A comprehensive comparative analysis of publication monopoly phenomenon in scientific journals

Abstract

The increasing number of academic practitioners has resulted in a significantly increased volume of scientific papers, attracting considerable interest among researchers examining this correlation. However, little research has been devoted to the phenomenon of scientists monopolizing authorship in academic journals. This study thus introduces the term Publication Monopoly (PM) to describe this effect. The study refers to the prolific authors as Monopoly Authors. In addition, it proposes a Monopoly Index to assess PM severity. For each journal, the Monopoly Contribution (MC) quantifies the impact of Monopoly Authors. Using the Open Academic Graph dataset, our analysis explores the prevalence of PM and the corresponding MC in selected journals and academic fields. The findings demonstrate a positive relationship between the number of articles published and the likelihood of PM occurrence in most journals. Furthermore, fields relying heavily on laboratory environments or specialized equipment are particularly susceptible to PM. Additionally, once a journal becomes entrenched in PM, it is challenging to alleviate this phenomenon over time. Our study of PM aimed to prompt academic practitioners to carefully consider the likelihood of acceptance in journals characterized by high PM levels. Moreover, the study encourages journals to reconsider their need to accept more articles from Monopoly Authors.