De publicar para vivir a publicar para no morir. Fundamentos y praxis de las publicaciones científicas. / From Publish to Live to Publish for not Perish. Foundations and Praxis of the Scientific Papers.
Resumen
RESUMEN
A partir de un análisis histórico, así como de los hechos y consecuencias, científicas, económicas, sociales y políticas, de las publicaciones científicas, se efectúa una revisión crítica y actualizada del tema, desde una perspectiva investigativa. Se da cuenta de los cambios en la comunicación de la Ciencia. El análisis histórico revela que la valoración del conocimiento científico, no se originó por razones mercantiles, sino que responde a la evolución política y económica de la sociedad. La situación actual de las publicaciones científicas revela su enorme aporte al conocimiento y desarrollo humano, pero también inequidades, conflictos sociales, económicos y éticos.
ABSTRACT
From an historical analysis as well as considering the scientific, economical, social and political facts and consequences of scientific publications, a critical and updated review of scientific journals is made using a research perspective. It realizes the changes in the communication of Science, especially through twenty centuries. The historical analysis reveals that valuation of scientific knowledge, did not originate for commercial reasons, but responds to the political and economic evolution of society. The current situation of scientific publications reveals its enormous contribution to both knowledge and human development, but also inequities, social, economic and ethical conflicts.
Citas
Albornoz, M., Barrere, R. & Sakil J. (2017). Las universidades lideran I+D en América Latina. El estado de la Ciencia 2017. Red de Indicadores de Ciencia y Tecnología (RICYT) http://ricyt.org
Baker, M. (2016). 1,500 scientists lift the lid on reproducibility, Nature News, 533, pp. 452-454.
Banks, D. (2009). Starting science in the vernacular. Notes on some early issues of the Philosophical Transactions and the Journal des
Sçavans, 1665-1700, ASp. la revue du GERAS, nº. 55, pp. 5-22.
Bell, D. (1976). El advenimiento de la sociedad postindustrial. Alianza Universidad Madrid, Madrid.
Beall, J. (2013). Predatory publishing is just one of the consecuences of gold open access”, Learned Publishing, nº. 26, pp. 79-84.
Bennett, J, Cooper, M, Hunter, M, & Jardine, L (2003). London's Leonardo: the life and work of Robert Hooke. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Bensman, S. J. (2001). Urquhart's and Garfield's laws: The british controversy over their validity, Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, nº. 52 pp. 714-724.
Bernal, J. D. (1939). The social function of Science. George Routledge and Sons Ltd., London.
Bernal, J. D. (1948). Provisional scheme for central distribution of scientific publications, in: The Royal Society Scientific Information Conference, 21 June–2 July 1948: Report and Papers Submitted, pp. 253–258.
Borman, L, & Mutz, R. (2015). Growth rates in modern science: a bibliometric analysis based in the number of publication and cited references, Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, nº. 66, pp. 2215-2223.
Borrego, A. (2017). La revista Científica: un breve recorrido histórico. Revistas Científicas. Situación Actual y Desafíos Futuros, Abadal, E. (ed). Ediciones de la Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona.
Bradford, S. (1934). Sources of information on specific subject, Engineering: An Illustrated Weekly Journal, London, nº. 137, pp. 85-86.
Cassirer, E. (1943). Newton and Leibniz, The Philosophical Review, nº. 52, pp. 366-391.
Cordeiro, Y & Lima, L. (2017). Publish or perish in the hands of predatory journals, Anais da Academica Brasileira de Ciencias, nº. 89, pp. 787-788.
Davies, B. & Felappi, G. (2017). Publish or perish, Metaphilosofy, nº. 48, pp. 0620-1068.
Drucker, P. (1959). Landwark of tomorrow. Harper, New York.
East, H. (1998). Professor Bernal’s “insidious and cavalier proposals”: The Royal Society Scientific Information Conference, 1948, Journal of Documentation, nº .54, pp. 293–302.
Fyfe, A. (2015). Peer review: not as old as you might think, Times Higher Education, nº. 25. Ver en: https://www.timeshighereducation.com/features/peer-review-not-old-you-might-think (revisado 27-03-2018)
Frank, E. (2017). Publish or perish: the moral imperative of journal, Canadian Medical Association Journal, nº. 188, pp. 675.
Garfield, E. (1955). Citation indexes for Science. A new dimension in documentation through association of ideas, Science, nº. 122, pp. 108-111
Garfield, E. (1971). The mystery of the transposed journal lists—wherein Bradford’s Law of Scattering is generalized according to Garfield’s Law of Concentration, Current Contents, nº. 3, pp. 5– 6
Garfield, E. (1972). Citation analysis as a tool in journal evaluation, Science, nº. 178, pp. 471– 479
Garfield, E. (1975). Journal Citation Reports. A Bibliometric analysis of references pocessed for the 1974. Science Citation Index. Institute for Scientific Information Press, Philadelphia.
Garfield, E. (1980). Is information retrieval in the arts and humanities inherently different from that in science? The effect that ISI®'s citation index for the arts and humanities is expected to have on future scholarship. The Library Quarterly, nº. 50: pp. 40-57.
Gibbs (1995). Lost science in the third world, Scientific American, pp. 92-99.
Guédon, J. C. (2001). In Oldenburg's long shadow: librarians, research scientists, publishers, and the control of scientific publishing. Association of research libraries, Washington, D. C.
Henry, J. (2008). The scientific revolution and the origins of modern science. Palgrave Macmillan.
Koyré, A. (1952). An Unpublished Letter of Robert Hooke to Isaac Newton, Isis nº. 43, pp. 312-337.
Lane, J, & Bertuzz, L. (2011). Measuring the results of Science investments, Science, nº. 331, pp. 678-680.
Lane, J, Owen-Smith, R, Rosen, & Weinberq, B. (2015). New linked data on research investments scientific workforce, productivity and public value, Research Police, nº. 44, pp. 1659-1671.
Li, K, Rollins J, & Yan, E. (2018). Web of Science use in published research and review papers 1997-2017: a selective, dynamics, cross-domain, content-based analysis, Scientometrics, nº. 115, pp. 1-20.
López, D, Rojas, López, B, & López, D. C. (2015). Chilean universities and institutional quality assurance processes, Quality Assurance in Education, nº. 23, pp. 166-183.
López, D, & Sánchez, X. (2015). Desarrollo de Ciencias y Tecnologías en Chile. Avances, desigualdades y principales desafíos, en:
Lago, S & Correa, N. (coords). Desafíos y dilemas de la Universidad y la Ciencia en América Latina y el Caribe en el siglo XXI. CUCSH/ALAS/UBA Sociales. Editorial Teseo, Buenos Aires.
Maor, E. (2006). E: historia de un número. Instituto Nacional de Antropología e Historia, México D. F.
Manning, K. (2013). Organizational theory in Higher Education. Routledge, N. York. London.
Mccornick, A (2013). Classifying Higher Education institutions: Lessons from the Carnegie classification. Pensamiento Educativo, Revista de Investigación Educacional Latinoamericana, nº. 50, pp. 65-75.
Muñoz, J, López, D, & Rivas, M. (en prensa). Las publicaciones científicas. Guía de sobrevivencia académica. Ril Editores, Valparaíso.
Navas, M. (2017). La situación de las revistas a nivel internacional, en: Abadal, E. (ed). Revistas científicas. Situación actual y retos de
futuro: pp. 35-51. Universidad de Barcelona, Barcelona.
Parks, R. P. (2002). The Faustian grip of academic publishing, Journal of Economic Methodology, nº. 9, pp. 317-335.
Price, D. (1973). Hacia una Ciencia de la Ciencia. Arial, Barcelona.
Reller (2016). Elsevier publishing – a look at the numbers, and more. Ver en https://www.elsevier.com/connect/elsevier-publishing-a-look-at-the-numbers-and-more (revisado 27-03-2018)
RICYT (2016). El estado de la ciencia. Red de Indicadores de Ciencia y Tecnología (RICYT). http://www.ricyt.org (revisado 27-03-2018)
RICYT (2017). El estado de la ciencia. Red de Indicadores de Ciencia y Tecnología (RICYT). http://www.ricyt.org (revisado 27-03-2018)
Schiermeier, Q. (2018). Germany vs Elsevier: universities win temporary journal access after refusing to pay fees, Nature, nº. 553, p. 137.
Smaldino, P, & Mcelreath, R. (2016). The natural selection of bad science, Royal Society Open Science, p. 10384.
Spier, R. (2002). The history of the peer-review process, Trends in Biotechnology, nº. 20, pp. 357-358
Soh, K. (2017). The seven dealy sins of world university ranking: a summary from several papers. Journal of Higher Education. Policy and Management, nº. 39, pp. 104-115
Takaiya, T. (1995). Historia del futuro. La sociedad del conocimiento. Editorial A. Bello. Santiago.
Tijdink, J. (2017). Publish or perish. Research on research and researchers. Tijdschrifwoor Psychiatrice, nº. 59, pp. 406-413.
UNESCO (2015). Unesco Science Report: towards 2030. Unesco Publishing. France.
Van Noorden, R. (2015). Seven thousand stories capture impact of Science. Nature, nº. 518, p.150.
Ware, M, & Mabe, M. (2015). The STM report: and scholarly journal publishing: celebrating the 350th anniversary of journal publishing 4° ed. The Hague: International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers.
Yan, E, Wu, C, & Song, M. (2018). The funding factor: a cross-disciplinary examination of the association between research funding and citation impact, Scientometric, 115, pp. 369-384.
Wang, X, Liu, D, Ding, K, & Wang, X. (2011). Science funding and research output: a study of 10 countries,
Scientometrics, nº 91, pp. 591-599.
