person, use ORCID (Open
Researcher and Contributor ID). An important tool for disambiguating people,
especially when names can change or have different spellings.
Slide 57

58. Legal aspects
Slide 58

59. Urheberrecht vs. Copyright
Slide 59
Urheberrecht, Droit d‘Auteur Anglo-American Copyright
protection of author rights re-use and (commercial) exploitation
• impossible to waive the Urheberrecht
(= necessity to be referred to as the
author)
• authors can only grant rights of use (=
copyright)
• right passes to the author's heirs (or
the heirs of the copyright holder) upon
his death
• Complete waiver of copyright is
possible (public domain); can be
completely transferred by the author
and be retransmitted to third parties
• right passes to the author's heirs (or
the heirs of the copyright holder) upon
his death
Protection period
Germany & France:
70 years after death of the author
Protection period
USA: 70/95 years after the author's death
UK: 70 years after the author's death
Practiced among others in: Germany,
France, Switzerland, Austria,
Netherlands, partly EU law
Practiced in: USA, UK, Commonwealth

60. Urheberrecht vs. Copyright
Slide 60
Urheberrecht, Droit d‘Auteur Anglo-American Copyright
protection of author rights re-use and (commercial) exploitation
• impossible to waive the Urheberrecht
(= necessity to be referred to as the
author)
• authors can only grant rights of use (=
copyright)
• right passes to the author's heirs (or
the heirs of the copyright holder) upon
his death
• Complete waiver of copyright is
possible (public domain); can be
completely transferred by the author
and be retransmitted to third parties
• right passes to the author's heirs (or
the heirs of the copyright holder) upon
his death
Protection period
Germany & France:
70 years after death of the author
Protection period
USA: 70/95 years after the author's death
UK: 70 years after the author's death
Practiced among others in: Germany,
France, Switzerland, Austria,
Netherlands, partly EU law
Practiced in: USA, UK, Commonwealth

61. Copyright
Authors may transfer a non-exclusive copyright to a publisher. This entitles the
holder (publisher) to use the work in the defined/ permitted manner.
The holder of an exclusive copyright is allowed to use and exploit the authors
work exclusively.
The holder of an exclusive copyright, in contrast to a non-exclusive copyright, is
entitled to prohibit other persons from using the work in any manner.
Slide 61

62. Open Access
Slide 62

63. Open Access
Open Access = Access to scientific information free of charge and as
unhindered as possible
First public record: 2001, Budapest Open Access Initiative
Slide 63

64. The counterpart: Closed Access
Reader's perspective:
Access to scientific information against charge
Subscription of the university’s library or Pay-Per-View
Author‘s perspective:
 Transfer of the exclusive rights of use (exclusive copyrights) to the
publisher
Business Model:
 Subscription (Libraries are buying / licensing content for their users)
 Author fees
In the study “Publikationstrategien im Wandel?" (2005) commissioned by the German Research
Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, DFG) 38.5 % of the scientists stated to have paid
fees for publications in Closed Access journals, in the field of Life sciences 75.3%, in the fields of
humanities and social sciences 8.8%.
Slide 64

65. Why Open Access?
 electronic publications allow acceleration of the exchange of scientific
information
 technically facilitated dissemination and availability, BUT: drastic
shortage in access to scientific information
 reason: decreasing budgets of scientific institutions with rapidly
increasing costs for the use of scientific information
Slide 65

66. Open Access: Variants
1 Self-Archiving (Green Road):
Publication of published scientific documents or preliminary versions
thereof on digital repositories
e.g. the Open Access server of the Viadrina University,
https://opus4.kobv.de/opus4-euv/home
2 Self-Publishing (Golden Road):
Founding or editing scientific online journals accessible free of
charge or publishing in such journals
• Financing sometimes based on Article Processing Charges APC
• Publication fees are often covered by funders
• Some universities provide publication funds
Slide 66

67. Open Access: Variants
3 Platinum Open Access:
• Gold Open Access without Article Processing Charges
• Neither readers nor authors must pay for a platinum Open Access
article
4 Bronze Open Access:
• Closed Access journals remove the paywalls to their articles at the
end of a defined time span and make them available Open Access
5 Hybrid Open Access:
• against payment of a fee single articles are published Open Access
in a Closed Access journal
Slide 67

68. Green Open Access in spite of Closed Access agreements
• by striking-out / deleting the passage transferring exclusive
copyrights to publishers
• by using a contractual addendum stating, for example, that the
transfer of exclusive copyrights is limited in time
SPARC Author's Addendum
Copyright Addendum Engine
• by amending the contract
Slide 68

69. Green Open Access in spite of Closed Access agreements
"I hereby declare that I do not wish to transfer full copyright to (name of
the publisher) but reserve the right to self-archive the article in full in an
open access repository.”
https://www.open-access.net/informationen-zu-open-
access/rechtsfragen/verlagsvertraege/#c1458
Slide 69

70. Green Open Access in spite of Closed Access agreements
• copyrights to publishers
• by using a contractual addendum stating, for example, that the
transfer of exclusive copyrights is limited in time
SPARC Author's Addendum
Copyright Addendum Engine
• by amending the contract
• by using the Open Access Policy of the publisher
http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/
Slide 70

71. Green Open Access in spite of Closed Access agreements:
Group phase
Slide 71

72. Closed Access
Reader's perspective:
Access to scientific information against charge
Subscription of the university’s library or Pay-Per-View
Author‘s perspective:
 Transfer of the exclusive rights of use to the publisher
Business Model:
 Subscription
 Author fees
In the study “Publikationstrategien im Wandel?" (2005) commissioned by the German Research
Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, DFG) 38.5 % of the scientists stated to have paid
fees for publications in Closed Access journals, in the field of Life sciences 75.3%, in the fields of
humanities and social sciences 8.8%.
Slide 72

73. Open Access
Reader's perspective:
 Access to scientific information free of charge
 Libre Open Access (by using CC licenses): Other forms of utilisation
(derivative works, commercial exploitation, etc.)
Author‘s perspective:
 usually transfer of a non-exclusive copyright to the publisher or
platform operator
 Libre Open Access: Fine-grained rights granting of further rights than
the simple use for reading (e.g. with CC licenses)
Business model:
 APCs, institutional memberships, sponsoring
Slide 73

74. Open Access Citation Advantage
Slide 74

75. Open Access Citation Advantage
Piwowar et al. (2018)
„Open [Access] articles receive 18% more citations than otherwise expected.”
Slide 75

76. Open Access Citation Advantage
Norris (2008)
Slide 76

77. Open Access to Research Data
Slide 77

78. Open Access to Research Data: Group phase
Slide 78

79. Open Access to Research Data
Why?
• Reproducibility
• Synergies
• Quality control
• Secondary analyses
• Comparative studies
• Journal Policies
• Funder Policies (http://v2.sherpa.ac.uk/)
Slide 79

80. Open Access to Research Data
Incentives?
Articles whose associated data are available in open access are cited
more frequently than other articles.
Piwowar, H. A., Day, R. S., & Fridsma, D. B. (2007). Sharing detailed research data is
associated with increased citation rate. PloS one, 2(3), e308. Public Library of Science.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0000308.
Handling of data in the same way as text publications to make Data
Curation attractive: Data becomes citable
https://clarivate.com/webofsciencegroup/solutions/webofscience-data-citation-index/
Slide 80

81. Open Access & Funder Policies
Slide 81

82. Open Access & Funder Policies
An increasing number of research funders are making Open Access to
texts (and in some cases also to data) compulsory for funded
research(ers), e.g. …
• Plan S = “an initiative for open-access science publishing launched in 2018 by
‘cOAlition S’", a consortium of national research agencies and funders from twelve
European countries. The plan requires scientists and researchers who benefit from
state-funded research organisations and institutions to publish their work in open
repositories or in journals that are available to all by 2021.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plan_S
• Funding by European Commission programmes requires that data and texts are
published Open Access.
Find relevant funder policies at http://v2.sherpa.ac.uk/
Slide 82

83. Open Access Services
Slide 83

84. Open Access Publishing
Open Access server of the Viadrina University
 https://opus4.kobv.de/opus4-euv/home
Open Access Repositories
 http://www.opendoar.org
 http://oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/Disciplinary_repositories
Zendo (multidisciplinary repository for text, data, software, …)
 http://www.zenodo.org
Directory of Open Access Journals/ DOAJ
 http://www.doaj.org
Publisher of Open Access Books
 http://oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/Publishers_of_OA_books
 http://blog.bibliothek.kit.edu/ag_univerlage/
Registry of Research Data Repositories/ re3data
 http://www.re3data.org/
Slide 84

85. Open Access Publishing: Social Sciences & Humanities
Repositories
RePEc (Research Papers in Economics): Catalogue with fulltext links, > 50% Open
Access content
SSRN (Social Science Research Network)
Humanities Commons
Data Archives
Gesis Daten-Archiv & datorium: Data Repositories of the GESIS
Slide 85

86. Finding Open Access
Bielefeld Academic Search Engine
 http://www.base-search.net/
GoogleScholar
 http://scholar.google.de/
Journal Ranking:
https://scholar.google.de/citations?view_op=top_venues&hl=de
Plugin Unpaywall (Firefox and Chrome) automatically notifies users who come
across a scientific publication to which their institution does not have access of
available Open Access versions.
Slide 86

87. Open Access at Viadrina
Hybrid Open Access: Publication in Springer Nature & Wiley
subscription journals without incurring costs.
Gold Open Access: Publication in Springer Nature & Wiley Gold Open
Access journals with 20% discount on the Author's fees (APCs)
See: https://www.ub.europa-uni.de/de/benutzung/bestand/edocs/deal/verlage/index.html
Slide 87

88. Choosing your publication venue
Slide 88

89. Publication venues : Group phase
Slide 89

90. Choosing the publication venue
Monographs
 Publication mode: Online/ Print/ Hybrid
 Accessibility: Open Access or Closed Access
 Distribution: Are the books available in libraries? → Karlsruhe Virtual Catalogue, World
Cat
 Perceived quality
 Quality control
 Costs (printing cost subsidy)
 Retail price (has influence on distribution & sales)
 Service (editing, proofreading, professional typesetting)
 Own examination: Perceived quality of the publications
 Publication speed
 Advertising, distribution of review copies
 Quantitative output of the publishers
 Coherence of the publishing programme
 Reputation important, especially for planned scientific activities/ careers
 Assignment of a Digital Object Identifier
 Royalities
Slide 90

91. Choosing the publication venue
Journal article
 Publication mode: Online/ Print/ Hybrid
 Accessibility: Open Acess or Closed Access
 Distribution: Are the journals available in libraries? Journal database
 Perceived quality
 Quality control
 Costs (Article Fees/Author Charges)
 Rankings, JIF
 Indexing in citation databases / evaluation by Altmetrics
 Ratings
 Reputation within the community
 Assignment of a Digital Object Identifier
Slide 91

92. Choosing the publication venue
Check on dissemination
Monographs:
KVK (Karlsruher Virtueller Katalog, Karlsruhe Virtual Catalogue)
https://kvk.bibliothek.kit.edu
Journals:
Zeitschriftendatenbank/ Journal database
http://www.zeitschriftendatenbank.de/
Monographs & Journals
Online Computer Library Center (OCLC) - Worldcat
https://www.worldcat.org/
Slide 92

93. Thank you very much
for your attention.
Dr. Ulrich Herb
u.herb@scidcode.com
http://www.scidecode.com

94. Bibliography
Campbell, P. (2005). In praise of soft science. Nature, 435(7045), 1003. https://doi.org/10.1038/4351003a
Campbell, P. (2008). Escape from the impact factor. Ethics in Science and Environmental Politics, 8(1), 5–7.
https://doi.org/10.3354/esep00078
Dong, P., Loh, M., & Mondry, A. (2005). The „impact factor“ revisited. Biomedical digital libraries, 2(7).
https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-5581-2-7
Engels, T. C. E., Istenič Starčič, A., Kulczycki, E., Pölönen, J., & Sivertsen, G. (2018). Are book publications disappearing from
scholarly communication in the social sciences and humanities? Aslib Journal of Information Management, 70(6), 592–607.
https://doi.org/10.1108/AJIM-05-2018-0127
Engels, T. C. E., Ossenblok, T. L. B., & Spruyt, E. H. J. (2012). Changing publication patterns in the Social Sciences and
Humanities, 2000–2009. Scientometrics, 93(2), 373–390. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-012-0680-2
Faas, T., & Schmitt-Beck, R. (2008). Die Deutsche Politikwissenschaft uns Ihre Publikationen: Ist und Soll. Ergebnisse einer
Umfrage unter den Mitgliedern der DVPW. Politikwissenschaft.Rundbrief der Deutschen Vereinigung für Politikwissenschaft, 139,
166–176.
Fröhlich, G. (1999). Das Messen des leicht Meßbaren: Output-Indikatoren, Impact-Maße: Artefakte der Szientometrie? In J.
Becker & W. Göhring (Hrsg.), Kommunikation statt Markt: Zu einer alternativen Theorie der Informationsgesellschaft (S. 27–38).
GMD- Forschungszentrum Informationstechnik GmbH. http://eprints.rclis.org/9115/
Fröhlich, G. (2003). Anonyme Kritik: Peer Review auf dem Prüfstand der Wissenschaftsforschung. medizin - bibliothek -
information, 3(2), 33–39.
Fröhlich, G. (2006). Plagiate und unethische Autorenschaft. Information - Wissenschaft & Praxis, 57(2), 81–89.
Fröhlich, G. (2009). Die Wissenschaftstheorie fordert Open Access. Information - Wissenschaft & Praxis, 60(5), 253–258.
Slide 94

95. Bibliography
Herb, U. (2015). Open Science in der Soziologie: Eine interdisziplinäre Bestandsaufnahme zur offenen Wissenschaft und eine
Untersuchung ihrer Verbreitung in der Soziologie. vwh, Verlag Werner Hülsbusch, Fachverlag für Medientechnik und -wirtschaft.
Kulczycki, E., Engels, T. C. E., Pölönen, J., Bruun, K., Dušková, M., Guns, R., Nowotniak, R., Petr, M., Sivertsen, G., Istenič
Starčič, A., & Zuccala, A. (2018). Publication patterns in the social sciences and humanities: Evidence from eight European
countries. Scientometrics, 116(1), 463–486. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2711-0
Kulczycki, E., Guns, R., Pölönen, J., Engels, T. C. E., Rozkosz, E. A., Zuccala, A. A., Bruun, K., Eskola, O., Starčič, A. I., Petr, M.,
& Sivertsen, G. (2019). Multilingual Publishing in the Social Sciences and Humanities: A Seven-Country European Study. Journal
of the Association for Information Science and Technology, n/a(n/a). https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24336
Münch, R. (2009). Publikationsverhalten in der Soziologie. In Alexander von Humboldt-Stiftung (Hrsg.), Publikationsverhalten in
unterschiedlichen Disziplinen. Beiträge zur Beurteilung von Forschungsleistungen (Zweite, er, S. 69–77). Alexander von
Humboldt-Stiftung.
Norris, M., Oppenheim, C., & Rowland, F. (2008). The citation advantage of open-access articles. Journal of the American Society
for Information Science and Technology, 59(12), 1963–1972. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.20898
Piwowar, H. A., Day, R. S., & Fridsma, D. B. (2007). Sharing detailed research data is associated with increased citation rate.
PloS one, 2(3), e308. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0000308
Piwowar, H., Priem, J., Larivière, V., Alperin, J. P., Matthias, L., Norlander, B., Farley, A., West, J., & Haustein, S. (2018). The
state of OA: A large-scale analysis of the prevalence and impact of Open Access articles. PeerJ, 6, e4375.
https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.4375
Plümper, T. (2003). Publikationstätigkeit und Rezeptionserfolg der deutschen Politikwissenschaft in internationalen
Fachzeitschriften, 1990–2002. Eine bibliometrische Analyse der Veröffentlichungsleistung deutscher politikwissenschaftlicher
Fachbereiche und Institute. Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 44(4), 529–544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11615-003-0097-x
Slide 95

96. Bibliography
Plümper, T., & Schimmelfennig, F. (2007). Wer wird Prof—Und wann? Berufungsdeterminanten in der deutschen Politikwissenschaft.
Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 48(1), 97–117. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11615-007-0008-7
Pöschl, U. (2004a). Interactive peer review enhances journal quality. Research Information, September/October.
http://www.researchinformation.info/risepoct04openaccess.html
Pöschl, U. (2004b). Interactive journal concept for improved scientific publishing and quality assurance. Learned Publishing, 17(2), 105–
113. https://doi.org/10.1087/095315104322958481
Pöschl, U. (2006a). Die neue Offenheit des Wissens. MaxPlanckForschung. Das Wissenschaftsmagazin der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft,
3, 26–31.
Pöschl, U. (2006b). Open Access & Collaborative Peer Review: Öffentliche Begutachtung und interaktive Diskussion zur Verbesserung
von Kommunikation und Qualitätssicherung in Wissenschaft und Gesellschaft. In S. Hornbostel & D. Simon (Hrsg.), Wie viel (In-)
Transparenz ist notwendig? : Peer Review revisited (iFQ Workin, S. 43–46). Institut für Forschungsinformation und Qualitätssicherung.
Ross, J. S., Gross, C. P., Desai, M. M., Hong, Y., Grant, A. O., Daniels, S. R., Hachinski, V. C., Gibbons, R. J., Gardner, T. J., &
Krumholz, H. M. (2006). Effect of blinded peer review on abstract acceptance. JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association,
295(14), 1675–1680. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.295.14.1675
Seglen, P. O. (1997). Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. BMJ, 314(7079), 498–502.
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.314.7079.497
Seglen, P. O. (1998). Citation rates and journal impact factors are not suitable for evaluation of research. Acta Orthopaedica, 69(3),
224–229. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453679809000920
Sivertsen, G. (2016). Patterns of internationalization and criteria for research assessment in the social sciences and humanities.
Scientometrics, 107(2), 357–368. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1845-1
Sivertsen, G. (2019). Understanding and Evaluating Research and Scholarly Publishing in the Social Sciences and Humanities (SSH).
Data and Information Management, 3(2), 61–71. https://doi.org/10.2478/dim-2019-0008
Slide 96