Les carnets de recherche en ligne, espac…

Posté le par

Les carnets de recherche en ligne, espace d’une conversation scientifique décentrée :

“Le carnet de recherches produit un décentrement des lieux d’écriture vers des espaces moins codifiés et moins formels que les espaces de publication traditionnels, prenant ainsi le relais de formes plus volatiles et moins individuelles de conversation. Ce qui est en jeu est moins une économie de l’écriture que de la lecture. En jetant les bases d’une nouvelle relation au lectorat, le carnet de recherche offre l’opportunité de réinventer l’écriture scientifique autour du paradigme de la conversation, renouant ainsi avec une vieille tradition de débat scientifique, tout en se dotant d’une rhétorique adaptée au nouvel espace qui se met en place.”

URL : http://archivesic.ccsd.cnrs.fr/sic_00439849/fr/

Simplifying the Scientific Writing and Review Process with SciFlow

Posté le par

Scientific writing is an essential part of a student’s and researcher’s everyday life. In this paper we investigate the particularities of scientific writing and explore the features and limitations of existing tools for scientific writing.

Deriving from this analysis and an online survey of the scientific writing processes of students and researchers at the University of Paderborn, we identify key principles to simplify scientific writing and reviewing.

Finally, we introduce a novel approach to support scientific writing with a tool called SciFlow that builds on these principles and state of the art technologies like cloud computing.

URL : http://www.mdpi.com/1999-5903/2/4/645/

Fractional counting of citations in rese…

Posté le par

Fractional counting of citations in research evaluation: An option for cross- and interdisciplinary assessments :

“In the case of the scientometric evaluation of multi- or interdisciplinary units one risks to compare apples with oranges: each paper has to assessed in comparison to an appropriate reference set. We suggest that the set of citing papers first can be considered as the relevant representation of the field of impact. In order to normalize for differences in citation behavior among fields, citations can be fractionally counted proportionately to the length of the reference lists in the citing papers. This new method enables us to compare among units with different disciplinary affiliations at the paper level and also to assess the statistical significance of differences among sets. Twenty-seven departments of the Tsinghua University in Beijing are thus compared. Among them, the Department of Chinese Language and Linguistics is upgraded from the 19th to the second position in the ranking. The overall impact of 19 of the 27 departments is not significantly different at the 5% level when thus normalized for different citation potentials”.

URL : http://arxiv.org/abs/1012.0359

How and why scholars cite on Twitter

Posté le par

Scholars are increasingly using the microblogging service Twitter as a communication platform. Since citing is a central practice of scholarly communication, we investigated whether and how scholars cite on Twitter.

We conducted interviews and harvested 46,515 tweets from a sample of 28 scholars and found that they do cite on Twitter, though often indirectly. Twitter citations are part of a fast-moving conversation that participants believe reflects scholarly impact. Twitter citation metrics could augment traditional citation analysis, supporting a “scientometrics 2.0”.

URL : http://clintlalonde.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/201_Final_Submission.pdf

E-only scholarly journals: overcoming th…

Posté le par

E-only scholarly journals: overcoming the barriers :

“In recent years, publishers, librarians and academics have seized the opportunities offered by the electronic publication of scholarly journals. Despite the popularity of e-journals, however, content continues to be published, acquired and used in physical printed form. In the UK, we are still some way from a wholly electronic journal environment. This study is prompted by a concern from publishers and librarians that the retention of both printed and e-journal formats adds unnecessary costs throughout the supply chain from publisher to library to user. In view of the many advantages of electronic journals, this report sets out to understand the barriers to a move to e-only provision of scholarly journals in the UK, and to investigate what various players within the scholarly communications system could do in order to encourage such a move.”

URL : http://www.rin.ac.uk/system/files/attachments/E-only_report_for_screen.pdf

Open Licenses and Radical Shift in Digit…

Posté le par

Open Licenses and Radical Shift in Digital Content Distribution :

“World Wide Web is becoming the most preferred location for academic community, librarians and other professionals for communication, content generation and transfer. They are extensively making use of web services such as blogs, podcast, wiki’s, digital libraries and institutional repositories for the transfer and access of information content in digital format. Text, images, audio and video in digitized format facilitate easy creation, transfer and duplication of information throughout networks. Reckless use and transfer of digital content through Internet invokes threats to copyright claims of commercial content creators. This situation force commercial publishers to make use of technology and law to ensure security and prevent unauthorized access of digital content.”

URL : http://eprints.rclis.org/19438/

Submission Fees – A tool in the transiti…

Posté le par

Submission Fees – A tool in the transition to open access? :

The study consisted of an initial literature survey, followed by an exploration of the experience of those currently using submission fees conducted via interviews (primarily with journal editors and publishers). We then developed some possible models for submission fees within open access that were tested and refined through discussions with relevant stakeholders. Finally the potential viability of these models was explored through a series of semi-structured interviews with stakeholders
including publishers, libraries, research funders, research institutions and individual researchers. In
total some 40 interviews were conducted.”

URL : http://knowledge-exchange.info/Admin/Public/DWSDownload.aspx?File=%2fFiles%2fFiler%2fdownloads%2fOpen+Access%2fKE_Submission_fees_Short_Report_2010-11-25.pdf