During promotion reviews of university researches I have seen statements minimizing open access publications as a sign of research productivity and therefore negatively impacting candidates chance for promotion. There is a generation gap, as younger scientists see open access as a normal venue to share their research results, but senior scientists (who are in charge of younger scientist's reviews) consider open access as new publications with unknown impact and questionable rigor. I am curious to see what others have experienced and if "younger" scientists are aware of this intriguing open access phase.
It depends whether the university is mainly research- or teaching-oriented. For research-oriented universities, getting research grants is very important. To get such grants, it is usually required to publish in journals indexed by the Web of Science, and if you wish to get employed in such a university, you also have to publish in such journals as then you can apply for grants. Lots of new open-access journals are not indexed. Thus, publishing there will not help you to get employed by a research-oriented university (especially if you wish to get a more senior position, not a Post-Doc position).
It depends whether the university is mainly research- or teaching-oriented. For research-oriented universities, getting research grants is very important. To get such grants, it is usually required to publish in journals indexed by the Web of Science, and if you wish to get employed in such a university, you also have to publish in such journals as then you can apply for grants. Lots of new open-access journals are not indexed. Thus, publishing there will not help you to get employed by a research-oriented university (especially if you wish to get a more senior position, not a Post-Doc position).
But new open-access or other journals obviously may become indexed.
My institution has not somewhere stated in a written way its policy about what exactly is considered to be a publication, so I really don't know.
In my university, the highest points are given to ISI articles and the points depends on the IF.
Consideration of articles in open access journals depends on where the journals are indexed. The points given to these articles are much lower.
Dear Miquel,
What you explained is roughly practiced in our university. One thing for sure is when we ask for grant (fund) in a new research proposal. It is mandatory or researcher obligations to publish the results as papers in WOS journal. The number of papers required is based on the fund we get. Neither OA nor other non indexed journals can fulfill the requirement to get final approval of the project (after it is finished). Of course, We can produce those papers after finishing the project.
Also, publishing in OA and other journals (with no IF) have adverse effects and reactions in getting promotion, recruitment, etc and would jeopardize the applicant, too.
Publishing research papers in open access, peer-reviewed, or in IF journal according to me should not be an issue why, because a researcher carry out his research and publish it so that it would help others to understand the objective behind his/her research and make full use of it. Also when we submit the papers in open access it does not mean it wouldn't be getting an IF or people will not entertain you, according to me the quality of knowledge and skills is what matters. This is what i think.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Publications