Camilla Hertil Lindelöw

Purpose: As gendering methods become more common in bibliometric studies, scrutinizing and developing current methodology for assigning gender is essential. This study analyses bibliometric studies' descriptions of how they gender, from a classification and ethical perspective. Design/methodology/approach: The empirical material comprises 599 bibliometric studies using diverse methods for gendering authors. The methods are categorized and analysed using classification theory, where prototype theory plays a central role. Both the development and the relative growth/decline over time are described. Findings: Gendering names was the most common method (240 studies), with photos (69 studies) slightly rising and linguistic cues (68 studies) declining somewhat. The classification is almost exclusively binary (women or men); only seven studies include gender diverse categories. The classification perspective reveals how several current methods are questionable both in validity and ethically. When it comes to gender diverse persons, “the paradox of exposure” needs to be considered. The discussion concludes with a proposal whereby names may be used in a specified manner, though surveys are preferable, as self-identified gender (or the option to decline answering) yields more valid and ethically sound studies. Originality/value: This study offers a novel approach to understanding gendering methodology. Through the lens of classification theories – both the mutually exclusive approach (classical Greek classification) and the graded approach of prototype theory – several problems with current methodology are highlighted.

Introduction. This paper analyses the presence of the journal Information Research in traditional citation databases, such as Web of Science, as well as in new open sources like OpenAlex; and services tracking policy and technological impact, such as SciVal and Overton. Method. We analyse the visibility of the journal across sources. With the limitations of representation in the different sources we proceed to study the impact of the journal in the scholarly community, as well as in society, by looking at how Information Research papers are situated in the scholarly world and how they are cited in patents and policy papers. Finally, we look at the openness of the journal as seen through the data sources. Results. Our results show that Information Research has made quite a journey. It has found a place in the scholarly universe: authors from institutions from around the world publish there and other prestigious journals cite the content. The content coverage in the perused data sources could be improved, as can metadata, for example markup of article types. Conclusions. Whilst the journal has been openly available on the Internet throughout its history, this is not well reflected in the data sources. This is something that the new home, Publicera.kb.se, might help with. Larger platforms can help individual journals fulfil the data standards needed to be properly indexed in the large data sources.

Traditionally, the bibliometric community has relied heavily on secondary data sources, most prominently the Science Citation Index. By analyzing three key journals, we detected trends in the data sources used over a 45‐year period (1978–2022). The historical analysis of data sources reveals a consistency in the materials used as well as bursts of new materials and approaches. On a larger scale, the pattern is stable with Web of Science and Scopus dominating, but this might be about to change. The complexity of the research performed in bibliometrics does not seem to increase as a vast majority of studies use one or two types of data sources despite the increasing availability of data. A more detailed analysis detects trends in the use of data, as represented by patent analyses in the 1980s, webometrics in the late 1990s, and altmetrics in the 2010s. Overall, the paper provides an analytical overview of current and historical data sources used in bibliometrics, which may guide and inspire further research. The question remaining, however, is how the current emphasis on open sources will transform the field in the future: are we entering the great wide open, or will established proprietary databases remain a dominating source?

Introduction Independent 10 researchers are a diverse category of researchers, from those who want to pursue their own path to the ones who are struggling to stay within the competitive world of academia. We define independent researchers broadly as people who conduct research without an institutional affiliation.

Introduction Independent 10 researchers are a diverse category of researchers, from those who want to pursue their own path to the ones who are struggling to stay within the competitive world of academia. We define independent researchers broadly as people who conduct research without an institutional affiliation.

Fully gold Open Access (OA) publication channels are still hold to be of inferior quality compared to channels offered by publishers with traditional subscription business models, albeit less and less so. The threat of predatory publishers looms on one side, and on the other most OA publishers haven’t been around to gather prestige for so long. Still, there seems to be a steady advance. For example, OA publication channels may now be found at level two (indexing the channels perceived as having most academic prestige in a certain subject) of the Norwegian Publication Model (NPM).In an earlier survey, I investigated the publication patterns of researchers at Swedish universities with focus on their gold OA publishing in journals. The publication patterns were contrasted with the occurrence of OA journals in NPM. 29 % of the DOAJ journals were present as approved channels in NPM. DOAJ is frequently mentioned as the most comprehensive OA journal indexing service in the world. At level one, 14 % of the listed journals were OA, whereas only 2 % of level two journals were OA. Out of the DOAJ-journals included in NPM, only 1 % made it to level two. This is probably explained by the situation described above; OA journals are often new to the scientific publishing market, and therefore they haven’t had the time to gather academic prestige.The OA journals that researchers at Swedish universities published were almost all of them present in DOAJ. 7 % of these were at level two. This pattern seems to imply that researchers are trying to fulfil demands of OA publishing from funders, while at the same time trying to gather prestige for their own researcher career. This poster aims to further explore these results, with focus on the 7 % journals at level 2. Which journals can be found here, and what is the distribution? Which research subjects are involved?