English/US
Our association is proud of its database and indexer SPELL (Scientific Periodicals Electronic Library). Some may not know, but we have made efforts and engaged resources since 2011 to build what has become a reference for readers, editors of national journals, and authors who seek access to the Brazilian journals in the field. Over ten years of development and maintenance, more than BRL 3 million has been invested in technology development and service provision, but the benefits have been great and rewarding.
In a nutshell, SPELL brings together the collections of over 132 out of the best Management, Accounting and Tourism journals in Brazil. Some journal collections date back to 1961, and the database contains more than 55,020 different articles.
As one of the requirements for a journal to be listed on the database is to allow open access (i.e., reading it online free of charge), it represents a wide source of consultation for undergraduate and graduate students in both Brazil and Portuguese-speaking countries. Still, the added value for the development of research in the field remains to be fully explored.
SPELL has also been known for the annual disclosure of its journals’ Impact Factor, which measures how much the articles in a journal on the database are cited by articles in other journals on the very database. Despite all the criticisms that impact factors have been receiving, especially for its indiscriminate use in teacher evaluation, it is na important tool for the editorial evaluation of journals. Combined with other indexes, the Impact Factor is a source of information for the planning of both editors and editorial boards.
But SPELL can go further. The current Board of Directors is continuing prior improvements and Will soon invite members to talk about new uses of the database. To begin the database expansion, ANPAD carried out a survey over the last few months to learn about the most frequent uses of SPELL and the users’ perception thereof. The survey was divided into two stages. The first stage was exploratory and provided for the development of a questionnaire in the second, quantitative stage. The questionnaire contained thirty-two 11-point Likert questions and covered topics such as the user’s familiarity with the database, perceived benefits, author’s use of the journals’ impact factor, database expansion, and possible criticisms of the database and its use continued.
We are thankful to the members of the academic community who participated in the content validation and helped us build and improve the data collection instrument. The questionnaire link was sent by email to more than 2,900 Individual Members and remained open for response from December 7th through 31st, 2020.
We received 231 complete responses (6.1% margin of error, 95.0% confidence interval). In tables 1 to 6, we show the main results, with the items grouped according to an exploratory factor analysis. Table 1 shows the user’s familiarity with SPELL. Bearing in mind the scale (0 to 10), it points to the need for greater publicization of the benefits and uses of the database.
The major perceived benefits of SPELL (Table 2) is the fact that the service is provided free of charge. Also, the users appreciate the database for consultation purposes, but it still has much room for expansion. The authors have a medium perception that the database provides greater visibility their publications. The same holds true when it comes to the author’s teaching activity, which entails an opportunity for ANPAD to dialogue with trainers and indicate how to use the material listed on the database. One of the possible solutions would be to create thematic lists or reading lists with fundamental articles for inclusion in undergraduate or graduate programs.
The authors’ use of the journals’ impact factor (Table 3) does not seem to be the main concern of the respondents. In part, the result is explained by the responses of graduate and undergraduate students (37.2% of the sample), whose current careers are not driven by the journals’ impact factor. However, the use tends to be higher amongst researchers, lecturers and professors as well as members of editorial teams (62.8% of the sample), which is indicative that this audience closely follows the journals’ performance. One of our priorities is both to provide greater transparency to the current SPELL metrics and to propose new metrics.
And what do users think of expanding SPELL? There is some expectation that the database could grow with further journals, including other areas of knowledge (Table 4). Something that we appreciate every time we have contact with the database is that its focus on the Brazilian audience is its greatest virtue and vocation, as it contains collections that are essentially in Portuguese and follow editorial policies aimed at Brazilians. This, however, does not make it any less important; on the contrary: SPELL occupies a space that other databases, such as Scopus and the Web of Science, do not reach and will not ever be able to reach. It generates an impact index of Brazilian journals and articles that would otherwise be concealed of the national reader. SPELL is a necessary window to the collection of Brazilian publications in the area. It disseminates knowledge with scientific rigor nationally, and perhaps this is its greatest mission and virtue. However, the internationalization of the Brazilian production is a discussion in which we would like to engage with our associates.
What are the main points of criticism of SPELL? The good news is that the criticism is somewhat mild. However, the following perceptions are curious: “I run the risk of not accessing all the information I need to carry out my academic activities” and “It does not provide all the information I need to carry out my academic activities.” This reinforces one of the most frequent queries made by users via email: “How do I publish [my article] on SPELL?” These are issues that can be addressedbthrough better communication.
Finally, in order to add value and increase the continued use of SPELL (Table 6), we consider that we have to explore new opportunities. The database itself and the metrics devoted to national journals (which, otherwise, would not have a chance of having their impact measured) are a great contribution to the field. However, we should add value to different types of users. Readers, authors, trainers and editors, to name but a few, have different needs. It can have some sort of classification by theme for trainers to indicate its journals in their undergraduate and graduate courses. It can point authors to communities working on the same topic, which will allow them to build network, identify potential members of examining committees and request feedback from other authors working in the same subdomain. It can also provide editors with a lot of information that ca ben used strategically for editorial management. The uses are varied, and ANPAD can extract more value from this great initiative.
