A resource- and impact-based micro-level conceptualization of collaborative academic work,Academic stratospheres-cum-underworlds: when highs and lows of publication cultures meet,Guest editorial: the reward system of science,Hobson’s choice: the effects of research evaluation on academics’ writing practices in England,Incorporating data sharing to the reward system of science: linking DataCite records to authors in the Web of Science,Making visible the invisible through the analysis of acknowledgements in the humanities,On the quest for currencies of science: field “exchange rates” for citations and Mendeley readership,Publish or impoverish: an investigation of the monetary reward system of science in China (1999-2016),Recognition and reward in the academy: valuing publication oeuvres in biomedicine, economics and history,The many hands of science: commonalities and differences in the research contributions of authors and subauthors,Why do you publish? On the tensions between generating scientific knowledge and publication pressure
The guest editorial team for this ebook unites two important poles in the study of scholarly communication and research evaluation, the Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS), Leiden University (The Netherlands), and the Canada Research Chair on the Transformations of Scholarly Communication, University of Montreal (Canada). We are researchers at various points of our careers; we further stem from various disciplinary backgrounds, including anthropology, library and information science, literature, science and technology studies, sociology, and theatre, and each bring our own perspective to the special issue. With this ebook, we wished to bring together some of the concerns that seem to be of particular interest to academics today in navigating the turbulent seas of the reward system of science in their own discipline and at each stage of their own career. We received 22 manuscripts and ten papers were accepted for publication following a peer review process performed by 32 external reviewers, for a final acceptance rate of 45 percent.