1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Journal of Second Language Studies
  4. Online First Articles
  5. Online First Article
image of Uncovering motivations behind authors’ questionable research practices
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

Applied linguistics has been showing increased interest in research ethics, including discussion of authors’ questionable research practices (QRPs). However, less attention has been given to how organizations may engender QRPs. To address this, here we discuss how neoliberal systems of academic publishing are implicated in QRPs. Through our collaborative autoethnography as two author-editors, we jointly explore such practices’ influences. Three key findings emerge: 1. journal reviewers’ and editors’ bias towards Anglocentric writing norms; 2. the influence organizations such as publishing houses, Ministries of Education, and universities exert over academic publication; and 3. metrification of research output leading authors to disproportionately focus on journal indexing. We argue that these factors hinder faculty ability to balance publishing, teaching, and administrative responsibilities. By widening the discussion concerning QRPs, we highlight how authors’ publication practices are influenced by external factors, pushing back on the narrative of individual responsibility for QRPs.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jsls.00057.mul
2025-11-06
2025-12-04

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/jsls.00057.mul
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Adamson, J. L.
    (2012) Mentoring academic journal reviewers: Brokering reviewing knowledge. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, (), –. 10.1080/14703297.2012.677593
     https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2012.677593 [Google Scholar]
  2. Adamson, J. L. & Muller, T.
    (2012) Editorial Investigation of Roles and Responsibilities in Academic Journal Editorial Systems. InAdamson, J. L. & Nunn, R. C. (Eds) Editorial and authorial voices in EFL academic journal publishing. (pp.–). Asian EFL Journal Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Adamson, J. L., & Muller, T.
    (2017) Joint autoethnography of teacher experience in the academy: exploring methods for collaborative inquiry. International Journal of Research and Method in Education, (), –. 10.1080/1743727X.2017.1279139
     https://doi.org/10.1080/1743727X.2017.1279139 [Google Scholar]
  4. Adamson, J. L. & Muller, T.
    (2024) Collaborative autoethnography in applied linguistics: Reflecting on research practice. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, , –. 10.1515/ijsl‑2023‑0001
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl-2023-0001 [Google Scholar]
  5. Adamson, J. L., Muller, T., Martins, C., Hann, N., & Nunn, R. C.
    (2021) Journal editors’ perceptions of academic publishing outside major publishing houses. ESBB (English Scholarship beyond Borders), (), –. www.englishscholarsbeyondborders.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Adamson-et-al.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Adamson, J. L. & Nunn, R. C.
    (2023) Editorial Reflections on Open Review: Leveling the playing field?ESBB (English Scholarship beyond Borders), (), –. https://www.englishscholarsbeyondborders.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/2.-Adamson-and-Nunn.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Allum, N., Reid, A., Bidoglia, M., Gaskell, G., Aubert-Bonn, N., Buljan, I., Fuglsang, S., Horbach, S., Kavouras, P., Marušić, A., Mejlgaard, N., Pizzolato, D., Roje, R., Tijdink, J., & Veltri, G.
    (2023) Researchers on research integrity: A survey of European and American researchers. F1000Research, , . 10.12688/f1000research.128733.1
     https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.128733.1 [Google Scholar]
  8. Anderson, L.
    2006 Analytic autoethnography. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography, (), –. 10.1177/0891241605280449
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0891241605280449 [Google Scholar]
  9. Andrews, M.
    (2004) Opening to the original contributions. Counter-narratives and the power to oppose. InM. Bamberg & M. Andrews (Eds.), Considering Counter-Narrative: Narration and Resistance (pp.–). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/sin.4.02and
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sin.4.02and [Google Scholar]
  10. Andringa, S., Mos, M., van Beuningen, C., González, P., Hornikx, J., & Steinkrauss, R.
    (2024) Diamond is a scientist’s best friend: Counteracting systemic inequality in open access publishing, Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics, , –. 10.51751/dujal18802
     https://doi.org/10.51751/dujal18802 [Google Scholar]
  11. Ashlee, A. A., Zamora, B., & Karikari, S. N.
    (2017) We are woke: A collaborative critical autoethnography of three “womxn” of color graduate students in higher education. International Journal of Multicultural Education, (), –. 10.18251/ijme.v19i1.1259
     https://doi.org/10.18251/ijme.v19i1.1259 [Google Scholar]
  12. Barkhuizen, G., & Wette, R.
    (2008) Narrative frames for investigating the experience of language teachers. System, (). –. 10.1016/j.system.2008.02.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2008.02.002 [Google Scholar]
  13. Barnard, R. & Wang, Y.
    (Eds.) (2020) Research ethics in second language education: Universal principles, local practices. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781003124733
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003124733 [Google Scholar]
  14. Batterbury, S.
    (2017) Socially just publishing: implications for geographers and their journals. Fennia, (), –. 10.11143/fennia.66910
     https://doi.org/10.11143/fennia.66910 [Google Scholar]
  15. Belcher, D. D.
    (2007) Seeking acceptance in an English-only research world. Journal of Second Language Writing, (), –. 10.1016/j.jslw.2006.12.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2006.12.001 [Google Scholar]
  16. Bell, K.
    (2017) ‘Predatory’ open access journals as parody: Exposing the limitations of ‘legitimate’ academic publishing. tripleC (Communication, Capitalism & Critique), (), –. www.triple-c.at. 10.31269/triplec.v15i2.870
     https://doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v15i2.870 [Google Scholar]
  17. Bennett, K.
    (2014) Introduction. InK. Bennett (Ed.), The semiperiphery of Academic Writing (pp.–). London: Palgrave Macmillan.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Benos, D. J., Bashari, E., Chaves, J. M., Gaggar, A., Kapoor, N., Lafrance, M., Mans, R., Mayhew, D., Mcgowan, S., Polter, A., Qadri, Y., Sarfare, S., Schultz, K., Splittgerber, R., Stephenson, J., Tower, C., Walton, R. G., & Zotov, A.
    (2007) The ups and downs of peer review. Advances in Physiology Education, (), –. 10.1152/advan.00104.2006
     https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00104.2006 [Google Scholar]
  19. Bigelow, M., & Pettitt, N.
    (2015) Narratives of ethical dilemmas in research with immigrants with limited formal schooling. InP. L. De Costa (Ed.), Ethics in applied linguistics research: Language researcher narratives (pp.–). New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315816937‑5
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315816937-5 [Google Scholar]
  20. Breault, R. A.
    (2016) Emerging issues in duoethnography. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, (). –. 10.1080/09518398.2016.1162866
     https://doi.org/10.1080/09518398.2016.1162866 [Google Scholar]
  21. Butterfield, L. D., Borgen, W. A., Amundson, N. E., & Maglio, A-S. T.
    (2022) Fifty years of the Critical Incident Technique: 1954–2004 and beyond. Qualitative Research, (), –. 10.1177/1468794105056924
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794105056924 [Google Scholar]
  22. Canagarajah, A. S.
    (1996) “Nondiscursive” Requirements in Academic Publishing, Material Resources of Periphery Scholars, and the Politics of Knowledge Production. Written Communication, (), –. 10.1177/0741088396013004001
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088396013004001 [Google Scholar]
  23. (2002) The Geopolitics of academic writing. Pittsburgh, USA: University of Pittsburgh Press. 10.2307/j.ctt5hjn6c
     https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctt5hjn6c [Google Scholar]
  24. Canagarajah, A. S., & Lee, E.
    (2014) Negotiating alternative discourses in academic writing and publishing: Risks with hybridity. InL. Thesen & L. Cooper (Eds.), Risk in academic writing: Postgraduate students, their teachers and the making of knowledge (pp.–). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Casanave, C. P.
    (2002) Writing games: Multicultural case studies of academic literacy practices in higher education. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Chang, H., Ngunjiri, F. W., & Hernandez, K-A. C.
    (2013) Collaborative autoethnography. New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Cobey, K. D., Grudniewicz, A., Lalu, M. M., Rice, D. B., Raffoul, H., & Moher, D.
    (2019) Knowledge and motivations of researchers publishing in presumed predatory journals: a survey. BMJ Open, (), –. 10.1136/bmjopen‑2018‑026516
     https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026516 [Google Scholar]
  28. Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L.
    (2000) Determining Validity in Qualitative Inquiry. Theory into Practice, (), –. 10.1207/s15430421tip3903_2
     https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip3903_2 [Google Scholar]
  29. Crozet, C., & Diaz, A. R.
    (2020) Tertiary language teacher-researchers between ethics and politics: Silent voices, unseized spaces. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780429505942
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429505942 [Google Scholar]
  30. D’Arcy, A., & Bender, E. M.
    (2023) Ethics in linguistics. Annual Review of Linguistics, (), –. 10.1146/annurev‑linguistics‑031120‑015324
     https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-031120-015324 [Google Scholar]
  31. De Costa, P. I., Sterling, S., Lee, J., Li, W., & Rawal, H.
    (2021) Research tasks on ethics in applied linguistics. Language Teaching, (), –. 10.1017/S0261444820000257
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444820000257 [Google Scholar]
  32. Demir, S. B.
    (2018) Predatory journals: Who publishes in them and why?Journal of Informetrics, (), –. 10.1016/j.joi.2018.10.008
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.10.008 [Google Scholar]
  33. Dontcheva-Navratilova, O.
    (2014) The changing face of Czech academic discourse. InK. Bennett (Ed.), The semiperiphery of academic writing (pp.–). London: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9781137351197_3
     https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137351197_3 [Google Scholar]
  34. Ellis, C. S., Adams, T. E., & Bochner, A. P.
    (2011) Autoethnography: An overview. Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, (), –. 10.17169/fqs‑12.1.1589
     https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-12.1.1589 [Google Scholar]
  35. Ellis, C. S. & Adams, T. E.
    (2014) The purposes, practices and principles of autoethnographic research. InP. Leavy (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of qualitative research (pp.–). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Fasulo, A., & Piazza, R.
    (2015) Introduction. InR. Piazza & A. Fasulo (Eds.), Marked identities: Narrating lives between social labels and individual biographies (pp.–). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9781137332813_1
     https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137332813_1 [Google Scholar]
  37. Fire, M., & Guestrin, C.
    (2019) Over-optimization of academic publishing metrics:observing Goodhart’s Law in action. GigaScience, (), –. 10.1093/gigascience/giz053
     https://doi.org/10.1093/gigascience/giz053 [Google Scholar]
  38. Flick, U.
    (2020) Hearing and being heard, seeing and being seen: Qualitative inquiry in the public sphere — Introduction to the special issue. Qualitative Inquiry, (). –. 10.1177/1077800419857766
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1077800419857766 [Google Scholar]
  39. Flowerdew, J.
    (2001) Attitudes of journal editors to nonnative speaker contributions. TESOL Quarterly, (), –. 10.2307/3587862
     https://doi.org/10.2307/3587862 [Google Scholar]
  40. (2007) The non-anglophone scholar on the periphery of scholarly publication. AILA Review, (), –. 10.1075/aila.20.04flo
     https://doi.org/10.1075/aila.20.04flo [Google Scholar]
  41. (2008) Scholarly writers who use English as an additional language: What can Goffman’s ‘Stigma’ tell us?Journal of English for Academic Purposes, (), –. 10.1016/j.jeap.2008.03.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2008.03.002 [Google Scholar]
  42. Fuchs, C., & Sandoval, M.
    (2013) The diamond model of academic publishing: Why policy makes scholars, universities, libraries, labour unions and the publishing world need to take non-commercial, non-profit open access serious. tripleC (Communication, Capitalism & Critique), (), –. 10.31269/vol11iss2pp428‑443
     https://doi.org/10.31269/vol11iss2pp428-443 [Google Scholar]
  43. Fujimoto-Adamson, N., Adamson, J. L., & Aida Niendorf, M.
    (2024) Exploring the supervisors’ writing experiences and their effects on undergraduate thesis supervisory practices: A comparison of Japanese and Swedish contexts. Research in Comparative and International Education, (), –. 10.1177/17454999241226773
     https://doi.org/10.1177/17454999241226773 [Google Scholar]
  44. Gaillet, L. L., & Guglielmo, L.
    (2014) Scholarly publication in a changing academic landscape: Models for success. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9781137410764
     https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137410764 [Google Scholar]
  45. Geertz, C.
    (1983) Local knowledge. New York: Basic Books.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Geoforum Editors
    Geoforum Editors (2019) The future of scholarly publishing: Paywalls and profits or a new plan?Geoforum, , –. 10.1016/j.geoforum.2019.03.005
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2019.03.005 [Google Scholar]
  47. Gopalakrishna, G., ter Riet, G., Vink, G., Stoop, I., Wicherts, J. M., & Bouter, L. M.
    (2022) Prevalence of questionable research practices, research misconduct and their potential explanatory factors: A survey among academic researchers in the Netherlands. PLoS ONE, (). 10.1371/journal.pone.0263023
     https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0263023 [Google Scholar]
  48. Gould, T. H. P.
    (2009) The future of academic publishing: Application of the long-tail theory. Publishing Research Quarterly, (), –. 10.1007/s12109‑009‑9134‑y
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-009-9134-y [Google Scholar]
  49. Gruber, T.
    (2014) Academic sell-out: How an obsession with metrics and rankings is damaging academia. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, (), –. 10.1080/08841241.2014.970248
     https://doi.org/10.1080/08841241.2014.970248 [Google Scholar]
  50. Habibie, P. & Sawyer, R. D.
    (2024) Duoethnography and English for research publication purposes: Promises and challenges. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, (). 10.1016/j.rmal.2024.100148
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2024.100148 [Google Scholar]
  51. Haggerty, K. D.
    (2004) Ethics creep: Governing social science research in the name of ethics. Qualitative Sociology, (), –. 10.1023/B:QUAS.0000049239.15922.a3
     https://doi.org/10.1023/B:QUAS.0000049239.15922.a3 [Google Scholar]
  52. Hamp-Lyons, L.
    (2009) Access, equity…and plagiarism. TESOL Quarterly, (), –. www.jstor.org/stable/27785050. 10.1002/j.1545‑7249.2009.tb00192.x
     https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2009.tb00192.x [Google Scholar]
  53. Hiratsuka, T., Nall, M., & Castellano, J.
    (2023a) Shifting from native-speakerism to trans-speakerism: A trioethnography of language teachers in Japan. The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language, (). –. 10.55593/ej.27105a9
     https://doi.org/10.55593/ej.27105a9 [Google Scholar]
  54. (2023b) Trans-speakerism: a trioethnographic exploration into diversity, equity, and inclusion in language education. Language and Education, (), –. 10.1080/09500782.2023.2223565
     https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2023.2223565 [Google Scholar]
  55. Hyland, K.
    (2016) Academic publishing and the myth of linguistic prejudice. Journal of Second Language Writing, , –. 10.1016/j.jslw.2016.01.005
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2016.01.005 [Google Scholar]
  56. Isbell, D. R., Brown, D., Chen, M., Derrick, D. J., Ghanem, R., Arvizu, M. N. G., Schnur, E., Zhang, M., & Plonsky, L.
    (2022) Misconduct and questionable research practices: The ethics of quantitative data handling and reporting in applied linguistics. The Modern Language Journal, (), –10.1111/modl.12760
     https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12760 [Google Scholar]
  57. Ivanič, R.
    (1997) Writing and Identity: The Discoursal Construction of Identity in Academic Writing. John Benjamins.10.1075/swll.5
     https://doi.org/10.1075/swll.5 [Google Scholar]
  58. Kachru, B.
    (1992) The other tongue. English across cultures (2nd ed.). Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  59. Kaiser, M., Drivdal, L., Hjellbrekke, J., Ingierd, H., & Rekdal, O. B.
    (2022) Questionable research practices and misconduct among Norwegian researchers. Science and Engineering Ethics, (), –. 10.1007/s11948‑021‑00351‑4
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11948-021-00351-4 [Google Scholar]
  60. Keleş, U.
    (2022a) Autoethnography as a recent methodology in applied linguistics: A methodological review. The Qualitative Report, (). –. 10.46743/2160‑3715/2022.5131
     https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2022.5131 [Google Scholar]
  61. (2022b) Writing a “good” autoethnography in educational research: A modest proposal. The Qualitative Report, (). –. 10.46743/2160‑3715/2022.5662
     https://doi.org/10.46743/2160-3715/2022.5662 [Google Scholar]
  62. Khaitova, M., & Muller, T.
    (2022a) Higher education discourses: A contrastive keyword analysis of the US and Japan. English Scholarship Beyond Borders (ESBB), (), –.
     [Google Scholar]
  63. (2022b) Marketization of Japan-based higher education advertisements: A discourse of McJobs?Lha Do Desterro, (), –. 10.5007/2175‑8026.2022.e83058
     https://doi.org/10.5007/2175-8026.2022.e83058 [Google Scholar]
  64. Khan, K.
    (2010) Is open peer review the fairest system? No. BMJ, :c6425. 10.1136/bmj.c6425
     https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c6425 [Google Scholar]
  65. Kouritzin, S.
    (2011) Editorial: Ethics in cross-cultural, cross-linguistic research. TESL Canada Journal, , — . 10.18806/tesl.v28i0.1077
     https://doi.org/10.18806/tesl.v28i0.1077 [Google Scholar]
  66. Kubanyiova, M.
    (2008) Rethinking research ethics in contemporary applied linguistics: The tension between macroethical and microethical perspectives in situated research. The Modern Language Journal, (), –. 10.1111/j.1540‑4781.2008.00784.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2008.00784.x [Google Scholar]
  67. Kurt, S.
    (2018) Why do authors publish in predatory journals?Learned Publishing, (), –. 10.1002/leap.1150
     https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1150 [Google Scholar]
  68. Larsson, T., Plonsky, L., Sterling, S., Kytö, M., Yaw, K., & Wood, M.
    (2023) On the frequency, prevalence, and perceived severity of questionable research practices. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, (), –. 10.1016/j.rmal.2023.100064
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2023.100064 [Google Scholar]
  69. Lawrence, P.
    (2007) The mismanagement of science. Current Biology, (), –. 10.1016/j.cub.2007.06.014
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2007.06.014 [Google Scholar]
  70. Lillis, T.
    (2008) Ethnography as method, methodology, and “deep theorizing”: Closing the gap between text and context in academic writing research. Written Communication, (). –. 10.1177/0741088308319229
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088308319229 [Google Scholar]
  71. Lillis, T. M.
    (2013) The Sociolinguistics of Writing. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  72. Lillis, T. M., & Curry, M. J.
    (2006) Professional academic writing by multilingual scholars: Interactions with literacy brokers in the production of English-medium texts. Written Communication, (), –. 10.1177/0741088305283754
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088305283754 [Google Scholar]
  73. (2010) Academic writing in a global context. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  74. Meho, L. I., & Akl, E. A.
    (2025) Using bibliometrics to detect questionable authorship and affiliation practices and their impact on global research metrics: A case study of 14 universities. Quantitative Science Studies, –. 10.1162/qss_a_00339
     https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00339 [Google Scholar]
  75. Mertkan, S., Onurkan Aliusta, G., & Suphi, N.
    (2021) Profile of authors publishing in “predatory” journals and causal factors behind their decision: A systematic review. Research Evaluation, (), –. 10.1093/reseval/rvab032
     https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvab032 [Google Scholar]
  76. Muller, T.
    (2018) An Exploration of the Experiences of Japan-Based English Language Teachers Writing for Academic Publication [PhD thesis Faculty of Wellbeing, Education and Language Studies (WELS) Centre for Research in Education and Educational Technology (CREET), The Open University, UK]. 10.21954/ou.ro.0000e1eb
     https://doi.org/10.21954/ou.ro.0000e1eb [Google Scholar]
  77. Muller, T., & Adamson, J. L.
    (2019) Living as the other in Japan: A joint autoethnography of two expatriate academics in the academy. InS. Khadka, J. Davis-McElligatt, & K. Dorwick (Eds.), Narratives of Marginalized Identities in Higher Education: Inside and Outside the Academy (pp.–). Bristol: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  78. Ngunjiri, F. W., Hernandez, K. A. C., & Chang, H.
    (2010) Living autoethnography: connecting life and research. Journal of Research Practice, (), –. https://core.ac.uk/reader/268476170
     [Google Scholar]
  79. Nochi, M.
    (2020) Research ethics from the viewpoint of a Japanese qualitative researcher. InR. Barnard & Y. Wang (Eds.), Research ethics in second language education: Universal principles, local practices (pp.–). London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781003124733‑9
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003124733-9 [Google Scholar]
  80. Norris, J., & Sawyer, R. D.
    (2012) Toward a dialogic methodology. InJ. Norris, R. D. Sawyer, & D. Lund (Eds.), Duoethnography: dialogic methods for social, health, and educational research (pp.–). Walnut Creek: Left Coast Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  81. Nunn, R. C.
    (2015) Foreword. English Scholarship Beyond Borders, (), –. www.englishscholarsbeyondborders.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Foreword4.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
  82. Nygaard, L. P., & Bellanova, R.
    (2018) Lost in quantification: Scholars and the politics of bibliometrics. InM. J. Curry & T. Lillis (Eds.), Global academic publishing: Policies, perspectives and pedagogies (pp.–). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  83. Öztürk, O., & Taşkın, Z.
    (2023) How metric-based performance evaluation systems fuel the growth of questionable publications?Pre-printhttps://osf.io/8xbgj/
  84. Palmer, D., Chang, T.-H., Covington, M., Na, V., & Wang, A. C.
    (2020) (Re)negotiating and (re)envisioning our feminist journeys: A collaborative autoethnography of five women of color doctoral students. Journal of Critical Scholarship on Higher Education and Student Affairs, (), –. https://ecommons.luc.edu/jcshesa/vol5/iss3/6
     [Google Scholar]
  85. Plonsky, L., Brown, D., Chen, M., Ghanem, R., Arvizu, M. N. G., Isbell, D. R., & Zhang, M.
    (2024) “Significance sells”: Applied linguists’ views on questionable research practices. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, (), –. 10.1016/j.rmal.2024.100099
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2024.100099 [Google Scholar]
  86. Rentz, K.
    (2009) The importance of “niche” journals to new business-communication academics-- and to all of us. Journal of Business Communication, (), –. 10.1177/0021943609333523
     https://doi.org/10.1177/0021943609333523 [Google Scholar]
  87. Rinehart, R. E., & Earl, K.
    (2016) Auto-duo-and collaborative-ethnographies: “Caring” in an audit culture climate. Qualitative Research Journal, (). –. 10.1108/QRJ‑04‑2016‑0024
     https://doi.org/10.1108/QRJ-04-2016-0024 [Google Scholar]
  88. Salager-Meyer, F.
    (2018) Open Access: The next model for research dissemination. InM. J. Curry & T. Lillis (Eds.), Global academic publishing: Policies, perspectives and pedagogies (pp.–). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.
     [Google Scholar]
  89. Satlow, M.
    (May18th 2016) Academic publishing: Toward a new model. The Chronicle of Higher Education. www.chronicle.com/article/Academic-Publishing-Toward-a/236526
     [Google Scholar]
  90. Shashok, K.
    (2001) Author’s editors: Facilitators of science information transfer. Learned Publishing, (), –. 10.1087/095315101300059495
     https://doi.org/10.1087/095315101300059495 [Google Scholar]
  91. Stephen, D.
    (2023) Medical articles in questionable journals are less impactful than those in non-questionable journals but still extensively cited. Scientometrics, , –. 10.1007/s11192‑023‑04763‑w
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-023-04763-w [Google Scholar]
  92. Stevenson, W.
    (2013) Open or blind peer review: Which is better?enago blog, 17th June, 2013. www.enago.com/blog/open-or-blind-peer-review-which-is-better/
     [Google Scholar]
  93. Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. K.
    (2008) Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
     [Google Scholar]
  94. Tarone, E.
    (1980) TESOL research committee report. TESOL Quarterly, (), –. 10.2307/3586605
     https://doi.org/10.2307/3586605 [Google Scholar]
  95. Walbot, V.
    (2009) Are we training pit bulls to review our manuscripts?Journal of Biology, , .
     [Google Scholar]
  96. Wen, Q., & Gao, Y.
    (2007) Dual publication and academic inequality. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, (), –. 10.1111/j.1473‑4192.2007.00147.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2007.00147.x [Google Scholar]
  97. Wu, S., & Li, Z.
    (2024) How semantic prosody is acquired in novel word learning: Evidence from the “Double-Date Tree” effect. Acta Psychologica Sinica, (), –. 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2024.00531
     https://doi.org/10.3724/SP.J.1041.2024.00531 [Google Scholar]
  98. Yamada, Y., & Teixeira da Silva, J. A.
    (2022) A psychological perspective towards understanding the objective and subjective gray zones in predatory publishing. Quality and Quantity, (), –. 10.1007/s11135‑021‑01307‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-021-01307-3 [Google Scholar]
  99. Yaw, K., Plonsky, L., Larsson, T., Sterling, S., & Kytö, M.
    (2023) Research ethics in applied linguistics. Language Teaching, (), –. 10.1017/S0261444823000010
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444823000010 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/jsls.00057.mul
Loading
Uncovering motivations behind authors’ questionable research practices
John Benjamins ; https://doi.org/10.1075/jsls.00057.mul
/content/journals/10.1075/jsls.00057.mul
/content/journals/10.1075/jsls.00057.mul
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: collaborative autoethnography ; centering ; metrification ; anglocentric norms ; indexing

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error