This paper investigates the amount of academic service performed by female versus male faculty. We use 2014 data from a large national survey of faculty at more than 140 institutions as well as 2012...

Articles on gender bias are funded less often and published in journals with a lower Impact Factor than articles on comparable instances of social discrimination.

The present paper takes its place in the stream of studies that analyze the effect of interdisciplinarity on the impact of research output. Unlike previous studies, in this study the...

The influence of discourses of internationalisation and excellence on formal and applied selection criteria in academia.

This research article describes a procedure to generate a snapshot of the structure of a specific scientific community and their outputs based on the information available in Google Scholar Citations (GSC)....

Paper advising universities to provide early-career researchers with temporal space for research and networking, facilitate stays at other universities, inform them about career success factors, and tailor faculty development programmes to the distinct stages of academic careers.

Article exploring the journal peer review process, examining how the reviewing process might itself contribute to papers, leading them to be more highly cited and to achieve greater recognition.

The infrastructure school, the public school, the measurement school, the democratic school, and the pragmatic school.

A clear citation advantage for open publishing with open available documents receiving twice as many citations.

How does open access affect the usage of scholarly books? A white paper by Springer Nature.

A paper evaluating the possibility of using Google Scholar (GS) institutional level data to evaluate university research in a relatively automatic way.

The academic social network site ResearchGate (RG) has its own indicator, RG Score, for its members. The high profile nature of the site means that the RG Score may be used for recruitment, promotion

The time that you’re absolutely sick of saying it is about the time that your target audience has heard it for the first time.

An analysis of data from 3500 review experiences submitted by authors to the SciRev.sc website.

Prior co-authorship relations have a large and significant influence on manuscript handling times, speeding up the editorial decision on average by 19 days.

The different options to achieve open access, whether by journals changing their revenue structures from subscription to publishing charges, or authors utilizing a number of options for posting open access versions of article manuscripts in repositories.

It is hard to see why some papers published in relatively obscure journals are highly cited, whilst others in more accessible outlets virtually ignored.

Research performance of all Italian professors in the sciences over three consecutive four-year periods.

A word frequency analysis of 874,411 English article titles to assess the likelihood that research on obscure (rarely researched) topics is less cited.

A collection of case studies on various aspects of interdisciplinarity in science.

This paper presents a novel model of science funding that exploits the wisdom of the scientific crowd. Each researcher receives an equal, unconditional part of all available science funding on a yearly basis, but is required to individually donate to other scientists a given fraction of all they receive. Science funding thus moves from one scientist to the next in such a way that scientists who receive many donations must also redistribute the most. As the funding circulates through the scientific community it is mathematically expected to converge on a funding distribution favored by the entire scientific community. This is achieved without any proposal submissions or reviews.

Peer review is widely viewed as an essential step for ensuring scientific quality of a work and is a cornerstone of scholarly publishing. In this work we investigate the feasibility of a tool capable of generating fake reviews for a given scientific paper automatically.

It is clear that the journal impact factor is not effective in predicting future citations of successful authors.