InfoDoc MicroVeille – Page 3 – Veille dédiée aux Sciences de l'Information et des Bibliothèques // Collecting and Sharing research papers in Library and Information science ISSN 2429-3938

Opening Pandora’s box: Developing reviewer rhetorical sensitivity through retracted articles

Posted on 8 janvier 2026 by Hans Dillaerts

Author : Baraa Khuder

Retractions issued for misconduct offer a unique window into how questionable research is rhetorically constructed and made to appear credible. This study investigates how engaging with retracted articles can serve as a pedagogical tool for reviewer training, with particular attention to the rhetorical mechanisms through which unreliability is performed.

Twenty STEM doctoral researchers analyzed self-selected retracted papers using guided critical-reading questions to identify problematic rhetorical features. Across the analyses, five recurring issues emerged: intertextual falsification, methodological opacity, rhetorical inconsistency, rhetorical overstatement, and terminological distortion.

The findings indicate that this approach has the potential to raise doctoral students’ rhetorical sensitivity by enabling them to detect subtle markers of unreliability and to adopt a more evaluative rhetorical stance toward scholarly texts.

Retracted articles thus can provide an authentic pedagogical resource for developing reviewer rhetorical sensitivity within doctoral education.

URL : Opening Pandora’s box: Developing reviewer rhetorical sensitivity through retracted articles

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1080/08989621.2025.2607681

A Cross-Disciplinary Analysis of AI Policies in Academic Peer Review

Posted on 7 janvier 2026 by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Zhongshi Wang, Mengyue Gong

Rapid advances of artificial intelligence (AI) have substantially impacted the field of academic publishing. This study examines AI integration in peer review by analysing policies from 439 high- and 363 middle-impact factor (IF) journals across disciplines. Using grounded theory, we identify patterns in AI policy adoption.

Results show 83% of high-IF journals have AI guidelines, with varying stringency across disciplines. Meanwhile, only 75% of middle-IF journals have AI guidelines. Science, technology, and medicine (STM) disciplines exhibit stricter regulations, while humanities and social sciences adopt more lenient approaches.

Key ethical concerns focus on confidentiality risks, accountability gaps, and AI’s inability to replicate critical human judgement. Publisher policies emphasise transparency, human oversight, and restricted AI usage for auxiliary tasks only, such as grammar checks or reviewer finding.

Disciplinary differences highlight the need for tailored guidelines that balance efficiency gains with research integrity. This study proposes collaborative frameworks for responsible AI integration. It focuses on accountability, transparency, and interdisciplinary policy development to address peer review challenges.

URL : A Cross-Disciplinary Analysis of AI Policies in Academic Peer Review

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.2035

Scientific production on data repositories and open science published in the Web of Science database: Methodi Ordinatio and content analysis

Posted on 22 décembre 2025 by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Sinval Adalberto Rodrigues-Junior, Marcelo Votto Texeira

The opening of scientific data proposed by the Open Science movement presupposes careful planning for data collection, organization, and treatment, aiming at their sharing, accessibility, and reuse. Data repositories have been conceived as structures necessary to enable open access to data.

This study aimed to analyze the influence of data repositories on the disclosure and sharing of scientific data proposed by the Open Science movement. The Methodi Ordinatio, developed to organize a portfolio of scientific publications, was adopted to analyze the subject of ‘Data Repositories’ and ‘Open Science’.

The studies were ranked using the InOrdinatio index, and the 15 best ranked studies were included and analyzed through Bardin’s content analysis. Most studies describe the structure involved in data repositories within the biological, chemical, and health areas.

Other studies addressed data reuse, data organization and analysis processes and tools, as well as data selection and classification algorithms. The units of analysis selected for the content analysis were categorized as open access, information technologies, data processing, and information retrieval.

Systems (processes and structures), metadata standards, ontologies, semantic web, data types, and their management were addressed by these studies. It is concluded that open data repositories are growing rapidly. Production with the greatest impact has occurred in the biological and biomedical/health areas, highlighting the structure involved in repositories within these fields.

Data repositories provide systems for depositing, managing, searching, accessing, and reusing data based on processes and technologies — often developed as open-source software — in alignment with the proposed Open Science model.

URL : Scientific production on data repositories and open science published in the Web of Science database: Methodi Ordinatio and content analysis

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1590/2318-0889202537e2513075

And then a miracle occurs—a review of theory of change models for societal impact of research

Posted on 17 décembre 2025 by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Ole Henning Sørensen, Stine Dandanell Garn, Steffen Bohni Nielsen

Through an umbrella review, this article identified and surveyed 24 societal impact of research (SIR) models. Most of these models were developed within health domains and in Anglo-Saxon countries. The authors mapped the SIR models against constituent components of a robust theory of change.

The study found that logic models were predominantly used to conceive SIR models. Yet, only nine models had explicit causal links, and only two made explicit assumptions about why research contributes to societal change.

The old proverb among evaluators—when using theories of change to describe change—“and then a miracle occurs…,” rings uncomfortably true to the current state of SIR theorizing. Further theorizing and conceptual clarity are needed to advance the science of research impact.

URL : And then a miracle occurs—a review of theory of change models for societal impact of research

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1093/reseval/rvaf057

Towards a terroir approach to science communication and its evidencing

Posted on 17 décembre 2025 by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Marianne Achiam, Martin Grünfeld, Sabrina Vitting-Seerup,
Jacob Thorek Jensen, Louise Whiteley

This essay proposes terroir as a metaphor for rethinking science communication. In contrast to dominant calls for a science of science communication, grounded in broadly replicable and generalisable methods, we suggest that communication practices are fundamentally shaped by the particularities of place, people, histories, and more-than-human relations.

Drawing on the agricultural origins of terroir, we argue that good science communication is not about imposing control but about cultivating resonance within specific ecosystems of meaning. This perspective also invites us to recognise the value of intuitive knowledge, local practice, and arts-based methods, which are often excluded from dominant frameworks.

As part of the research programme Addressing Sustainability with Arts-Based Science Communication, we explore co-creative, arts-based approaches that surface emotional, sensory, and contextual dimensions of sustainability science communication.

Ultimately, we call for a shift: from the search for universal best practices to the careful, situated crafting of an arts of science communication.

URL : Towards a terroir approach to science communication and its evidencing

DOI : https://doi.org/10.22323/161120251104104659

The Drain of Scientific Publishing

Posted on 16 décembre 2025 by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Fernanda Beigel, Dan Brockington, Paolo Crosetto, Gemma Derrick, Aileen Fyfe, Pablo Gomez Barreiro, Mark A. Hanson, Stefanie Haustein, Vincent Larivière, Christine Noe, Stephen Pinfield, James Wilsdon

The domination of scientific publishing in the Global North by major commercial publishers is harmful to science.

We need the most powerful members of the research community, funders, governments and Universities, to lead the drive to re-communalise publishing to serve science not the market.

DOI : https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2511.04820