Representações sobre o acesso aberto como ressonâncias de posicionalidades de publicação em diferentes identidades acadêmicas em Portugal
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/18070337-133020Palavras-chave:
acesso aberto, campos científicos, identidades acadêmicas, posicionalidades de publicação, Brasil e PortugalResumo
O modelo de Acesso Aberto (AA) vem ganhando força na gestão científica, apoiado por um entusiasmo compartilhado por decisores políticos que o posicionam como uma espécie de panaceia para os problemas do conhecimento científico por meio da ressignificação da produção científica. Dentro dessa esfera de produção científica – que constitui os componentes salientes da atividade acadêmica e faz parte de um conjunto mais amplo de normas epistemológicas, práticas e estratégias de criação que diferenciam cada identidade acadêmica na arena de luta pelo monopólio da competência científica – o AA surge como uma contribuição original para testar posicionalidades editoriais em diferentes identidades acadêmicas. Para esse propósito, com base nos dados coletados em uma pesquisa com 1172 acadêmicos de 124 unidades de pesquisa em Portugal, foi possível identificar três perfis representativos de diferentes posicionalidades de identidades acadêmicas em relação ao AA. Dentro de um primeiro perfil, compreendendo as humanidades, o AA se beneficia de maior reputação e relevância. Um perfil contrastante, compreendendo as ciências exatas, representa a identidade acadêmica que mais negligencia o AA. Um perfil intermediário, compreendendo as ciências naturais, ciências médicas e ciências agrícolas, bem como engenharia e tecnologia, considera o AA como de importância moderada. No entanto, esse perfil – como as ciências exatas e diferentemente das humanidades – ainda prefere publicar em periódicos fechados ou híbridos Quartil 1 para atender às demandas de um mercado de significância científica focado em métricas normalizadas (quartil) e não normalizadas (fator de impacto).
Downloads
Referências
ABBOTT, Andrew. Career stage and publication in American academia. Sociologia, Problemas e Práticas, n. 90, p. 9-30, 2019. https://doi.org/10.7458/spp20199014297
ABBOTT, Andrew. Chaos of disciplines. Chicago: Chicago University Press, 2001.
ANTELMAN, Kristin. Do open-access articles have a greater research impact? College & Research Libraries, n. 65, p. 372-382, 2004. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.65.5.372
BEALL, Jeffrey. Predatory journals and the breakdown of research cultures. Information Development, v. 31, n. 5, p. 473-476, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266666915601421
BEALL, Jeffrey. Dangerous predatory publishers threaten medical research. Journal of Korean Medical Science, v. 31, n. 10, p. 1511-1513, 2013a. https://doi.org/10.3346/jkms.2016.31.10.1511
BEALL, Jeffrey. The open-access movement is not really about open access. TripleC, v. 11, n. 2, p. 589-597, 2013b. https://doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v11i2.525
BECHER, Tony. Academic tribes and territories. London: The Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press, 1989.
BECHER, Tony. Towards a definition of disciplinary cultures. Studies in Higher Education, v. 6, n. 2, p. 109-122, 1981. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075078112331379362
BLOOR, David. Knowledge and social imagery. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1991/1976.
BLOOR, David. Wittgenstein and Mannheim on the sociology of mathematics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, v. 4, n. 2, p. 173-191, 1973. https://doi.org/10.1016/0039-3681(73)90003-4
BOURDIEU, Pierre. Homo academicus. Paris: Editions de Minuit, 1984.
BOURDIEU, Pierre. Le champ scientifique. Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales, v. 2/3, p. 88-104, 1983.
CLARK, Burton R. The academic life. Princeton: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 1987.
COLLINS, Harry. Changing order: Replication and induction in scientific practice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992/1985.
COLLINS, Heidi; MCNULTY, Yvonne. Insider status: (Re)framing researcher positionality in international human resource management studies. German Journal of Human Resource Management, v. 34, n. 2, p. 202-227, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1177/2397002220908425
COOMBS, Robert H. Karl Mannheim, epistemology and the sociology of knowledge. The Sociological Quarterly, v. 7, n. 2, p. 229-233, 1966.
DEMETER, Marton; JELE, Agnes; MAJOR, Zsolt B. The international development of open access publishing: A comparative empirical analysis over seven world regions and nine academic disciplines. Publishing Research Quarterly, v. 37, p. 364-383, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-021-09814-9
EGER, Thomas; MERTENS, Armin; SCHEUFEN, Marc. Publication cultures and the citation impact of open access. Managerial and Decision Economics, v. 42, n. 8, p. 1980-1998, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1002/mde.3429
ELCHARDUS, Mark; SPRUYT, Bram. The culture of academic disciplines and the sociopolitical attitudes of students: A test of selection and socialization effects. Social Science Quarterly, v. 90, n. 2, p. 446-460, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6237.2009.00626.x
EUROPEAN COMMISSION – EU. Open access. Research and innovation, 2020. https://research-and-innovation.ec.europa.eu/strategy/strategy-2020-2024/our-digital-future/open-science/open-access_en
FIRMINO, Teresa. Mais de 60% dos centros de investigação são excelentes e muito bons. Público, 25 jun. 2019. https://www.publico.pt/2019/06/25/ciencia/noticia/60-centros-investigacao-sao-excelentes-bons-1877511
GARFIELD, Eugene. The history and meaning of the journal impact factor. JAMA, v. 295, n. 1, p. 9093, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.295.1.90
GARFIELD, Eugene. Citation indexes for science: A new dimension in documentation through association of ideas. Science, v. 122, n. 3159, p. 108-111, 1955. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.122.3159.108
GROSS, Paul R.; LEVITT, Norman; LEWIS, Martin W. The flight from science and reason. New York: New York Academy of Sciences, 1997.
HAKALA, Johanna; YLIJOKI, Oili-Helena. Research for whom? Research orientations in three academic cultures. Organization, v. 8, n. 2, p. 373-380, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508401082021
HAMMETT, Daniel. Tales from the road: Reflections on power and disciplining within the academy. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, v. 44, n. 2, p. 445-457, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1068/a44326
HENKEL, Mary. Academic identity and autonomy in a changing policy environment. High Education, v. 49, p. 155-176, 2005. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-004-2919-1
HENKEL, Mary. Academic identities and policy change in higher education. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers, 2000.
JACOB, Merle. The commodification of academic research: Science and the modern university. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, v. 25, n. 4, p. 423-426, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1080/02698595.2011.623373
KAISER, David. A Mannheim for all seasons: Bloor, Merton, and the roots of the sociology of scientific knowledge. Science in Context, v. 11, n. 1, p. 51-87, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1017/S026988970000291X
KURT, Serhat. Why do authors publish in predatory journals? Learned Publishing, v. 31, n. 2, p. 141-147, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1150
LATOUR, Bruno. Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1987.
LATOUR, Bruno; WOOLGAR, Steve. Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1987.
MANNHEIM, Karl. Ideology and utopia. London: Routledge, 1991.
MARTÍN-MARTÍN, Alberto; ORDUNA-MALEA, Enrique; DELGADO LÓPEZ-CÓZAR, Emilio. Coverage of highly-cited documents in Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: A multidisciplinary comparison. Scientometrics, v. 116, p. 2175-2188, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2820-9
MCCABE, Mark J.; SNYDER, Christopher. Does online availability increase citations? Theory and evidence from a panel of economics and business journals. Review of Economics and Statistics, v. 97, p. 144-165, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1162/REST_a_00437
MERMIN, David N. Science wars revisited. Nature, v. 454, p. 276-277, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1038/454276a
MERTON, Robert. Sociology of science and sociology as science. New York: Columbia University Press, 2010.
MERTON, Robert. Sociology of science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1973.
MIROWSKI, Philip. The future(s) of open science. Social Studies of Science, v. 48, n. 2, p. 171-203, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312718772086
MOLLO, Monica. Academic cultures: Psychology of education perspective. Human Arenas, online first, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42087-021-00238-7
NWAGWU, Williams E. Counterpoints about predatory open access and knowledge publishing in Africa. Learned Publishing, v. 28, n. 2, p. 114-122, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1087/20150205
PINCH, Trevor. Scientific Controversies. In: WRIGHT, J. D. (ed.). International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. Berlin: Springer, 2015. p. 281-286.
SEVERIN, Anna; EGGER, Matthias; EVE, Martin Paul; HÜRLIMANN, Daniel. Discipline-specific open access publishing practices and barriers to change: an evidence-based review. F1000Res, v. 11, n. 7, p. 1925, 2018. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.17328.2
SHAPIN, Steven. Here and everywhere: Sociology of scientific knowledge. Annual Review of Sociology, v. 21, p. 289-321, 1995.
SOKAL, Alan. Transgressing the boundaries: Towards a transformative hermeneutics of quantum gravity. Social Text, v. 46/47, p. 217-252, 1996a.
SOKAL, Alan. A physicist experiments with cultural studies. Lingua Franca, p. 62-64, 5 jun. 1996b.
SUKOVIC, Suzana. Transliterate cultures. In: SUKOVIC, S. (ed.). Transliteracy in complex information environments. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2017. p. 119-150.
TAYLOR, Edward W. Adult education quarterly from 1989 to 1999: A content analysis of all submissions. Adult Education Quarterly, v. 51, n. 5, p. 322-340, 2001
VETTER, Tim; SCHEMMANN, Michael. On the dark side of open access and new expectations of scientific productivity in adult education research. Zeitschrift für Weiterbildungsforschung, v. 44, p. 75-95, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40955-021-00182-7
WOHLRABE, Klaus; BIRKMEIER, Daniel. Do open access articles in economics have a citation advantage? Munich: University Library of Munich, 2014.
YLIJOKI, Oili-Helena. Disciplinary cultures and the moral order of studying: A case-study of four Finnish university departments. Higher Education, v. 39, p. 339-362, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003920230873
ZHU, Yimei. Who support open access publishing? Gender, discipline, seniority and other factors associated with academics’ OA practice. Scientometrics, v. 111, n. 2, p. 557-579, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2316-z
ŽIVKOVIĆ, Marko. Academic disciplines as transcultural heritage: In defence of culture as cultivation. In: NIGLIO, O. et al. (ed.). Transcultural diplomacy and international law in heritage conservation. London: Springer, 2021. p. 27-48. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-0309-9_3
Downloads
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Seção
Licença
Copyright (c) 2024 Tiago Lima Quintanilha
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Autores que publicam nesta revista concordam com os seguintes termos:
Autores mantém os direitos autorais e concedem à revista o direito de primeira publicação, com o trabalho simultaneamente licenciado sob a Licença Creative Commons Attribution que permite o compartilhamento do trabalho com reconhecimento da autoria e publicação inicial nesta revista.
