In this research, we analyzed all 79 Web of Science (WoS) indexed journals in communication and media studies to disclose main publication patterns. We found that English-language countries dominate the field in a greater extent than in other disciplines, and developing countries are in a weaker position than English-language developed countries not just in natural sciences but also in soft sciences. We found significant correlations between the nominal GDP, the per capita publication, and per capita GDP of a given country and its publication scores.
AstanehB.MasoumiS. (2018). From paper to practice: Indexing systems and ethical standards. Science and Engineering Ethics, 24, 647-654. doi:10.1007/s11948-017-9899-x
3.
Ataie-AshtianiB. (2017a). Chinese and Iranian scientific publications: Fast growth and poor ethics. Science and Engineering Ethics, 23, 317-319.
4.
Ataie-AshtianiB. (2017b). World map of scientific misconduct. Science and Engineering Ethics. Advance online publication. doi:10.1007/s11948-017-9939-6
5.
BonitzM.BrucknerE.ScharnhorstA. (1997). Characteristics and impact of the Matthew effect for countries. Scientometrics, 40, 407-422.
6.
BorgmanC. L. (1989). Bibliometrics and scholarly communication: Editor’s introduction. Communication Research, 16, 583-599.
7.
BorgmanC. L.ReevesB. (1983). A bibliometric evaluation of core journals in communication research. Human Communication Research, 10, 119-136.
8.
BrusztL.GreskovitsB. (2009). Transnationalization, social integration, and capitalist diversity in the East and the South. Studies in Comparative International Development, 44, 411-434.
9.
BunzU. (2005). Publish or perish: A limited author analysis of ICA and NCA journals. Journal of Communication, 55, 703-720.
10.
DehalN.KrishanK.KanchanT.SinghA. (2017). Mandatory publications: An approach to kill “lack of will” or “lack of skill?”Science and Engineering Ethics, 24, 773-777. doi:10.1007/s11948-017-9903-5
11.
DelgadoE.RepisoR. (2013). The impact of scientific journals of communication: Comparing Google scholar metrics, web of science and Scopus. Cominicar, 21(41), 45-52.
12.
DemeterM. (2017). The core-periphery problem in communication research: A network analysis of leading publication. Publishing Research Quarterly, 33, 402-421. doi:10.1007/s12109-017-9535-2
13.
DemeterM. (2018). Nobody notices it? Qualitative inequalities of leading publications in communication and media research. International Journal of Communication, 12, 1001-1031.
14.
ErfanmaneshM.TahiraM.AbrizahA. (2017). The publication success of 102 nations in Scopus and the performance of their Scopus-indexed journals. Publishing Research Quarterly, 33, 421-433. doi:10.1007/s12109-017-9540-5
15.
ErrenT. C.ShawD. M.MorfeldP. (2016). Analyzing the publish-or-perish paradigm with game theory: The prisoner’s dilemma and a possible escape. Science and Engineering Ethics, 22, 1431-1446.
16.
FeeleyT. H. (2008). A bibliometric analysis of communication journals from 2002 to 2005. Human Communication Research, 34, 505-520.
17.
FernandezA.FerrandizE.LeonM. D. (2016). Proximity dimensions and scientific collaboration among academic institutions in Europe: The closer, the better. Scientometrics, 106, 1073-1092. doi:10.1007/s11192-015-1819-8
18.
FerraroV. (2008). Dependency theory: An introduction. In SecondiG. (ed): The development economics reader (pp. 58 - 64). London, England: Routledge.
FunkhouserE. T. (1996). The evaluative use of citation analysis for communication journals. Human Communication Research, 22, 563-574.
21.
GerkeS.EversH. D. (2006). Globalizing local knowledge: Social science research on Southeast Asia, 1970-2000. Sojourn: Journal of Social Issues in Southeast Asia, 21, 1-21.
22.
GumpenbergerC.SorzJ.WielandM.GorraizJ. (2016). Humanities and social sciences in the bibliometric spotlight—Research output analysis at the University of Vienna and considerations for increasing visibility. Research Evaluation, 25, 271-278.
23.
GüntherE.DomahidiE. (2017). What communication scholars write about: An analysis of 80 years of research in high-impact journals. International Journal of Communication, 11, 3051-3071.
24.
HaL. (2016). Olympic champions and successful scholars. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 94, 725-727.
25.
KornaiJ. (1992). The socialist system: The political economy of communism. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
26.
LaufE. (2005). National diversity of major international journals in the field of communication. Journal of Communication, 55, 19-151.
27.
LaukE. (2015). A view from the inside: The dawning of de-westernization of CEE media and communication research?Media and Communication, 3(4), 1-4.
28.
LoveJ. L. (1980). Raul Prebisch and the origins of the doctrine of unequal exchange. Latin American Research Review, 15(3), 45-72.
29.
Martin-MartinA.Orduna-MaleaE.AyllonJ. M.López-CózarE. D. (2015). The counting house: Measuring those who count: Presence of Bibliometrics, Scientometrics, Informetrics, Webometrics and Altmetrics in the Google scholar citations, ResearcherID, Researchgate, Mendeley & Twitter. EC3 Working Papers, 21, 1-60.
30.
MoodyJ. (2004). The structure of a social science collaboration network: Disciplinary cohesion from 1963 to 1999. American Sociological Review, 69, 213-238.
31.
PatnaikP. R. (2016). Scientific misconduct in India: Causes and perpetuation. Science and Engineering Ethics, 22, 1245-1249.
32.
PooleyJ. D.ParkD. W. (2013). Communication research. In SimonsonP.PeckJ.CraigR. T.JacksonJ. (Eds.), The handbook of communication history (pp. 76-93). London, England: Routledge.
33.
PrebischR. (1959). Commercial policy in the underdeveloped countries. The American Economic Review, 49, 251-273.
34.
PriceD. J. S. (1965). Networks of scientific papers. Science, 49, 510-515.
35.
PupovacV.Prijic-SamarzijaS.PetroveckiM. (2017). Research misconduct in the Croatian scientific community: A survey assessing the forms and characteristics of research misconduct. Science and Engineering Ethics, 23, 165-181.
36.
RiceR. E.BorgmanC. L.ReevesB. (1988). Citation networks of communication journals, 1977–1985 cliques and positions, citations made and citations received. Human Communication Research, 15, 256-283.
37.
RogersE. M. (1999). Anatomy of the two subdisciplines of communication study. Human Communication Research, 25, 618-631.
38.
SchmochU.SchubertT. (2008). Are international co-publications an indicator for quality of scientific research?Scientometrics, 74, 361-377.
39.
ShenhavY. A. (1986). Dependency and compliance in academic research infrastructures. Sociological Perspectives, 29, 29-51.
40.
SimonsonP.PeckJ.CraigR. T.JacksonJ. (2013). The history of communication history. In SimonsonP.PeckJ.CraigR. T.JacksonJ. (Eds.), The handbook of communication history (pp. 13-58). London, England: Routledge.
41.
TeodorescuD.TudorelA. (2011). The growth of international collaboration in East European scholarly communities: A bibliometric analysis of journal articles published between 1989 and 2009. Scientometrics, 89, 711-722.
42.
TothJ. (2012). The dangers of academic bubble economy from a young researcher’s perspective. Acta Sociologica, 5, 61-67.
43.
WareM.MabeM. (2015). The STM Report: An overview of scientific and scholarly journal publishing. The Hague, The Netherlands: International Association of Scientific, Technical, and Medical Publishers.
44.
WiedemannT.MeyenM. (2016). Internationalization through Americanization: The expansion of the International Communication Association’s leadership to the world. International Journal of Communication, 10, 1489-1509.
45.
ZanottoS. R.HaeffnerC.GuimaraesJ. A. (2016). Unbalanced international collaboration affects adversely the usefulness of countries’ scientific output as well as their technological and social impact. Scientometrics, 109, 1789-1814.
46.
ZdenekR. (2018). Editorial board self-publishing rates in Czech economic journals. Science and Engineering Ethics, 24, 669-682. doi:10.1007/s11948-017-9922-2
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
