| Title |
The Ethical and Academic Implications of the Jeffrey Beall (www.scholarlyoa.com) Blog Shutdown
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Science and Engineering Ethics, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s11948-017-9905-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva |
| Abstract |
A very important event took place on January 15, 2017. On that day, the Jeffrey Beall blog ( www.scholarlyoa.com ) was silently, and suddenly, shut down by Beall himself. A profoundly divisive and controversial site, the Beall blog represented an existential threat to those journals and publishers that were listed there. On the other hand, the Beall blog was a ray of hope to critics of bad publishing practices that a culture of public shaming was perhaps the only way to rout out those journals-and their editors-and publishers who did not respect basic publishing ethical principles and intrinsic academic values. While members of the former group vilified Beall and his blog, members of the latter camp tried to elevate it to the level of policy. Split by extreme polar forces, for reasons still unknown to the public, Beall deliberately shut down his blog, causing some academic chaos among global scholars, including to the open access movement. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 17% |
| Italy | 1 | 8% |
| Japan | 1 | 8% |
| Austria | 1 | 8% |
| Myanmar | 1 | 8% |
| Unknown | 6 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 7 | 58% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 17% |
| Scientists | 2 | 17% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 8% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 26 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Professor | 3 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 11% |
| Other | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 7% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 8 | 30% |
| Unknown | 7 | 26% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 4 | 15% |
| Computer Science | 3 | 11% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 11% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 7% |
| Philosophy | 2 | 7% |
| Other | 5 | 19% |
| Unknown | 8 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 September 2017.
All research outputs
#2,533,221
of 25,432,721 outputs
Outputs from Science and Engineering Ethics
#205
of 966 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,108
of 324,673 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science and Engineering Ethics
#9
of 27 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,432,721 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 966 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 324,673 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 27 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.