Author

  • Ali Shirazi

    • Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Faculty of Economic and Administrative Sciences, Mashhad, Iran
    • Iran, Islamic Republic of

Abstract

The decades leading to the third millennium was marked with concerted efforts by governments to raise their knowledge generation and contribution profile in the community of nations. Thus, all kinds of financial and promotional incentives have been offered to academics and researchers to publish papers in international journals, particularly ISI journals. It is argued that quantity and quality of articles published in ISI journals is an indication of scientific capabilities of a country and a yardstick for assessing its development. This research study aims to identify barriers that academics face in publishing papers in ISI social/humanity science journals. A questionnaire based on extensive literature review and a series of unstructured interviews was developed and tested. A stratified sampling method was used to collect data from academics of four social/humanity science faculties of a provincial university in the northwest of Iran. The findings revealed that respondent’s perceived lack of proficiency in a foreign language, poor information technology infrastructure and inadequate access to international scientific databases and uncontrollable factors related to the nature of social science disciplines and political climate as the major barriers that prevent or de-motivate them to publish in ISI journals. The research findings were discussed and concluded, and recommendations were made to reduce or remove barriers to publishing in ISI journals.

Keywords

References

  • Alpert, D. (1985). Performance and paralysis: The organizational context of the American research university. Journal of Higher Education, 56, 241-281.
  • Baumard, P. (1999). Tacit knowledge in organization . London: Sage.
  • Bayer, A. E. & Smart, J. C. (1991). Career patterns and collaborative styles in American academic science. Journal of Higher Education, 62(6), 615-636.
  • British Government (2004). The scientific impact of nations. Office of Science and Technology (by King, D.), Available at: < http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/.
  • Cameron, B. D. (2005). Trends in the Usage of ISI Bibliometric Data: Uses, Abuses, and Implications. Libraries and the Academy , (5)1, 105-125.
  • Cronin, B. (1984). The citation process: The role and significance of citations in scientific communication. London: Taylor Graham.
  • Coe, R. K., & Weinstock, I. (1984). Evaluating the management journals: A second look. Academy of Management Journal, 27(3), 660-666.
  • Dong, P., Loh, M. & Mondry, A. (2005). The impact factor revisited. Biomedical Digital Libraries , 2(7). Available from: <http: www.bio-diglib.com/content.2/1/7>.
  • Gosden, H. (1992) Research Writing and NNSs: from the Editors. Journal of Second Language Writing, 1(2), 123-139.
  • Global Research Report (2011), Middle East: Exploring the changing landscape of Arabian, Persian and Turkish Research. Thomson Reuters Inc.
  • Dickersin K., Chan S., Chalmers T.C., Sacks H.S. and Smith H. Jr. (1987). Publication bias and clinical trials. Control Clinical Trials . 8(4), 343–353.
  • Drucker, P. F., (1993). Post-Capitalist Society . Harper Collins Publishers, Inc, New York.
  • Edwards, G. (1991) Addictions, personal influences and scientific movements. (Ed.). London: Transaction Publishers.
  • Elkjaer, B. (1999). In search of a social learning theory. In: Organizational learning and the learning organization: Developments in theory and practice. Easterby-Smith M., Araujo, L. & Burgoyne, J. G. (Eds.), London: Sage Publication.
  • Evidence (2009). International comparative performance of UK research base. Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, UK.
  • Friedkin, N. E. (1998). A structural theory of social influence . Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
  • Hofestede, G. (1980). Cultures’ consequences: International differences in work-related values. Sage Publication.
  • Horton, R. (2000). North and South: bridging the information gap. Lancet , 355, 2231–2236.
  • Hunt, J. G. & Blair, J. D. (1987). Content, process, and the Matthew effect among management academics. Journal of Management, 13(2), 191-210.
  • Thompson Reuters, Institute of Scientific Information databases (2000-2010). USA.
  • Javidan, M. & House, R. J. (2001). Cultural acumen for the global manager: Lessons from project GLOBE. Organizational Dynamics , 29(4), 289-305.
  • King, D. (2004). The scientific impact of nations, Nature , 430, 311-316.
  • Kuhnen, F. (1987). The causes of underdevelopment and concepts for development: An introduction to development theories. The Journal of Development Studies , 8, 11-25.
  • Linardi, P. M., Coelho, P. M .Z. & Costa, H. M. A. (1996) The 'impact factor' as a criteria for the quality of scientific production is a relative, not absolute, measure. Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research , 29(5), 555-561.
  • Luthans, F. (1967). Faculty promotions: An analysis of central administrative control. Academy of Management Journal, 10(4), 385-394.
  • Man, J. P., Weinkauf, J. G., Tsang, M. & Sin, D. D. (2004). Why do some countries publish more than others? An international comparison of research funding, proficiency and publication output in highly ranked medical journals. European Journal of Epidemiology , 19(8), 811-817.
  • Mauranen, A. (1993). Cultural differences in academic writing . Berlin: Peter Lang.
  • Montgomery, S. (2004). Of towers, walls, and fields: perspectives on language in science. Science, 303, 1333-1335.
  • Nederhof, A. J. (2006). Bibliometric monitoring of research performance in the Social Sciences and the Humanities: A review. Scientometrics , 66(1), 81-100.
  • Niglro, L. G. (1984). Decision-making in the public sector (Ed.), Marcel Dekker Inc.
  • Nonaka, I. & Takeuchi, H. (1995) The Knowledge Creating Company. New York. Oxford; University Press.
  • O’Donohue, W. & Redding, R. E. (2009). The psychology of political correctness in higher education. In: The politically correct university: problems, scope, and reforms. (Ed. Robert Maranto, Richard E. Redding, Frederick M. Hess.). American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, Washington.
  • Perakakis, P., Yaylor, M. & Mazza, M. G. (2011). Understanding the role of open peer and dynamic academic articles. Socientometrics , 87(2), 1-5.
  • Phillipson, R. (1992). Linguistic Imperialism . Oxford University, UK.
  • Ramlogan, R. & Metcalfe, J. S. (2002). Limits to the economy of knowledge and knowledge of the economy. The University of Manchester, Economic Social Research Council.
  • Reany, P. (1988). What is knowledge? Journal of Natural Philosophy , 2 (March), 7-14.
  • Rumsey-Wairepo, A. (2006). The association between co-authorship network structures and successful academics publishing among higher education scholars. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Brigham Young University.
  • Robbins, A. & Freeman, P. (2007). Author AID: Developmental editing assistance for researchers in developing countries. European Science Editing , 33(1), 9-10.
  • Royal Society (2011). Knowledge, networks and nations . UK.
  • Salager-Meyer, F. (2008). Scientific publishing in developing countries: Challenges for the future. Journal of English for Academic Purposes , 7(2), 121-132.
  • Science-Matrix (2010). 30 Years in Science: Secular movement in knowledge creation .
  • Science Watch (2008). Data and Ranking: Rising stars . Thompson Reuters.
  • SRJ (2009). Country ranking . Spain, Available at: < http://scimagojr.com/countryrank.php? area=0&category=0&region=all&year=2009&order=it&min=0&min_type=it>.
  • Stokes, T. D. & Hartley, J. A. (1989). Co-authorship, social structure and influence within specialties. Social Studies of Science, 19 (1), 101-125.
  • Shakiba, B., Salmasian, H., Yousefi-Nooraie, R. and Rohanizadegan, M. (2008). Factors Influencing Editors’ Decision on Acceptance or Rejection of Manuscripts: The Authors’ Perspective Archives of Iranian Medicine , 11(3), 257-262.
  • Shirazi, A. (2006). The Role of Qualitative Research in Theory-building: Uses and Barriers in Developing Countries. Paper presented at Multidisciplinary Qualitative Research in Developing Countries Conference, University of Karachi, Pakistan, 34-41.
  • Shirazi, A., Mortazavi, S. & Pour Azad, N. (2011). Factors Affecting Employees’ Readiness for Knowledge Management. European Journal of Economics, Finance and Administrative Science , 33, 167-177.
  • Swales, J. (2000). Language for specific purposes. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics , 20, 59-76. US Government (2010). National Science Indicators . Chapter 6.
  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: the development of higher psychological processes . Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Downloads

No downloads have been recorded for this article yet. Figures appear here once readers begin downloading the full text.

How to Cite

Shirazi, A. (2011). Barriers Affecting Contribution of Developing Countries Social Scientists in ISI Indexed Journals. Information Management and Business Review, 3(1), 39-47. https://doi.org/10.22610/imbr.v3i1.915

Share this article

Section

Research Paper

Published

2011-07-15

Submissions

Have research to publish? Information Management and Business Review welcomes submissions.

Make a Submission