Religion in changing times: an overview of the journal in its comparative scholarly and publishing contexts

References

• AAAS (American Academy of Arts and Sciences). n.d. “Gender Distribution of Advanced Degrees in the Humanities.” Humanities Indicators https://is.gd/eAcPmc.
   Google Scholar
• Amirkhanyan, Hayk, Michał Krawczyk, and Maciej Wilamowski. 2023. “Do Male and Female Authors Employ Different Journal Choice Strategies?” Scientometrics 128: 5905–5928. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-023-04829-9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anonymous. 1974. “Editorial.” Religion 4 (1): 3–4.
   Google Scholar
• Anonymous. 2023. “Reviewing Papers for MDPI.” Academia Stack Exchange. https://is.gd/bTuSaO.
   Google Scholar
• Bailey, Moya, and Trudy. 2018. “On Misogynoir: Citation, Erasure, and Plagiarism.” Feminist Media Studies 18 (4): 762–768. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2018.1447395.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beall, J. 2017. “What I Learned from Predatory Publishers.” Biochemia Medica (Zagreb) 27 (2): 273–278. https://is.gd/NfmTBE.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Björk, B. 2018. “Evolution of the Scholarly Mega-journal, 2006–2017.” PeerJ 6: e4357. https://peerj.com/articles/4357/.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brunton, F. 2020. “Making People and Influencing Friends: Citation Networks and the Appearance of Significance.” In Gaming the Metrics: Misconduct and Manipulation in Academic Research, edited by M. Biagioli, and A. Lippman, 243–250. Cambridge, MS: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Castor, N. Fadeke. 2024. “Sacred Cites: Engaging the Spiritual in Ethnographic Knowledge (Re)production.” Studies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses 53 (2): 247–264. https://doi.org/10.1177/00084298231216696.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chakravartty, Paula, Rachel Kuo, Victoria Grubbs, and Charlton McIlwain. 2018. “#CommunicationSoWhite.” Journal of Communication 68 (2): 254–266. https://doi.org/10.1093/joc/jqy003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crosetto, Paulo. 2021. “Is MDPI a predatory publisher?” Paolo Crosetto. April 12. https://is.gd/k8BJL1.
   Google Scholar
• Dion, Michelle L., Sara M. Mitchell, and Jane L. Sumner. 2020. “Gender, Seniority, and Self-Citation Practices in Political Science.” Scientometrics 125: 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03615-1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Engler, Steven. 2014. “Bibliometrics and the Study of Religion.” Religion 44 (2): 193–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/0048721X.2014.893680.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Engler, Steven. 2024. Tradition: A Crtical Primer. Sheffield: Equinox.
   Google Scholar
• Engler, Steven, and Michael Stausberg. 2011. “Crisis and Creativity: Opportunities and Threats in the Global Study of Religion\s.” Religion 41 (2): 127–143. https://doi.org/10.1080/0048721X.2011.591209.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Engler, Steven, and Michael Stausberg, eds. 2022. Routledge Handbook of Research Methods in the Study of Religion. 2nd ed. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Engler, Steven, and Kevin A. Whitesides. 2022. “Emic Concepts and Etic Paths.” Religion 52 (1): 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1080/0048721X.2021.2011090.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Esparza, Luz Judith R., Ángel Lee, and Carmen Rubio. 2024. “Influence of Cultural and Socioeconomic Factors on Scientific Production: A Statistical Analysis of the h-index.” Scientometrics 129: 2083–2099. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-024-04965-w.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferber, Marianne A. 1986. “Citations: Are They an Objective Measure of Scholarly Merit?” Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 11 (2): 381–389. https://doi.org/10.1086/494230.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferber, Marianne A. 1988. “Citations and Networking.” Gender & Society 2 (1): 82–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124388002001006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferber, Marianne A., and Michael Brün. 2011. “The Gender Gap in Citations: Does It Persist?” Feminist Economics 17 (1): 151–158. https://doi.org/10.1080/13545701.2010.541857.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Formanowicz, Magdalena, Marta Witkowska, Weronika Hryniszak Zuzanna Jakubik, and Aleksandra Cisłak. 2023. “Gender Bias in Special Issues: Evidence from a Bibliometric Analysis.” Scientometrics 128: 2283–2299. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-023-04639-z.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Franssen, Thomas, and Paul Wouters. 2019. “Science and its Significant Other: Representing the Humanities in Bibliometric Scholarship.” Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 70 (10): 1124–1137. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24206.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Halvorson, Britt. 2024. “Ancestral Cites: Citation Politics and Canonical Figures in Protestant Communities.” Studies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses 53 (2): 227–246. https://doi.org/10.1177/00084298231219260.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heschel, Susannah. 2019. “Women in Jewish Studies: Conversations from the Periphery.” Feminist Studies in Religion. May 31. https://is.gd/0uFS73.
   Google Scholar
• Heschel, Susannah, and Sarah Imhoff. Forthcoming. The Woman Question in Jewish Studies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP.
   Google Scholar
• Hovland, Ingie. 2024. “Feminist Cites: A Review of Feminist Relations to and Citations of the Canon.” Studies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses 53 (2): 207–226. https://doi.org/10.1177/00084298231212202.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hovland, Ingie, and Brett Halvorson. 2024. “Problems of Citation in the Study of Religion: Who Do We Cite and Why?” Studies Religion/Sciences Religieuses 53 (2): 167–184. https://doi.org/10.1177/00084298241245663.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Imhoff, Sarah. 2019. “404 Women Not Found Error.” Feminist Studies in Religion. May 30. https://is.gd/5V0Kg3.
   Google Scholar
• Imhoff, Sarah. 2022. “Women and Citations Jewish Studies.” IDAH Spring Symposium, Institute for Digital Arts & Humanities, Indiana University, Bloomington. https://is.gd/KpnWF8.
   Google Scholar
• Imhoff, Sarah. 2024. “The Impossibility of Ethical Citation.” Studies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses 53 (2): 265–272. https://doi.org/10.1177/00084298241235397.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacob, Marie-Andrée. 2020. “Crack Open the Make Believe: Counterfeit, Publication Ethics, and the Global South.” In Gaming the Metrics: Misconduct and Manipulation in Academic Research, edited by M. Biagioli, and A. Lippman, 251–260. Cambridge, MS: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kember, Sarah, and Amy Brand. 2023. “The Corporate Capture of Open-Access Publication.” The Chronicle of Higher Education. August 16. https://is.gd/vIMiAN.
   Google Scholar
• Klassen, Pamela E. 2024. “Faith in Citation.” Studies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses 53 (2): 273–284. https://doi.org/10.1177/00084298241235401.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lantsoght, Eva. 2023. “MDPI.” Ph.D. Talk, May 2. https://is.gd/6ATfAo.
   Google Scholar
• Linmans, A. J. M. 2010. “Why with Bibliometrics the Humanities Does Not Need to Be the Weakest Link: Indicators for Research Evaluation Based on Citations, Library Holdings, and Productivity Measures.” Scientometrics 83 (2): 337–354. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0088-9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mot, Carrie, and Daniel Cockayne. 2017. “Citation Matters: Mobilizing the Politics of Citation toward a Practice of ‘Conscientious Engagement’.” Gender, Place & Culture 24 (7): 954–973. https://doi.org/10.1080/0966369X.2017.1339022.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nederhof, Anton J. 2006. “Bibliometric Monitoring of Research Performance in the Social Sciences and the Humanities: A Review.” Scientometrics 66 (1): 81–100. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-006-0007-2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nguyen, T. M. 2018. “The Case for Crowd Peer Review.” Chemical and Engineering News, Nov. 26. https://is.gd/OOoh7r
   Google Scholar
• Oviedo-García, M. Ángeles. 2021. “Journal Citation Reports and the Definition of a Predatory Journal: The Case of the Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute (MDPI).” Research Evaluation 30 (3): 405–419a. https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvab020.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pérez, Elizabeth. 2024. “Sorry Cites: The (Necro)politics of Citation in the Anthropology of Religion.” Studies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses 53 (2): 185–206. https://doi.org/10.1177/00084298231224811.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petrou, Christos. 2020. “MDPI’s Remarkable Growth.” The Scholarly Kitchen, Aug. 10, https://is.gd/2J7sRL.
   Google Scholar
• Petrou, Christos. 2022. “Publishing Fast and Slow: A Review of Publishing Speed in the Last Decade.” The Scholarly Kitchen, Nov. 8. https://is.gd/YJiFcr.
   Google Scholar
• Pye, Michael. 1973. “Editorial.” Religion 3 (1): iii–iv.
   Google Scholar
• Rossiter, Margaret W. 1993. “The Matthew Matilda Effect in Science.” Social Studies of Science 23 (2): 325–341. https://doi.org/10.1177/030631293023002004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharpe, Eric J. 1971. “Statement of Editorial Policy.” Religion 1 (1): 4–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/0048-721X(71)90002-9.
   Google Scholar
• Siler, K. 2020. “There is No Black and White Definition of Predatory Publishing.” LSE Impact Blog. https://is.gd/Mu8RdP.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, Christen A., and Dominique Garrett-Scott. 2021. “We are Not Named”: Black Women and the Politics of Citation in Anthropology.” Feminist Anthropology 2 (1): 18–37. https://doi.org/10.1002/fea2.12038.
   Google Scholar
• Stausberg, Michael, and Steven Engler. 2008. “Editorial.” Religion 38 (1): 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.religion.2008.01.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stausberg, Michael, and Steven Engler, eds. 2011. Routledge Handbook of Research Methods in the Study of Religion. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Stausberg, Michael, and Steven Engler, eds. 2016. The Oxford Handbook of the Study of Religion. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stausberg, Michael. Forthcoming. 21st-Century Theories of Religion. London and New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Strenski, Ivan. 2020. “The Beginnings of Religion, with Special Attention to the North America Board.” Religion 50 (1): 18–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/0048721X.2019.1681123.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson, Jennifer. 2019. “The Birdcage: Gender Inequity in Academic Jewish Studies.” Contemporary Jewry 39 (3/4): 427–446. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12397-019-09303-4.
   Google Scholar
• UKRI. 2023. “UK Research and Open Access Policy”. May 24. https://is.gd/0KkYXY
   Google Scholar
• Van Leeuwen, Thed. 2013. “Bibliometric Research Evaluations, Web of Science and the Social Sciences and Humanities: A Problematic Relationship?” Bibliometrie-Praxis und Forschung 2: 1–18. https://doi.org/10.5283/bpf.173.
   Google Scholar
• Vega, Paula C. 2024. “Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science Flips to Diamond Open Access with Open Library of Humanities.” Open Library of Humanities. https://www.openlibhums.org/news/671/.
   Google Scholar
• Wang, Jing, Willem Halffman, and Serge P. J. M. Horbach. 2023. “Listing Quality: Chinese Journal Lists In Incoherent Valuation Regimes.” Science and Public Policy 51 (1): 55–66. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scad052.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weeden, Kim A., Sarah Thébaud, and Dafna Gelbgiser. 2017. “Degrees of Difference: Gender Segregation of U.S. Doctorates by Field and Program Prestige.” Sociological Science 4 (6): 123–150. https://doi.org/10.15195/v4.a6.
   Google Scholar
• White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. 2022. “OSTP Issues Guidance to Make Federally Funded Research Freely Available Without Delay.” Aug. 25. https://is.gd/AnLS5N.
   Google Scholar
• Yitzhaki, M. 1997. “Variation in Informativity of Titles of Research Papers in Selected Humanities Journals: A Comparative Study.” Scientometrics 38 (2): 219–229. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02457410.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhao, Kai, Huiqing Liang, and Jiali Li. 2024. “Understanding the Growing Contributions of China to Leading International Higher Education Journals.” Higher Education, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-024-01189-y.
   Google Scholar