Home  About us  Contact
 

Scholarly Communication (scholarly + communication)

Distribution by Scientific Domains
Information Science and Computing71%

Selected Abstracts

Scholarly communication and bibliometrics

ANNUAL REVIEW OF INFORMATION SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY (ELECTRONIC), Issue 1 2002
Christine L. Borgman
[source]

Response to ,Scholarly communication and concerns for our conferences'

AUSTRALIAN OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY JOURNAL, Issue 3 2009
Marilyn Pattison
No abstract is available for this article. [source]

Scholarly communication and concerns for our conferences

AUSTRALIAN OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY JOURNAL, Issue 2 2009
Natasha Lannin
No abstract is available for this article. [source]

Information resources in High-Energy Physics: Surveying the present landscape and charting the future course

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, Issue 1 2009
Anne Gentil-Beccot
Access to previous results is of paramount importance in the scientific process. Recent progress in information management focuses on building e-infrastructures for the optimization of the research workflow, through both policy-driven and user-pulled dynamics. For decades, High Energy Physics (HEP) has pioneered innovative solutions in the field of information management and dissemination. In light of a transforming information environment, it is important to assess the current usage of information resources by researchers and HEP provides a unique test bed for this assessment. A survey of about 10% of practitioners in the field reveals usage trends and information needs. Community-based services, such as the pioneering arXiv and SPIRES systems, largely answer the need of the scientists, with a limited but increasing fraction of younger users relying on Google. Commercial services offered by publishers or database vendors are essentially unused in the field. The survey offers an insight into the most important features that users require to optimize their research workflow. These results inform the future evolution of information management in HEP and, as these researchers are traditionally "early adopters" of innovation in scholarly communication, can inspire developments of disciplinary repositories serving other communities. [source]

Scholarly work and the shaping of digital access

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, Issue 11 2005
Carole L. Palmer
In the cycle of scholarly communication, scholars play the role of both consumer and contributor of intellectual works within the stores of recorded knowledge. In the digital environment scholars are seeking and using information in new ways and generating new types of scholarly products, many of which are specialized resources for access to research information. These practices have important implications for the collection and organization of digital access resources. Drawing on a series of qualitative studies investigating the information work of scientists and humanities scholars, specific information seeking activities influenced by the Internet and two general modes of information access evident in research practice are identified in this article. These conceptual modes of access are examined in relation to the digital access resources currently being developed by researchers in the humanities and neuroscience. Scholars' modes of access and their "working" and "implicit" assemblages of information represent what researchers actually do when gathering and working with research materials and therefore provide a useful framework for the collection and organization of access resources in research libraries. [source]

Network influences on scholarly communication in developmental dyslexia: A longitudinal follow-up

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, Issue 14 2003
Claudia A. Perry
Author cocitation analysis was used to explore ongoing changes in the intellectual structure of the hybrid problem area of developmental dyslexia for the period 1994,1998, and to address ambiguities in results raised by an earlier study of these researchers for the years 1976,1993. Results suggest that: (1) discrepancies between the structure of the sociometric (personal) and author cocitation networks reflect real differences, not temporal factors; (2) differences between cocitation patterns and reports in the literature, and corresponding delays in the visibility of emerging perspectives, are likely due to the "inertia" of aggregate cocitation data and/or by shifts by neuroscience-vision researchers to publication in more prominent journals; (3) a sharp rise in link density for the neuroscience-vision subgroup indicates increased cohesiveness and growing maturation for this emerging perspective; (4) shifts in subgroup membership, link density, patterns of coauthorship, and multiple factor loadings suggest possible convergence between other subgroups in the network and identify individuals who may play boundary-spanning roles within the network; and (5) changing patterns of cocitation throughout the network suggest the increasing influence of studies relating to neurobiological mechanisms underlying dyslexia. The possible contributions of such boundary spanners in addressing the substantial information and communication challenges posed by the increased interdisciplinary character of scholarship in general, also are discussed. [source]

The changing face of scientific discourse: Analysis of genomic and proteomic database usage and acceptance

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, Issue 10 2003
Cecelia Brown
The explosion of the field of molecular biology is paralleled by the growth in usage and acceptance of Web-based genomic and proteomic databases (GPD) such as GenBank and Protein Data Bank in the scholarly communication of scientists. Surveys, case studies, analysis of bibliographic records from Medline and CAPlus, and examination of "Instructions to Authors" sections of molecular biology journals all confirm the integral role of GPD in the scientific literature cycle. Over the past 20 years the place of GPD in the culture of molecular biologists was observed to move from tacit implication to explicit knowledge. Originally journals suggested deposition of data in GDP but by the late1980s, the majority of journals mandated deposition of data for a manuscript to be accepted for publication. A surge subsequently occurred in the number of articles retrievable from Medline and CAPlus using the keyword "GenBank". GPD were not found to a new form of publication, but rather a fundamental storage and retrieval mechanism for vast amounts of molecular biology information that support the creation of scientific intellectual property. For science to continue to advance, scientists unequivocally agreed that GDP must remain free of peer-review and available at no charge to the public. The results suggest that the existing models of scientific communication should be updated to incorporate GDP data deposition into the current continuum of scientific communication. [source]