Power and publications in Chinese academia

In power-oriented societies, academia may not be immune to the influence of power. This paper studies the power-publication link by applying an event-study strategy to a panel dataset of the publication and biographical information of deans of economics schools in Chinese universities. We find that (i) deanship increases an individual's publication by 0.7 articles per year; (ii) the increased publications stem from work coauthored with other researchers within the same university; (iii) the topics of the increased publications are more likely to deviate from the deans’ research area prior to becoming deans; and (iv) the power effect is smaller for top universities and leading journals, and for scholars with more pre-dean publications. These patterns appear consistent with the role of power in resource allocation rather than the impact of ability or reputation of the deans and thus have implications on distortions in knowledge production.     

The Impact of Non-Serial Publications on Research in Accounting and Finance

This study examines the role of books and official Publications in accounting and finance research. From an analysis of thirteen leading journals for the year 1987–8 we report on the characteristics of such non-serial materials used by authors to support their research. We find that the accounting discipline in particular has become more open to influence from other disciplines. The individual perspectives of these thirteen journals can be partially revealed by their use of non-serial materials. Using cluster analysis we examine inter-journal variations in the disciplinary pattern of book citations and the distribution of citations to official bodies. Several relatively homogeneous groupings are identified.     

摘要撰写“标准”新解与翻译探微

针对国内学术期刊英汉摘要写作和翻译中的不足,对比分析了国际标准（ISO）214—1976（E）和国家标准GB6447—1986中的摘要写作规范。结果发现：两“标准”实质上确认了摘要的文体、语篇和体裁特征;国家标准等效地采用了国际标准,“规则”不同源于英汉民族思维差异。汉译英摘要应参照国际标准规范,符合英文表达习惯、保持中英文摘要的基本一致并要与时俱进。要使摘要起到其应有的作用,从“规则”本身人手是关键。     

Tracing Knowledge Flows in Innovation Systems—an Informetric Perspective on Future Research Science-based Innovation

This paper gives an overview of informetric approaches to studying the science-technology linkage. Informetrics can be understood as the application of mathematical and statistical methods to the information process in science and technology-oriented activities. A number of theoretical contributions over the past few years in the area of innovation studies emphasize the exchange of actors in innovation systems and a shift in the division of labour between publicly funded research and industrial development of technology. Based on a review of informetric literature in the area, the paper derives a typology of three informetric approaches to study the science/technology linkage - namely analyses of patent citations, industrial publications, and university patenting. For each approach, merits and possible disadvantages are discussed. The results from studies of the Finnish innovation system are used to illustrate advantages and disadvantages of the three approaches.     

The Contribution of Non-U.S. Institutions to Academic Accounting Journals

This study uses the weightings of accounting journal quality derived by Howard and Nikolai (HN, 1983) to produce a ranked list of the publishing contribution of the twenty-five top non-U.S. institutions for the ten-year period 1977–86. A data base was created of all the contributions by non-U.S. academics to the ten academic accounting and finance journals ranked highest in the HN study. The results of the analyses of this data base indicate: (a) the contribution of non-U.S. countries to the accounting and finance literature; (b) the proportion of publications accounted for by the top twenty-five non-U.S. institutions; and (c) a ranking of the contributions of the top twenty-five non-U.S. institutions.     

The Pretence of Publishing: A Beneficial Conspiracy for Academics

Abstract

Publishing activity as a measure of academic performance is a fertile research area and, frequently, leads to suggestions as to how such activity can be increased or receive greater recognition. This Commentary argues that the available evidence reveals that the majority of academics do not engage successfully and consistently in publishing. It is in the interests of policy-makers, administrators and academics, however, to maintain the illusion of its importance and prevalence. This serves both to promote the status and rewards of academics and it avoids the necessity of deciding how they should spend their time and how this should be measured and rewarded.     

Stand your ground: The case for publishing in hospitality and tourism journals

The hospitality and tourism field has been struggling for academic legitimacy since its founding. Despite the impressive growth of research in the field, as well as the publication of a respectable number of high-quality scientific journals, voices are being heard from the community of hospitality and tourism researchers calling for more focused efforts on publication in journals of more established and traditional disciplines. It is argued here that this demand may have negative implications for research in the field, on the contribution of academia to the industry, and on the advancement of the career of hospitality and tourism scholars. The scientific community should reverse this trend and instead concentrate its efforts on developing the field by promoting publishing in hospitality and tourism journals in order to promote relevant, up-to-date, and innovative research for the benefit of science and industry.     

Development of 5G – Identifying organizations active in publishing,patenting, and standardization

Publications, patents, standard-essential patents (SEPs), and standard contributions are important indicators for the drivers in the technology development of 5G. However, current 5G technology reports predominately draw on patent data to identify technology developing organizations, ignoring the importance of publications and standard contributions. Therefore, we identify 5G technology developing organizations in publishing, patenting, and standardization and compile a unique dataset to identify leading organizations per category and to identify possible correlations and interdependencies. We find that for companies offering fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) licensing conditions related to standard-essential patents, their publication, patent, and standard contribution counts highly correlate. Our findings suggest that 5G technology developing companies holding a high number of patents declared to 5G manage the three contributing factors of publishing, patenting, and standardization to optimize their impact on 5G technology development. Furthermore, we show that patenting and standardization are dominated by a few large companies from the United States, China, Korea, Japan, Finland, and Sweden, while publishing is much more globally distributed and not as concentrated. Our research suggests that scientific findings can be more easily published via scientific journals and that barriers might hinder filing patents and participating in standardization committees focusing on 5G, which only large companies overcome.