SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Professional Applications of Information Literacy: Helping Researchers Learn to Evaluate Journal Quality
7 references·2 citing·39 second hop
Professional Applications of Information Literacy: Helping Researchers Learn to Evaluate Journal Quality (2021)Professional Applications of Information …Faculty knowledge and attitudes regarding predatory open access journals: a needs assessment study (2020)Faculty knowledge and attitud…Predatory journals: no definition, no defence (2019)Predatory journals: no defini…A walk on the wild side: ‘Predatory’ journals and information asymmetries in scientific evaluations (2018)A walk on the wild side: ‘Pre…Trustworthiness and authority of scholarly information in a digital age: Results of an international questionnaire (2015)Trustworthiness and authority…Who publishes in “predatory” journals? (2014)Who publishes in “predatory” …Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education (2014)Framework for Information Lit…Intersections of Scholarly Communication and Information Literacy: Creating Strategic Collaborations for a Changing Academic Environment (2013)Intersections of Scholarly Co…Retraction handling by potential predatory journals (2024)Retraction handling by potent…A mixed-methods survey and focus group study to understand researcher and clinician preferences for a Journal Transparency Tool (2024)A mixed-methods survey and fo…Peer-review practices of psychological journals: The fate of published articles, submitted again (1982)Bias in peer review (2012)Who's Afraid of Peer Review? (2013)The academic, economic and societal impacts of Open Access: an evidence-based review (2016)An Integrative Model Of Organizational Trust (1995)An Integrative Model of Organizational Trust (1995)Measuring the Prevalence of Questionable Research Practices With Incentives for Truth Telling (2012)Early career researchers: Scholarly behaviour and the prospect of change (2017)A global questionnaire survey of the scholarly communication attitudes and behaviours of early career researchers (2020)Credibility of preprints: an interdisciplinary survey of researchers (2020)Determining Data Information Literacy Needs: A Study of Students and Research Faculty (2011)Reframing Information Literacy as a Metaliteracy (2011)What do Students Learn from Participation in an Undergraduate Research Journal? Results of an Assessment (2014)Data Information Literacy and Undergraduates: A Critical Competency (2015)The bright side of information: ways of mitigating information overload (2017)The scientific impact of nations (2004)Citation Analysis in Research Evaluation (2005)How Frequently Are Articles in Predatory Open Access Journals Cited (2020)RETRACTED ARTICLE: Predatory publishing in Scopus: evidence on cross-country differences (2021)Beyond Beall’s List: Better understanding predatory publishers (2015)Stop this waste of people, animals and money (2017)Infodemics and health misinformation: a systematic review of reviews (2022)ChatGPT and the rise of large language models: the new AI-driven infodemic threat in public health (2023)The strain on scientific publishing (2024)Open access versus subscription journals: a comparison of scientific impact (2012)‘Predatory’ open access: a longitudinal study of article volumes and market characteristics (2015)Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education (2018)Drivers and Obstacles of Open Access Publishing. A Qualitative Investigation of Individual and Institutional Factors (2020)Awareness of predatory journals and open access publishing among orthopaedic and trauma surgeons – results from an online survey in Germany (2021)Authors publishing repeatedly in predatory journals: An analysis of Scopus articles (2022)Book Review: Focus Groups: A Practical Guide for Applied Research (1989)Three Approaches to Qualitative Content Analysis (2005)Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups (2007)Geographic Variation in LLM DOI Fabrication: Cross-Country Analysis of Citation Accuracy Across Four Large Language Models (2025)Predatory publishers are corrupting open access (2012)Reform retractions to make them more transparent (2020)Assessing Digital Information Literacy in Higher Education: A Review of Existing Frameworks and Assessments With Recommendations for Next‐Generation Assessment (2016)Effects of Information Literacy Skills on Student Writing and Course Performance (2016)Survey of Information Literacy Instructional Practices in U.S. Academic Libraries (2018)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2019Predatory journals: no definition, no defence837 cited
  • 2014Framework for Information Literacy for Higher Education828 cited
  • 2014Who publishes in “predatory” journals?402 cited
  • 2018A walk on the wild side: ‘Predatory’ journals and information asymmetries in scientific evaluations158 cited
  • 2015Trustworthiness and authority of scholarly information in a digital age: Results of an international questionnaire75 cited
  • 2013Intersections of Scholarly Communication and Information Literacy: Creating Strategic Collaborations for a Changing Academic Environment63 cited
  • 2020Faculty knowledge and attitudes regarding predatory open access journals: a needs assessment study40 cited

Cited by

  • 2024Retraction handling by potential predatory journals8 cited
  • 2024A mixed-methods survey and focus group study to understand researcher and clinician preferences for a Journal Transparency Tool7 cited

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work