FR

Quels choix juridiques pour la médiation culturelle et scientifique dans l’environnement numérique ?

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Auteur/Author : Lionel Maurel

La dimension juridique n’est pas forcément celle à laquelle on songe en premier lorsque l’on envisage les «enjeux numériques pour la médiation scientifique et culturelle du passé».

Pourtant, tout autant que la technique, le droit est devenu aujourd’hui un facteur essentiel d’interopérabilité dans l’environnement numérique. Tout projet culturel ou scientifique produisant des données et/ou des contenus doit s’interroger sur les conditions juridiques de mise à disposition de ces objets, sous peine que ces questions ne se posent ensuite a posteriori, en provoquant alors souvent difficultés et blocages pour ne pas avoir été suffisamment anticipées.

Cette dimension juridique est néanmoins de plus en plus importante pour les institutions culturelles (archives, bibliothèques, musées, etc.), ainsi que pour les équipes de chercheurs à mesure que la démarche du Linked Open Data (LOD) se développe et place les porteurs de projets devant des choix souvent complexes à effectuer.

L’ouverture des données implique en effet d’être en mesure de choisir entre plusieurs licences parmi le panel d’outils contractuels existants pour les appliquer à différents objets, sachant que leurs effets varient sensiblement et ne sont pas neutres pour les réutilisateurs en aval.

La visibilité des projets, leur capacité à nouer des relations avec d’autres initiatives et les formes même de médiation qui pourront être mis en oeuvre auprès de différents publics découlent en partie des décisions qui auront été prises à propos des conditions d’utilisation des données et contenus.

Le présent article vise à décrire les principes de base à partir desquels ces choix peuvent être effectués dans de bonnes conditions. En particulier, cet article s’attachera à montrer que faire le choix de l’ouverture par le biais de licences adaptées constitue un atout pour le développement de la médiation autour des données de la recherche.

URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01577998/

 

EN

Information in the ecosystem: Against the “information ecosystem”

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Timothy B. Norris, Todd Suomela

The “information ecosystem” metaphor is widely used in academic libraries and has become nearly ubiquitous when speaking of the information systems that support scholarly communication and varied forms of data sharing and publication.

The trending use of this language arises from non-academic applications — for example in big data (the Hadoop ecosystem) or software development (the node.js ecosystem) — and there remains little critical examination of the use of this metaphor.

Indeed, the definition of ecosystem as the set of relations between living organisms and their surrounding non-living environment is apparently not directly a part of the metaphor.

This paper first describes the emergence of ecological thinking and how it was influenced by early information science and then explores how different “ecologies” are used within the academy, including in the emergent field of information ecology.

A short critique of the metaphor is then posed and the paper concludes that the information ecosystem metaphor is useful, yet at the same time there are dangerous elements that render aspects of human societies and natural ecosystems invisible.

URL : http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/6847

EN

The interactive library as a virtual working space

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Author : Andreas Degkwitz

The internet and the new digital media are challenging the traditional business model of academic libraries and enable new capabilities of information provisioning and new shapes of collaborations between the librarians and the users.

To pick up the demands and the expectations of the many users, whose information behavior is heavily influenced by the internet, a new business model for academic libraries has to be designed urgently.

The aim of the project is to analyze and to identify the organizational and technical requirements of a business model for the future library, which is based on the potential of the internet and the new media.

The result is a pilot study about the interactive, multi-user driven library as the future business model for libraries.

URL : The interactive library as a virtual working space

DOI : http://doi.org/10.18352/lq.10214

EN

Academics’ behaviors and attitudes towards open access publishing in scholarly journals

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Jennifer Rowley, Frances Johnson, Laura Sbaffi, Will Frass, Elaine Devine

While there is significant progress with policy and a lively debate regarding the potential impact of open access publishing, few studies have examined academics’ behavior and attitudes to open access publishing (OAP) in scholarly journals.

This article seeks to address this gap through an international and interdisciplinary survey of academics. Issues covered include: use of and intentions regarding OAP, and perceptions regarding advantages and disadvantages of OAP, journal article publication services, peer review, and reuse.

Despite reporting engagement in OAP, academics were unsure about their future intentions regarding OAP. Broadly, academics identified the potential for wider circulation as the key advantage of OAP, and were more positive about its benefits than they were negative about its disadvantages. As regards services, rigorous peer review, followed by rapid publication were most valued.

Academics reported strong views on reuse of their work; they were relatively happy with noncommercial reuse, but not in favor of commercial reuse, adaptations, and inclusion in anthologies. Comparing science, technology, and medicine with arts, humanities, and social sciences showed a significant difference in attitude on a number of questions, but, in general, the effect size was small, suggesting that attitudes are relatively consistent across the academic community.

URL : http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/114578/

EN

How quickly do publications get read? The evolution of Mendeley reader counts for new articles

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Nabeil Maflahi, Mike Thelwall

Within science, citation counts are widely used to estimate research impact but publication delays mean that they are not useful for recent research. This gap can be filled by Mendeley reader counts, which are valuable early impact indicators for academic articles because they appear before citations and correlate strongly with them.

Nevertheless, it is not known how Mendeley readership counts accumulate within the year of publication, and so it is unclear how soon they can be used. In response, this paper reports a longitudinal weekly study of the Mendeley readers of articles in six library and information science journals from 2016.

The results suggest that Mendeley readers accrue from when articles are first available online and continue to steadily build. For journals with large publication delays, articles can already have substantial numbers of readers by their publication date.

Thus, Mendeley reader counts may even be useful as early impact indicators for articles before they have been officially published in a journal issue. If field normalised indicators are needed, then these can be generated when journal issues are published using the online first date.

URL : http://hdl.handle.net/2436/620522

 

EN

Evolution of Wikipedia’s medical content: past, present and future

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Thomas Shafee, Gwinyai Masukume, Lisa Kipersztok, Diptanshu Da, Mikael Häggström, James Heilman

As one of the most commonly read online sources of medical information, Wikipedia is an influential public health platform. Its medical content, community, collaborations and challenges have been evolving since its creation in 2001, and engagement by the medical community is vital for ensuring its accuracy and completeness.

Both the encyclopaedia’s internal metrics as well as external assessments of its quality indicate that its articles are highly variable, but improving. Although content can be edited by anyone, medical articles are primarily written by a core group of medical professionals.

Diverse collaborative ventures have enhanced medical article quality and reach, and opportunities for partnerships are more available than ever. Nevertheless, Wikipedia’s medical content and community still face significant challenges, and a socioecological model is used to structure specific recommendations.

We propose that the medical community should prioritise the accuracy of biomedical information in the world’s most consulted encyclopaedia.

URL : Evolution of Wikipedia’s medical content: past, present and future

Alternative location : http://jech.bmj.com/content/early/2017/08/24/jech-2016-208601