So, are early career researchers the harbingers of change?

Abstract

This article provides the final results of a 3‐year study that sought to discover whether early career researchers (ECRs) were the harbingers of change with respect to scholarly communications. Over a hundred science and social science ECRs from seven countries, spanning three continents, were depth‐interviewed annually for 3 years (2016–2018) about their attitudes and behaviours with respect to 23 scholarly issues and activities (aspects). In order to provide an accessible overarching assessment of an extremely large and complex dataset, the interview data were categorized according to the strength and direction of change exhibited and the trends and points of interest raised. Results show that all ECRs have changed in one way or another, and a small minority has changed greatly in both attitude and practice and that collaboration and research impact are the scholarly aspects where most changes have occurred, and the greatest cause of change is not so much new technology as a change of jobs.

Does the scholarly communication system satisfy the beliefs and aspirations of new researchers? Summarizing the Harbingers research

“…Full details of the project's methodology and the characteristics of the ECR sample can be found in a recently published article in this journal (Nicholas et al ., ) and also on the project's Harbinger's website (CIBER Research, ; http://ciber-research.eu/harbingers.html). In this paper, we provide the broad features of the methodology and also additional methodologies special to the analyses conducted in this paper.…”

“…It has been long speculated that the new wave of researchers will start, or have started, changing the existing scholarly communications system in order to accommodate their millennial beliefs (Anderson & Rainie, ; Taylor & Keeter, ). We have shown elsewhere in this journal that, while changes over the period 2016–2018 have indeed taken place quickly, they are only taking place with respect to some scholarly features and activities, such as collaboration, social impact, and social media (Nicholas et al ., ). What we have not done, however, which we intend to do here, is to take stock of each and every one of the major scholarly features (16 in all) that we investigated during the whole project with respect to their perceived value and use by ECRs as of the most recent year of the study (2018).…”

How can publishers support early career journal editors?

“…There has been much literature published about early career researchers in scholarly communications, for example, the 3‐year study by the CIBER Research team that sought to discover whether early career researchers (ECRs) were the harbingers of change with respect to scholarly communications (Nicholas et al ., ). However, there has been little research published about ECRs who serve as journal editors – that is, early career editors (ECEs in this article).…”

The future of academic publishing: Revolution or evolution revisited

“…(Nicholas et al ., ). Indeed, the pressure to publish in high‐impact journals means that some ECRs are publishing less through OA channels: ‘…while attitudes to open access are positive and getting more so, publishing practice has changed only a little, and in some places is getting less open’ (Nicholas et al ., ).…”