An analysis of SA journals

An analysis of SA journals
Johann Mouton (+ Astrid Valentine and Johann Spies) National Editors Forum meeting, ASSAf © 1 September 2016

Contents Introduction Some general output trends
Distribution of articles by fields and journal Journal impact statistics Distribution of articles by journal index Author level metrics The threat of predatory publishers The spectre of “in-house” publishing Conclusions

Introduction The last systematic studies of scientific journals and scholarly publishing in South Africa were done in 2006 and 2009 respectively (both by CREST under commission by ASSAf). Both of these are now seriously out-dated. One reason for this has to do with the Revision of the DHET Research Subsidy Framework in 2003 (which came into effect in 2005) as well as the more recent additional revisions to the Framework. Depending on how these revisions are implemented we could expect some far-reaching changes in scholarly publishing in South Africa. Against this background CREST was commissioned by ASSAf in and with support from the DHET) to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the state of SA publications. The project includes sections on book publishing as well as trends in conference proceedings. My focus today is on journals and journal articles.

Assessment of SA journals (1)
Research project Bibliometric data requirements Source and time frame Assessment of SA scholarly journals, conference proceedings and books: 2005 – Project time frame: Consolidated database (SA Knowledgebase) of all SA publications for this time frame University data (new) University research studies Previous versions of SAK Web of Science Main research questions: What are the main trends and changes (if any) in the nature of scientific journal publishing since the introduction of the revised funding framework of 2005? What are the changes in the distribution of journal articles by journal list (Web of Science/ IBSS/DHET) between 2005 and 2014? In which journals do South African authors publish and how are these journals distributed by national and international publishers? What are the main trends in the demographics of journal authors (gender, age, race, nationality, institutional affiliation)?

Assessment of SA journals (2)
Main research questions: What are the main trends and changes (if any) in the nature of scientific journal publishing since the introduction of the revised funding framework of 2005? What are the main trends in collaborative publishing (multi-authorship)? What are the main trends in the citation impact of South African authored papers over the period 2005 – 2014? The bibliometric analyses at the systems level in (1) above will be augmented by journal-level analyses. How do the bibliometric properties (including citation profiles) of individual SA journals indexed by the Web of Science or Scopus compare with those journal titles not indexed in the Web of Science or Scopus? How do the bibliometric properties (including journal citation impact) compare between open access journals and the “traditional” journals? The bibliometric analyses generated under the previous two bullets should be compared with Journal information provided for the ASSAf reviews in order to assess whether these correlate with journal editorial practices (rejection rates, contribution of foreign authors to local journals, editorial policies, etc.) What has been and is the impact of “predatory” journals on the publication practices of SA authors?

Elaboration on project (1)
With the introduction of the 2015 revisions to the funding framework, some additional issues have been highlighted (and included in the study): What impact will the additional lists (Scopus, NSD and Scielo) have on the publication practices of SA academics/scholars? Perhaps an even more basic question should be asked: What does the DHET want to achieve with the introduction of these additional lists? There is growing evidence (not just in SA) that the demand to publish and publish more is generating seemingly more unethical/ non-virtuous practices: increasing cases of plagiarism are reported, increase in the number of ghost-authors, the huge increase in the number of predatory journals, dubious practices on the side of journal editors to “manipulate” their journal impact factors, and so on.

Elaboration on project (2)
Many of these developments point to the increasing tension between maintaining high standards of quality and ethics and the demand for quantity and growth in output. Of course, the imperative to assure quality and ethical compliance is located at different points in the system: the author, the university (research office), the journal editor, reviewers, the publishers and the DHET. Our aim in the project is therefore to address these issues in addition to the more standard bibliometric questions listed above.

General output trends

Major trends in output: 2005 - 2014
The most obvious impact of the revised funding framework of 2003 has been the steep and sustained increase in the number of research publications since (See overleaf). In our view the introduction of new funding incentives was the single biggest cause for the observed increase in output. But three other factors would have contributed. The introduction of the NRF rating system to the social sciences in have placed new demands on academics to publish. The increase in the number of SA journals accredited by the DHET. The overall number increased from around 210 in 2003 to 302 in There was also a commensurate increase in the number of SA journals indexed in the WoS from around 26 in 2003 to 61 in 2014. There has been a small increase in the academic capacity of the university sector to produce additional output: from permanent instructional staff in 2005 to in But, we should also take into account that universities have implemented other “strategies” to augment their active human capital base.

Total HE research publication output (subsidy units): 1993-2014
Average Annual Growth: 5.3%

Trends in journal article production (Fractional units: 2005 – 2014)
Average Annual Growth: 8%

Full papers and fractional units (2005 – 2014)

Distribution of articles by fields and journals

Growth Rates of Papers by Field
Papers Annual Growth Rate

Average Annual Growth Rates of Papers by Field, 2005-2014

Total no of journals in dataset = 8056

Top ten journals (8 SA journals)
Papers Share Cum % AJPHERD: African Journal for Physical, Health Education Recreation and Dance (now AJHPES) 1343 1.1% SAMJ: South African Medical Journal 1107 1.0% 2.1% HTS Teologiese Studies / Theological Studies 997 0.9% 3.0% PLoS One 995 3.9% South African Journal of Science 874 0.8% 4.6% South African Journal of Higher Education 789 0.7% 5.3% Acta Crystallographica Section E: Structure Reports Online 728 0.6% 6.0% South African Journal of Botany 694 6.6% South African Family Practice 634 7.2% Journal of Public Administration 615 0.5% 7.7%

Next 20 top journals (16 SA journals)
Journal of Psychology in Africa 581 0.5% 8.2% STJ: Stellenbosch Theological Journal 562 8.7% Water SA 547 9.2% Journal of Contemporary Roman-Dutch Law 538 9.7% SADJ: Journal of the South African Dental Association 509 10.2% Journal of Social Sciences 485 0.4% 10.6% Tydskrif vir die Suid-Afrikaanse Reg / Journal of South African Law 461 11.0% African Journal of Biotechnology 451 11.4% Alternation: Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of the Arts and Humanities in Southern Africa 444 11.8% African Journal of Business Management 438 12.2% In Die Skriflig 431 12.6% Acta Academica 417 13.0% Obiter 415 13.3% Verbum et Ecclesia 13.7% Tydskrif vir Geesteswetenskappe 394 14.1% Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 392 0.3% 14.4% South African Journal of Psychology 380 14.7% South African Journal of Education 369 15.1% Studia Historiae Ecclesiasticae 355 15.4% Old Testament Essays (New Series) 351 15.7%

Journal impact statistics

Relative citation rate Self-citations as % of all citations
Papers Citations Self-citations Ncs Relative citation rate % SA authors Self-citations as % of all citations ALL PAPERS ( ) 393 1197 121 2.74 10.1% RSA PAPERS ( ) 341 1126 119 2.95 1.08 86.8% 10.6% ALL PAPERS ( ) 587 1344 178 1.99 13.2% RSA PAPERS ( ) 527 1240 168 2.03 1.02 89.8% 13.5%

Relative citation rate Self-citations as % of all citations
Papers Citations Self-citations Ncs Relative citation rate % SA authors Self-citations as % of all citations ALL PAPERS ( ) 378 113 45 0.18 39.8% RSA PAPERS ( ) 358 105 41 0.99 94.7% 39.0% ALL PAPERS ( ) 478 104 37 0.14 35.6% RSA PAPERS ( ) 469 1.02 98.1%

Acta Crystallographica Section E CRYSTALLOGRAPHIC COMMUNICATIONS

Acta Crystallographica Section E CRYSTALLOGRAPHIC COMMUNICATIONS
The last year of full coverage in the WoS was Partial coverage in Citation reports ends in It is debatable whether the units for 2012 should have been subsidized, BUT the 40 units (R 4.1m) for 2013 definitely not!

Distribution of articles by journal index

ARTICLES BY INDEX (2005 – 2014) Standardized WOS = 61% DHET = 31%
IBSS = 8%

DHET compared to Web of Science (Full paper count)

Trends in papers by index: 2005 - 2014

Author level metrics

SA’s most productive authors
A total of individuals produced the more than papers (or authorships) 10% of these papers were produced by 184 individuals; 20% by 565 individuals and 50% of all papers by 3509 individuals The distribution of papers by authors conform to the classic Lotka distribution

SA’s 30 most productive authors
Stein DJ 524 Van Staden J 396 Wingfield MJ 372 Nyokong T 370 Vickey TN 303 Vickey Boeriu OE 273 Peltzer K 263 Wood RJ 233 Swart HC 226 Van Helden PD 211 Coetzee M 197 Afolayan AJ 186 Govender T Naidoo S 182 Johnson SD 175 Kruger HG 174 Bekker L 170 Bennett NC 169 Makinde OD 168 Mohammadi AH 166 Ramjugernath D 165 Wingfield BD 164 Richardson DM 163 Seedat S 160

Top 25 authors in Clinical and Public health & Agricultural sciences
Papers Stein DJ 524 Wood RJ 241 Seedat S 188 Schaaf HS 175 Cotton MF 174 Myer L 168 Andronikou S 165 Bekker L 149 Schutte AE 148 Bateman ED 143 Zar HJ Van Helden PD 139 Flisher AJ 138 Naidoo S 134 Mayosi BM 132 Newell ML 128 Hesseling AC 126 Malan L 124 Beyers N 123 Woodiwiss AJ Norton GR Lawn SD 122 Smith PJ Joubert G 120 Peltzer K Author Papers Van Staden J 396 Wingfield MJ 193 Labuschagne MT 161 Hoffman LC 140 Cloete SWP 137 Du Preez CC 136 Dzama K 133 Gous RM 123 Viljoen AM 108 Smith GF 105 Chimonyo M 104 Johnson SD Agenbag GA 102 Van Wyk BE 94 Hugo A Pretorius ZA 92 Muchenje V 88 Laing MD 87 Finnie JF Afolayan AJ 84 Joubert E 81 Derera J Taylor JRN 80 Manley M Shimelis HA 79

Top 25 authors in Religious Studies and Physics
Papers Van der Walt BJ 78 Strauss DFM 58 Van Aarde AG Punt J 56 Lombaard CJS 47 Nel M Dreyer Y 45 Viljoen FP 43 Conradie EM (Ernst Marais) 42 Raath AWG Hendriks HJ 41 Vorster JM (Jakobus) Van der Walt JL 40 DE KLERK BJ 39 Hale F 37 Cilliers JH Verster P Wessels WJ 35 Van den Berg JA GERICKE JW 34 De Wet CL 32 DE VILLIERS PGR Jordaan PJ (Pierre) 31 Duncan GA Lategan LOK Author Papers Vickey TN 166 Vickey Boeriu OE 150 Meng J 97 Swart HC 78 Mellado B 64 Auret FD 63 Strydom AM 62 Petruccione F 56 Ntwaeaborwa OM 51 Verheest F 48 Carrillo Montoya GD Leach PGL 47 Hellberg MA Ruan X 46 Kara AH 45 Botha JR 41 Bristow KM 40 Mahomed FM Clarkson CA 31 Cleymans JWA Scholtz FG 30 Bharuthram R (Ramesh) Maharaj SD 29 Meyer WE 27

Top 25 authors in Law & Engineering
Papers Neethling J 103 PIENAAR JM 75 Hoctor SV 64 Olivier NJJ 60 Visser PJ 49 Du Plessis M 47 Mujuzi JD (Jamil Ddamulira) 45 Van Niekerk JP 40 Potgieter JM Van der Walt AJ Scott TJ 39 Sonnekus JC Carnelley M 36 Van der Merwe CG 33 Whitear-Nel NJ Meel BL 32 Pretorius JT 31 Pieterse M 30 Du Plessis W Pretorius C Woolman SC Schulze WG 29 Davis D 27 Scott SJ Rautenbach IM Author Papers Mohammadi AH 242 Meyer JP 191 Swart HC 163 Nurick GN 161 Xia X 155 Harley RG 150 Makinde OD 149 Glasser D 143 Hildebrandt D 141 Coville NJ 128 Ramjugernath D 113 Ntwaeaborwa OM 111 Meikap BC 110 Alexander MG (Mark Gavin) 99 Guo B 97 Langdon GS 93 Sigalas I Luyt AS 92 Zilla P 91 Kumar V 85 Nyokong T 84 Focke WW Adali S 82 Sibanda P 81 Mamba BB 77

Dan Stein (524 papers in 143 journals)
More than 40 papers in these 7 journals CNS Spectrums Metabolic Brain Disease Depression and Anxiety Human Psychopharmacology - Clinical and Experimental Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease AIDS Care: Psychological and Socio-Medical Aspects of AIDS/HIV

J van Staden (396 papers in 73 journals)
More than 20 papers in these 6 journals South African Journal of Botany Journal of Ethnopharmacology Plant Cell Tissue and Organ Culture Plant Growth Regulation Natural Product Communications Scientia Horticulturae

Bennie van der Walt (78 papers in 4 journals)

Danie Strauss (137 papers in 25 journals)
Journal for Christian Scholarship / Tydskrif vir Christelike Wetenskap Tydskrif vir Geesteswetenskappe Koers: Bulletin for Christian Scholarship South African Journal of Philosophy 10 or more papers in these four journals

J Neethling (103 papers in 12 journals)

Questionable research practices?
Predatory journals

Predatory journals according to Beall (?)
Asian Journal of Chemistry 63 Canadian Journal of Pure and Applied Sciences 3 European Journal of Science and Theology European Journal of Sustainable Development 2 International Journal of Current Research 5 International Journal of Electrochemical Science 530 International Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences International Journal of Humanities and Social Science 15 Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences 117 OIDA International Journal of Sustainable Development 1 Oncotarget Romanian Biotechnological Letters It is not clear that The Asian Journal of Chemistry is a predatory journal. It appears in TR Web of Science up to 2014 (but not 2015). In our dataset there are 33 papers from 2013 and 14 from 2014 that earned subsidy.

International Journal of Electrochemical Science
Binder Jose writes on January 23, 2014 at 6:22 PM Is “International Journal of Electrochemical Science” really a predatory publication? The ISI impact factor was 3.7 in 2011… Beall responds on January 23, 2014 at 6:33 PM In fact, this page, apps.webofknowledge.com.skyline.ucdenver.edu/JCR/static_html/n otices/notices.htm, shows that this journal has lost its impact factor. The above conversation between Jeffrey Beall and a blog reader took place in It seems that one of the reasons for including the journal on his list was because it was “suppressed by Thomson Reuters in 2012”. But it is now back on WoS (overleaf).

17 papers from UNIVEN UNIVEN 2012
Trade liberalization and climate change The properties of the celestial bodies in Tshivenda culture An exploration into the morphological structure of the names of domestic animals Running before crawlingL The situation of HIV care givers in Thohoyandou, Limpopo Province, South Africa 2014 Active Role of Stakeholders in the Implementation of Comprehensive Rural Development Programme in South Africa The teachings of death as depicted in Tshivenda folklore The prospects and challenges of women in leadership positions: A case study of Thulamela municipality Socialization of the Muvenda girl from infancy to teenage stage Migrants and Asylum seeking children in search of a deffered dream: Can access to education redeem their dreams? A theoretical paeper The integration of intercultural engagement in the internationalisation of higher education: Case of rural-based South African universities. Violent crime and apartheid philosophy: The inextricable twins of social disorder

Bogus “Center” Provides Quick, Easy, and Cheap Publishing
Quick, easy, and cheap scholarly publishing. The Mediterranean Center of Social and Educational Research is a very popular open-access publisher of three broad-scoped and popular journals: Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences Journal of Educational and Social Research Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies Although this publisher gives an address in Rome as its location, and although it might really have a presence there, the publisher is basically an Albanian operation. In fact, in the instructions the publisher gives for wiring the article processing fees, two bank accounts are given. One is a personal bank account in the name of Sokol Pacukaj:

Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences
Institution 2012 2013 2014 CPUT 4 CUT 1 DUT 2 UFH 16 154 UJ 6 UL 17 NMMU NWU 45 UP UNISA 13 81 SU TUT UNIVEN VUT 40 WSU UWC WITS

Questionable research practices?
In-house publishing

The Top South African Journal (1334 articles between 2005 & 2014)
African Journal for Physical Health Education, Recreation and Dance (AJPHERD), continued by the African Journal for Physical Activity and Health Sciences (AJPHES) in 2016

AJPHERD / AJHPES: Publication Trends

Papers in AJPHERD/AJHPES by institution

AJPHERD / AJHPES: % of Papers per university
Fun Fact: The current editorial board consists of members from the following South African universities: UNIVEN, NWU & TUT

AJPHERD/AJHPES: Average number of authors per paper

Top 30 authors who published in AJHPES (2005 – 2014)
Papers Institution Share Cum % Surujlal J 81 VUT 3.0% Dhurup M 61 2.2% 5.2% Toriola AL 56 TUT 2.0% 7.2% Amusa LO 54 UNIVEN 9.2% Shaw BS 38 1.4% 10.6% Maputle MS 37 12.0% MOTHIBA T 36 UL 1.3% 13.3% Kruger PE 35 UP 14.5% Khoza LB 34 1.2% 15.8% Goon DT 28 1.0% 16.8% MONYEKI MA 26 NWU 17.8% Lekhuleni M 25 0.9% 18.7% Lebese RT 19.6% Shaw I 24 20.5% Pienaar AE 21.3% STRYDOM GL 21 0.8% 22.1% 22.9% Edwards SD 20 UZ 0.7% 23.6% 19 UJ 24.3% du Toit PJ 18 25.0% MALEMA R 17 0.6% 25.6% 26.2% Grant CC 26.8% Peltzer K 16 27.4% Tshitangano TG 28.0% Wilders CJ (Cilas) 28.6% 15 0.5% 29.1% Kgole J 29.7% Tugli AK 30.2%

Prof X. published 102 papers in AJHPES over the past 10 years

Conclusions

The perverse consequence of the “Publish or perish” imperative
The enormous pressure to publish and publish fast — preferably in the very best journals — influences both authors and editors. This pressure exists almost everywhere but is particularly intense in Asia (China and India). It is therefore no surprise that the most inventive ways to game the peer-review system to get manuscripts published have come from China and India. The companies that provide fake peer reviews come from countries in Southeast Asia, and most of the authors involved in these cases come from the same areas. But it would be a mistake to look at this as a Chinese or Asian problem. This situation is no less true in South Africa where we have for some time now seen the pervasive (perverse?) effects of the DHET funding system in combination with the NRF rating system. As long as authors are (mostly) rewarded for publishing many articles and editors are (mostly) rewarded for publishing them rapidly, new ways of gaming the traditional publication models will be invented more quickly than new control measures can be put in place.

Thai Researcher Has Hundreds of Publications, Except … Jeffrey Beall
An egotistical Thai researcher claims he has “the most number [sic] of international publications as first author in global [sic] international record.” However, he mostly publishes letters to the editor and one-paragraph editorials, many of them in predatory journals. The man is Viroj Wiwanitkit. He apparently loves predatory journals and serves as editor-in-chief of some and on the editorial boards of many others. He is a visiting professor at China’s Hainan Medical University. He also loves to write short, vacuous pieces in journals — editorials and letters to the editor — to get his publication count up. Then he brags about the number:

A sobering note from Daniel Sarewitz on “Saving science”
Part of the problem surely has to do with the pathologies of the science system itself. Academic science, especially, has become an onanistic enterprise worthy of Swift or Kafka. As a university scientist you are expected to produce a continual stream of startling and newsworthy findings. Here’s how the great biologist E.O. Wilson describes the life of an academic researcher: You will need forty hours a week to perform teaching and administrative duties, another twenty hours on top of that to conduct respectable research, and still another twenty hours to accomplish really important research.... Make an important discovery, and you are a successful scientist in the true, elitist sense in a profession where elitism is practiced without shame.... Fail to discover, and you are little or nothing. The professional incentives for academic scientists to assert their elite status are perverse and crazy, and promotion and tenure decisions focus above all on how many research dollars you bring in, how many articles you get published, and how often those articles are cited in other articles. A survey of more than 1,500 scientists published by Nature in May 2016 shows that 80 percent or more believe that scientific practice is being undermined by such factors as “selective reporting” of data, publication pressure, poor statistical analysis, insufficient attention to replication, and inadequate peer review.

What we have learned so far?
The increase in research outputs since has been spectacular. The per capita output of SA academics has doubled over the past 10 years (as has their production of Masters and Doctoral students). But our analysis (thus far) suggests that this growth has been accompanied with increasing evidence of either a loss of quality and/or increasing incidence of unethical and questionable practices. It seems as if the current quality assurance mechanisms (University research offices/ ASSAf reviews and DHET controls) are not by themselves adequate to identify and respond to these practices. So we do need to relook the current processes and procedures of ensuring that SA journal publications meet acceptable criteria of quality and ethics. We also need to start doing more “education and “training” in basic bibliometrics (understanding the publication and citation behaviour; the dangers of unethical and questionable practices in scientific authorship and especially of predatory publishing) for staff, post-graduate students and of course all research directors and managers in the system. And most importantly of all: we should retain a sense of proportionality about what we do and remind ourselves what is important about doing science!

Thank you

An analysis of SA journals

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "An analysis of SA journals"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

An analysis of SA journals

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "An analysis of SA journals"— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback