How publication processes influence results

In standard literature on methods and research designs, the publication of a result happens at the very end of the research process. After data collection and analysis the results are published. We believe that this process can also happen the other way around: researchers have a publication strategy and develop a research project that fits that strategy. If this is the case, how does this exactly happen? Research shows that social scientists are required to buil d a diverse publication portfolio, which may include publications in English-language journals, monographs, anthologies in a non-English language, or visual presentations. Do researchers plan their projects with these requirements in mind? Do they analyze their data in different directions in order to create multiple outcomes that fit multiple pathways of publication? Simultaneously, some researcher or scientific institutions suggest to reduce the diversity of publishing pathways in favor of English-language journals to make scientists and their outputs comparable by bibliometrics. However, there are scientific methods that are less often published in the targeted journals. Do researchers use other methods in this case? To answer our question about everyday publishing practices of researchers, we interview authors about their research projects and compare their publications. We assume that different forms of text convey different knowledge. In addition, we interview editors and reviewers of scientific journals to get their perspective on the publication process. We follow the hypothesis that a diverse publication strategy would be important for the social sciences, because it increases the amount of scientific knowledge. To address our questions we employ a theory, which assumes that parts of the research process do not exist separately from each other and that research processes do not follow a linear path (from A data collection to B analysis to C publication), but that all these processes run simultaneously and are broken down and rationalized into successive steps after the process happened. If we follow this theory, step C, publishing, would be no longer just the last consequence or appendage of the research, but part of the research process entangled with A and B. We assume that this theory and our empirical research can be combined into a new model of scientific processes in the social sciences, which defines publication processes as a crucial part of research designs and methods.