Our Recent Productions

Showing 1–2 of 2

1. Working Paper2026Open Access

   Are University Journals Truly Local? National and Institutional Anchoring in Seven Research Systems(opens in a new tab)

   

   Nazarovets, Maryna; Beigel, Fernanda; Van Schalkwyk, François B.; Taşkın, Zehra; Meng, Ping

   University journals (UJs) are often described as local or inward-looking, although national and institutional embeddedness are rarely distinguished. This study examines the internationally indexed segment of university journals, analysing Web of Science-indexed titles from seven countries with contrasting publishing traditions and evaluation regimes (Argentina, China, Germany, South Africa, Türkiye, Ukraine, and the United Kingdom), based on publications from 2022-2024. National anchoring (N-Anch) measures the share of papers with at least one author from the journal’s home country, while institutional anchoring (I-Anch) captures participation by authors from the publishing university. The results reveal a clear divergence between these dimensions. National anchoring is high in Türkiye, China, Ukraine, South Africa, and Argentina, but considerably lower in Germany and UK university-press journals. Institutional anchoring remains low across all countries. Thus, strong integration into a national research community does not imply institutional anchoring. The findings show that patterns of national and institutional anchoring vary substantially across countries with different research, evaluation, and publishing systems and cannot be explained by university ownership alone.

   DOI: 10.31235/osf.io/pmhdy_v1PublishingAnchoringEmbeddedness
2. Working Paper2026Open Access

   Different operationalizations of local research and their associated citation patterns: A study of African publications(opens in a new tab)

   

   Alonso-Álvarez, Patricia; Boshoff, Nelius

   Local research has gained increasing attention in recent years, with a growing body of literature emphasizing its significance—especially for peripheral communities underrepresented in mainstream scientific discourse. However, despite this growing interest, there remains no clear consensus on how to define local research. Conceptual clarity is essential for conducting consistent and replicable analyses that capture the specific characteristics, contexts, and societal relevance of local research. This need is particularly acute in the Global South, where structural inequalities in visibility and recognition often marginalize regionally focused scholarship. In Africa, for instance, a substantial share of research is published in local or regional journals that are poorly represented in global indexing databases. As bibliometric analyses typically rely on these databases, this exclusion diminishes their perceived relevance. To address this gap, the present study incorporates data from regional and open-access sources to examine citation patterns associated with African local research. It uses multiple conceptualizations of local research to classify publications as either local or non-local depending on the definition used. These classifications are correlated with three citation-based indicators: average citations per publication, time to first citation, and the proportion of uncited publications. Additionally, the study explores the characteristics of citing publications, distinguishing between local and non-local sources as well as domestic and international citations. The findings reveal that citation patterns differ significantly across locality definitions, underscoring the importance of adopting nuanced, context-sensitive approaches to assess and support local research.

   DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17865910local researchafrican researchcitation patternsajolopenalex