InfoDoc MicroVeille – Page 290 – Veille dédiée aux Sciences de l'Information et des Bibliothèques // Collecting and Sharing research papers in Library and Information science ISSN 2429-3938

Réseaux sociaux académiques et diffusion de la production scientifique des chercheurs en biologie/médecine L’exemple de ResearchGate

Posted on 9 octobre 2017 by Hans Dillaerts

Auteurs/Authors : Christophe Boudry, Aline Bouchard

Les réseaux sociaux pour les chercheurs s’imposent au fil du temps auprès des communautés académiques, notamment grâce aux fonctionnalités de dépôt et de partage d’articles qu’ils proposent.

L’objet de cette étude est d’évaluer la proportion, la typologie (pre-print, version auteur non expertisée ; post-print auteur/éditeur, versions auteur et éditeur expertisées définitives) et la légalité des textes intégraux d’articles qui y sont déposés par les chercheurs, à partir d’un échantillon de 1 500 articles publiés entre 2013 et 2015 sélectionnés aléatoirement dans PubMed, en prenant pour exemple ResearchGate qui est très largement utilisé par la communauté médicale et biologique.

À titre de comparaison, l’accès au texte intégral des 1 500 articles via PubMed et PubMedCentral a également été évalué, mettant en évidence le rôle important que joue ResearchGate dans la fourniture de textes intégraux d’articles en biologie-médecine.

Cet article met également en perspective le positionnement des réseaux sociaux par rapport aux archives ouvertes et au libre accès.

URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01582202

Make researchers revisit past publications to improve reproducibility

Posted on 9 octobre 2017 by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Clare Fiala, Eleftherios P. Diamandis

Scientific irreproducibility is a major issue that has recently increased attention from publishers, authors, funders and other players in the scientific arena. Published literature suggests that 50-80% of all science performed is irreproducible. While various solutions to this problem have been proposed, none of them are quick and/or cheap.

Here, we propose one way of reducing scientific irreproducibility by asking authors to revisit their previous publications and provide a commentary after five years. We believe that this measure will alert authors not to over sell their results and will help with better planning and execution of their experiments.

We invite scientific journals to adapt this proposal immediately as a prerequisite for publishing.

URL : Make researchers revisit past publications to improve reproducibility

DOI : http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.12715.1

Incidence of predatory journals in computer science literature

Posted on 9 octobre 2017 by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Simona Ibba, Filippo Eros Pani, John Gregory Stockton, Giulio Barabino, Michele Marchesi, Danilo Tigano

Purpose

One of the main tasks of a researcher is to properly communicate the results he obtained. The choice of the journal in which to publish the work is therefore very important. However, not all journals have suitable characteristics for a correct dissemination of scientific knowledge.

Some publishers turn out to be unreliable and, against a payment, they publish whatever researchers propose. The authors call “predatory journals” these untrustworthy journals.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the incidence of predatory journals in computer science literature and present a tool that was developed for this purpose.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors focused their attention on editors, universities and publishers that are involved in this kind of publishing process. The starting point of their research is the list of scholarly open-access publishers and open-access stand-alone journals created by Jeffrey Beall.

Specifically, they analysed the presence of predatory journals in the search results obtained from Google Scholar in the engineering and computer science fields. They also studied the change over time of such incidence in the articles published between 2011 and 2015.

Findings

The analysis shows that the phenomenon of predatory journals somehow decreased in 2015, probably due to a greater awareness of the risks related to the reputation of the authors.

Originality/value

We focused on computer science field, using a specific sample of queries. We developed a software to automatically make queries to the search engine, and to detect predatory journals, using Beall’s list.

URL : Incidence of predatory journals in computer science literature

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1108/LR-12-2016-0108

Building a Disciplinary, World‐Wide Data Infrastructure

Posted on 8 octobre 2017 by Hans Dillaerts

Authors: Françoise Genova, Christophe Arviset, Bridget M. Almas, Laura Bartolo, Daan Broeder, Emily Law, Brian McMahon

Sharing scientific data with the objective of making it discoverable, accessible, reusable, and interoperable requires work and presents challenges being faced at the disciplinary level to define in particular how the data should be formatted and described.

This paper represents the Proceedings of a session held at SciDataCon 2016 (Denver, 12–13 September 2016). It explores the way a range of disciplines, namely materials science, crystallography, astronomy, earth sciences, humanities and linguistics, get organized at the international level to address those challenges. T

he disciplinary culture with respect to data sharing, science drivers, organization, lessons learnt and the elements of the data infrastructure which are or could be shared with others are briefly described. Commonalities and differences are assessed.

Common key elements for success are identified: data sharing should be science driven; defining the disciplinary part of the interdisciplinary standards is mandatory but challenging; sharing of applications should accompany data sharing. Incentives such as journal and funding agency requirements are also similar.

For all, social aspects are more challenging than technological ones. Governance is more diverse, often specific to the discipline organization. Being problem‐driven is also a key factor of success for building bridges to enable interdisciplinary research.

Several international data organizations such as CODATA, RDA and WDS can facilitate the establishment of disciplinary interoperability frameworks. As a spin‐off of the session, a RDA Disciplinary Interoperability Interest Group is proposed to bring together representatives across disciplines to better organize and drive the discussion for prioritizing, harmonizing and efficiently articulating disciplinary needs.

URL : Building a Disciplinary, World‐Wide Data Infrastructure

DOI : http://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2017-016

Betweenness and diversity in journal citation networks as measures of interdisciplinarity—A tribute to Eugene Garfield

Posted on 8 octobre 2017 by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Loet Leydesdorff, Caroline S. Wagner, Lutz Bornmann

Journals were central to Eugene Garfield’s research interests. Among other things, journals are considered as units of analysis for bibliographic databases such as the Web of Science and Scopus. In addition to providing a basis for disciplinary classifications of journals, journal citation patterns span networks across boundaries to variable extents.

Using betweenness centrality (BC) and diversity, we elaborate on the question of how to distinguish and rank journals in terms of interdisciplinarity. Interdisciplinarity, however, is difficult to operationalize in the absence of an operational definition of disciplines; the diversity of a unit of analysis is sample-dependent. BC can be considered as a measure of multi-disciplinarity.

Diversity of co-citation in a citing document has been considered as an indicator of knowledge integration, but an author can also generate trans-disciplinary—that is, non-disciplined—variation by citing sources from other disciplines.

Diversity in the bibliographic coupling among citing documents can analogously be considered as diffusion or differentiation of knowledge across disciplines. Because the citation networks in the cited direction reflect both structure and variation, diversity in this direction is perhaps the best available measure of interdisciplinarity at the journal level.

Furthermore, diversity is based on a summation and can therefore be decomposed; differences among (sub)sets can be tested for statistical significance. In the appendix, a general-purpose routine for measuring diversity in networks is provided.

URL : Betweenness and diversity in journal citation networks as measures of interdisciplinarity—A tribute to Eugene Garfield

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2528-2

Pursuing Best Performance in Research Data Management by Using the Capability Maturity Model and Rubrics

Posted on 7 octobre 2017 by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Jian Qin, Kevin Crowston, Arden Kirkland

Objective

To support the assessment and improvement of research data management (RDM) practices to increase its reliability, this paper describes the development of a capability maturity model (CMM) for RDM. Improved RDM is now a critical need, but low awareness of – or lack of – data management is still common among research projects.

Methods

A CMM includes four key elements: key practices, key process areas, maturity levels, and generic processes. These elements were determined for RDM by a review and synthesis of the published literature on and best practices for RDM.

Results

The RDM CMM includes five chapters describing five key process areas for research data management: 1) data management in general; 2) data acquisition, processing, and quality assurance; 3) data description and representation; 4) data dissemination; and 5) repository services and preservation.

In each chapter, key data management practices are organized into four groups according to the CMM’s generic processes: commitment to perform, ability to perform, tasks performed, and process assessment (combining the original measurement and verification).

For each area of practice, the document provides a rubric to help projects or organizations assess their level of maturity in RDM.

Conclusions

By helping organizations identify areas of strength and weakness, the RDM CMM provides guidance on where effort is needed to improve the practice of RDM.

URL : Pursuing Best Performance in Research Data Management by Using the Capability Maturity Model and Rubrics

DOI : https://doi.org/10.7191/jeslib.2017.1113

Processus de diffusion des mémoires de Master. Littérature grise et accessibilité : un enjeu majeur dans le domaine de la Recherche. Étude de cas : projet MemorySID

Posted on 7 octobre 2017 by Hans Dillaerts

Auteur/Author : Sylvain Vanacker

Ce mémoire a été élaboré à la suite d’un stage ayant eu lieu à l’Atelier National de Reproduction de Thèses de Villeneuve d’Ascq. Il s’agit d’une étude de cas concernant le Projet MemorySID et s’intéressant aux processus de traitement et de diffusion de mémoires de stage d’étudiants de Master en Sciences de l’Information et de la Documentation.

L’environnement de travail y est décrit ainsi que les missions confiées et la méthodologie mise en place. Ce mémoire de stage évoque les phases d’indexation et de vérification des méta-données de mémoires sur la plate-forme Nuxeo ainsi que les étapes de diffusion dans l’ENT de Lille 3 et en Libre Accès dans l’archive ouverte DUMAS.

Enfin, une analyse étudiant l’impact et l’importance qu’engendre l’accès aux mémoires de Master et à la Littérature Grise dans le domaine de la Recherche complète ce mémoire et permet de s’interroger sur l’intérêt de cette démarche.

URL : https://dumas.ccsd.cnrs.fr/dumas-01558312