OOIR: Observatory of International Research

Papers

(The TQCC of Learned Publishing is 4. The table below lists those papers that are above that threshold based on CrossRef citation counts [max. 250 papers]. The publications cover those that have been published in the past four years, i.e., from 2020-03-01 to 2024-03-01.)

Article	Citations
Problematizing ‘predatory publishing’: A systematic review of factors shaping publishing motives, decisions, and experiences	48
Global academic response to COVID‐19: Cross‐sectional study	29
Transformative agreements: Do they pave the way to open access?	28
Beall's legacy in the battle against predatory publishers	27
Is rapid scientific publication also high quality? Bibliometric analysis of highly disseminated COVID‐19 research papers	24
Consumer community cognition, brand loyalty, and behaviour intentions within online publishing communities: An empirical study of Epubit in China	22
Fortification of retraction notices to improve their transparency and usefulness	21
Research on Industry 4.0 and on key related technologies in Vietnam: A bibliometric analysis using Scopus	21
Evolution of scientific collaboration on COVID‐19: A bibliometric analysis	17
National comparisons of early career researchers' scholarly communication attitudes and behaviours	16
Sharing research with academia and beyond: Insights from early career researchers in Australia and Japan	15
Promoting science with linguistic devices: A large‐scale study of positive and negative words in academic writing	14
The Chinese scientific publication system: Specific features, specific challenges	14
The prevalence and impact of special issues in communications journals 2015–2019	14
Over‐promotion and caution in abstracts of preprints during the COVID‐19 crisis	13
Purposes of peer review: A qualitative study of stakeholder expectations and perceptions	13
Predatory journals and publishers: Characteristics and impact of academic spam to researchers in educational sciences	13
An analysis of revising article processing charges for open access journals between 2018 and 2020	12
Chinese researchers' perceptions and use of open access journals: Results of an online questionnaire survey	12
Overburdening of peer reviewers: A multi‐stakeholder perspective on causes and effects	12
Analysis of publications by authors of Ukrainian institutes in Scopus‐delisted titles	12
Standardizing terminology for text recycling in research writing	12
Improving peer‐review by developing reviewers' feedback literacy	11
Fear of the academic fake? Journal editorials and the amplification of the 'predatory publishing' discourse	11
Journal hijacking: Challenges and potential solutions	11

The motivations and criteria behind China's list of questionable journals	11
Thousands of Australian academics on the editorial boards of journals run by predatory publishers	11
Token‐curated registry in a scholarly journal: Can blockchain support journal communities?	10
Human‐ and AI‐based authorship: Principles and ethics	10
Publishing during pandemic: Innovation, collaboration, and change	10
Knowledge production on predatory publishing: A systematic review	10
Article processing charge expenditure in Chile: The current situation	10
Evaluation of untrustworthy journals: Transition from formal criteria to a complex view	10
Journal self‐citation trends in 1975–2017 and the effect on journal impact and article citations	9
Non‐author entities accountable for retractions: A diachronic and cross‐disciplinary exploration of reasons for retraction	9
Editors publishing in their own journals: A systematic review of prevalence and a discussion of normative aspects	9
Perspectives on institutional valuing and support for academic and translational outputs in Japan and Australia	9
Scholarly journal publishing standards, policies and guidelines	8
Factors influencing the choice of a publication venue in library and information science	8
Why we should have listened to Jeffrey Beall from the start	8
Adopting open access in an emerging country: Is gender inequality a barrier in humanities and social sciences?	8
The relationship and incidence of three editorial notices in PubPeer: Errata, expressions of concern, and retractions	8
Titles in research articles: Changes across time and discipline	7
Publication practices during the COVID‐19 pandemic: Expedited publishing or simply an early bird effect?	7
Publication and collaboration anomalies in academic papers originating from a paper mill: Evidence from a Russia‐based paper mill	7
Attitudes, willingness, and resources to cover article publishing charges: The influence of age, position, income level country, discipline and open access habits	7
University presses and the impact of COVID‐19	7
Home country bias in academic publishing: A case study of the New England Journal of Medicine	7
Journals in Beall's list perform as a group less well than other open access journals indexed in Scopus but reveal large differences among publishers	7
Journal editors and journal indexes: Internationalization pressures in the semi‐periphery of the world of science	7
Factors impacting international‐indexed publishing among Vietnamese educational researchers	7
Choosing the ‘right’ journal for publication: Perceptions and practices of pandemic‐era early career researchers	7
Questionnaires mentioned in academic research 1996–2019: Rapid increase but declining citation impact	7
Implementing an Open & FAIR data sharing policy—A case study in the earth and environmental sciences	6
The impact of COVID‐19 on the UK publishing industry: Findings and opportunity	6
Authors publishing repeatedly in predatory journals: An analysis of Scopus articles	6
Philosophers' perceptions of pay to publish and open access in Spain: Books versus journals, more than a financial dilemma	6
Plain language summaries: Enabling increased diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility in scholarly publishing	6
Perceptions on the prevalence and impact of predatory academic journals and conferences: A global survey of researchers	6
Where predatory and mainstream journals differ: A study of language and linguistics journals	6
COVID‐19 Rapid Review cross‐publisher initiative: What we have learned and what we are going to do next	6
Why do journals discontinue? A study of Australian ceased journals	6
Politics matters: The power dynamics behind Chinese English‐language humanities and social science journals	6
Scientific publishing sanctions in response to the Russo‐Ukrainian war	6
Is the quality of reviews reflected in editors' and authors' satisfaction with peer review? A cross‐sectional study in 12 journals across four research fields	6
Expanding Nature: Product line and brand extensions of a scientific journal	5
An analysis of journalism articles achieving high Altmetric attention scores	5
The AMSTAR‐2 critical appraisal tool and editorial decision‐making for systematic reviews: Retrospective, bibliometric study	5
How often are basic details of the research process mentioned in social science research papers?	5
The future of scientific journals: The rise of UniAI	5
Authors' choice between parent and mirror journals of Elsevier	5
Evaluating equity in scholarly publishing	5
Analysing the research performance of province‐level administrative regions in China	4
Publons as a source of high volume, poorly targeted reviewer requests: The need for better standards of practice by publishers	4
Dissimulate or disseminate? A survey on the fate of negative results	4

Do graphical abstracts on a publisher's official website have an effect on articles' usage and citations? A propensity score matching analysis	4
How to improve scientific peer review: Four schools of thought	4
‘Cracks’ in the scholarly communications system: Insights from a longitudinal international study of early career researchers	4
Evolution and adoption of contributor role ontologies and taxonomies	4
Objectivity of the peer‐review process: Enduring myth, reality, and possible remedies	4
Scholarly journal publishing in Australia	4
Beyond data: Sharing related research outputs to make data reusable	4