Search results

1 – 10 of over 125000
To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 3 June 2020

Elisha R.T. Chiware

The paper presents a literature review on research data management services in African academic and research libraries on the backdrop of the advancing open science and…

Abstract

Purpose

The paper presents a literature review on research data management services in African academic and research libraries on the backdrop of the advancing open science and open research data infrastructures. It provides areas of focus for library to support open research data.

Design/methodology/approach

The literature analysis and future role of African libraries in research data management services were based on three areas as follows:open science, research infrastructures and open data infrastructures. Focussed literature searches were conducted across several electronic databases and discovery platforms, and a qualitative content analysis approach was used to explore the themes based on a coded list.

Findings

The review reports of an environment where open science in Africa is still at developmental stages. Research infrastructures face funding and technical challenges. Data management services are in formative stages with progress reported in a few countries where open science and research data management policies have emerged, cyber and data infrastructures are being developed and limited data librarianship courses are being taught.

Originality/value

The role of the academic and research libraries in Africa remains important in higher education and the national systems of research and innovation. Libraries should continue to align with institutional and national trends in response to the provision of data management services and as partners in the development of research infrastructures.

Details

Library Management, vol. 41 no. 6/7
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0143-5124

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 13 June 2016

Katarzyna Szkuta and David Osimo

This paper aims to analyse a set of converging trends underpinning a larger phenomenon called science 2.0 and to assess what are the most important implications for…

Downloads
6178

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to analyse a set of converging trends underpinning a larger phenomenon called science 2.0 and to assess what are the most important implications for scientific method and research institutions.

Design/methodology/approach

It is based on a triangulation of exploratory methods which include a wide-ranging literature review, Web-based mapping and in-depth interviews with stakeholders.

Findings

The main implications of science 2.0 are enhanced efficiency, transparency and reliability; raise of data-driven science; microcontributions on a macroscale; multidimensional, immediate and multiform evaluation of science; disaggregation of the value chain of service providers for scientists; influx of multiple actors and the democratisation of science.

Originality/value

The paper rejects the notion of science 2.0 as the mere adoption of Web 2.0 technologies in science and puts forward an original integrated definition covering three trends that have not yet been analysed together: open science, citizens science and data-intensive science. It argues that these trends are mutually reinforcing and puts forward their main implications. It concludes with the identification of three enablers of science 2.0 – policy measures, individual practice of scientists and new infrastructure and services and sees the main bottleneck in lack of incentives on the individual level.

Details

Foresight, vol. 18 no. 3
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 1463-6689

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 18 June 2020

Carin Graminius

The purpose of this paper is to explore and analyse interfaces between scholarly and science communication practices by using the production of open letters on climate…

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to explore and analyse interfaces between scholarly and science communication practices by using the production of open letters on climate change as a point of departure. Furthermore, the paper highlights an understudied form of science communication – open letters.

Design/methodology/approach

The material consists of nine open letters on climate change, written and signed by academics and published in 2018–2019, as well as 13 semi-structured interviews with the initiators and co-authors of the letters. The interviews were analysed by qualitative thematic analysis and grouped into thematic clusters.

Findings

The study finds that three practices used in scholarly communication – more specifically: peer review, professional community building and, to a certain extent, communication as “merit-making” – are central in the making of the open letters, illustrating an integration of scholarly communication practices in academic science communication activities.

Social implications

The study suggests that the conflation of communication practices needs to be seen in relation to larger structural changes in the academic working environment, as well as in relation to the specific environment in which communication about climate change occurs.

Originality/value

This study contends that the proposed conflation between scholarly and science communication concerns not only texts and genres but also practices integral to contemporary science, thereby conflating the forms of communication at a practical level.

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 21 November 2016

Joachim Schöpfel, Coline Ferrant, Francis André and Renaud Fabre

This paper aims to present empirical evidence on the opinion and behaviour of French scientists (senior management level) regarding open access (OA) to scientific and…

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to present empirical evidence on the opinion and behaviour of French scientists (senior management level) regarding open access (OA) to scientific and technical information.

Design/methodology/approach

The results are part of a nationwide survey on scientific information and documentation with 432 directors of French public research laboratories conducted by the French National Research Center (CNRS) in 2014.

Findings

The CNRS senior research managers (laboratory directors) globally share the positive opinion towards OA revealed by other studies with researchers from the UK, Germany, the USA and other countries. However, they are more supportive of open repositories (green road) than of OA journal publishing (gold). The response patterns reveal a gap between generally positive opinions about OA and less supportive behaviours, principally publishing articles with article processing charges (APCs). A small group of senior research managers does not seem to be interested in green or gold OA and reluctant to self-archiving and OA publishing. Similar to other studies, the French survey confirms disciplinary differences, i.e. a stronger support for self-archiving of records and documents in HAL by scientists from Mathematics, Physics and Informatics than from Biology, Earth Sciences and Chemistry; and more experience and positive feelings with OA publishing and payment of APCs in Biology than in Mathematics or in Social Sciences and Humanities. Disciplinary differences and specific French factors are discussed, in particular in the context of the new European policy in favour of Open Science.

Originality/value

For the first time, a nationwide survey was conducted with the senior research management level from all scientific disciplines. The response rate was high (>30 per cent), and the results provide good insight into the real awareness, support and uptake of OA by senior research managers who provide both models (examples for good practice) and opinion leadership.

Details

Interlending & Document Supply, vol. 44 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0264-1615

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 16 January 2009

Jenny Fry, Ralph Schroeder and Matthijs den Besten

This paper seeks to discuss the question of “openness” in e‐Science.

Downloads
1612

Abstract

Purpose

This paper seeks to discuss the question of “openness” in e‐Science.

Design/methodology/approach

The study is based on 12 in‐depth interviews with principal investigators, project managers and developers involved in UK e‐Science projects, together with supporting documentary evidence from project web sites. The approach was to explore the juxtaposition of research governance at the institutional level and local research practices at the project level. Interview questions focused on research inputs, software development processes, access to resources, project documentation, dissemination of outputs and by‐products, licensing issues, and institutional contracts.

Findings

The findings suggest that, although there is a widely shared ethos of openness in everyday research practice, there are many uncertainties and yet‐to‐be resolved issues, despite strong policy imperatives towards openly shared resources.

Research limitations/implications

The paper concludes by observing a stratification of openness in practice and the need for more nuanced understanding of openness at the level of policy making. This research was based on interviews within a limited number of e‐Science/Social Science projects and the intention is to address this in future work by scaling the study up to a survey that will reach the entire UK e‐Science/Social Science community.

Practical implications

The fundamental challenge in resolving openness in practice and policy, and thereby moving towards a sustainable infrastructure for e‐Science, is the coordination and integration of goals across e‐Science efforts, rather than one of resolving IPR (Intellectual Property Rights) issues, which has been the central focus of openness debates thus far.

Originality/value

The question of openness has previously been posed on the macro‐level of research policy, e.g. whether science as a whole can be characterized as open science, or in relation to the dissemination of published outputs, e.g. Open Access. Instead, a fine‐grained perspective is taken focusing on individual research projects and the various facets of openness in practice.

Details

Journal of Documentation, vol. 65 no. 1
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0022-0418

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 5 May 2021

Dumitru Roman, Neal Reeves, Esteban Gonzalez, Irene Celino, Shady Abd El Kader, Philip Turk, Ahmet Soylu, Oscar Corcho, Raquel Cedazo, Gloria Re Calegari, Damiano Scandolari and Elena Simperl

Citizen Science – public participation in scientific projects – is becoming a global practice engaging volunteer participants, often non-scientists, with scientific…

Abstract

Purpose

Citizen Science – public participation in scientific projects – is becoming a global practice engaging volunteer participants, often non-scientists, with scientific research. Citizen Science is facing major challenges, such as quality and consistency, to reap open the full potential of its outputs and outcomes, including data, software and results. In this context, the principles put forth by Data Science and Open Science domains are essential for alleviating these challenges, which have been addressed at length in these domains. The purpose of this study is to explore the extent to which Citizen Science initiatives capitalise on Data Science and Open Science principles.

Design/methodology/approach

The authors analysed 48 Citizen Science projects related to pollution and its effects. They compared each project against a set of Data Science and Open Science indicators, exploring how each project defines, collects, analyses and exploits data to present results and contribute to knowledge.

Findings

The results indicate several shortcomings with respect to commonly accepted Data Science principles, including lack of a clear definition of research problems and limited description of data management and analysis processes, and Open Science principles, including lack of the necessary contextual information for reusing project outcomes.

Originality/value

In the light of this analysis, the authors provide a set of guidelines and recommendations for better adoption of Data Science and Open Science principles in Citizen Science projects, and introduce a software tool to support this adoption, with a focus on preparation of data management plans in Citizen Science projects.

Details

Data Technologies and Applications, vol. 55 no. 5
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 2514-9288

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Book part
Publication date: 28 April 2021

Bryan G. Cook, Lydia A. Beahm, Anna Moriah Myers, Victoria J. VanUitert and Sarah Emily Wilson

Scientific research provides a reliable means for developing and accumulating knowledge bases to guide policy and practice. However, evidence from meta-research and…

Abstract

Scientific research provides a reliable means for developing and accumulating knowledge bases to guide policy and practice. However, evidence from meta-research and large-scale replication projects suggests that the published research base likely reflects bias, which threatens the validity and credibility of research-based recommendations. Moreover, there is limited accessibility to research reports, which limits the impact and application of scientific research. In this chapter, we propose that open-science reforms, which aim to make the research process as open and transparent as possible, can be applied to help address these issues. We describe and discuss four open-science practices – preregistration and Registered Reports, open data and materials, open peer review, and open access and preprints – and propose that they may become one of the next big things in special education research.

Details

The Next Big Thing in Learning and Behavioral Disabilities
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-80071-749-7

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 13 September 2013

Sarika Sawant

The present paper is compilation of open access resources in the subject area library and information science (LIS) and their usefulness in the LIS teaching and learning…

Downloads
1498

Abstract

Purpose

The present paper is compilation of open access resources in the subject area library and information science (LIS) and their usefulness in the LIS teaching and learning process. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

Design/methodology/approach

Researcher compiled list by visiting library science department web sites, library web sites, OA forums/blogs, etc.

Findings

The library science subject area is rich in various forms of open access literature which is reported in the paper.

Originality/value

One of the first studies to report various forms of open access literature in the library science subject area.

To view the access options for this content please click here
Book part
Publication date: 16 December 2017

John B. Davis

In his 1931 unpublished “Surplus Product” manuscript Sraffa used an open–closed distinction to explain the relationship between the “economic field” and distribution. This…

Abstract

In his 1931 unpublished “Surplus Product” manuscript Sraffa used an open–closed distinction to explain the relationship between the “economic field” and distribution. This chapter examines Sraffa’s thinking in this regard, and shows how it allowed him to resolve a problem he encountered in his early objectivist representation of commodity production in economies with a surplus. The chapter argues that Sraffa adopted a view different from Bertalanffy’s general systems theory understanding of open and closed systems developed around the same time in such a way as to address the specific nature of economics. The chapter compares two related interpretations of Sraffa’s thinking in regard to the open–closed distinction developed by Arena and Ginzburg, and also addresses how Sraffa’s thinking regarding open and closed systems compares with similar thinking of Wittgenstein and Gramsci. The concluding discussion contrasts Sraffa’s causal reasoning with mainstream economics’ ceteris paribus method of causal reasoning.

Details

Including a Symposium on New Directions in Sraffa Scholarship
Type: Book
ISBN: 978-1-78714-539-9

Keywords

To view the access options for this content please click here
Article
Publication date: 21 November 2016

Joachim Schöpfel

The purpose of this paper is to propose a personal viewpoint on the development of document supply in the context of the recent European Union (EU) decisions on open science.

Downloads
559

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this paper is to propose a personal viewpoint on the development of document supply in the context of the recent European Union (EU) decisions on open science.

Design/methodology/approach

The paper provides some elements to the usual questions of service development, about business, customers, added value, environment and objectives.

Findings

The EU goal for open science is 100 per cent available research results in 2020. To meet the challenge, document supply must change, include more and other content, serve different targets groups, apply innovative technology and provide knowledge. If not, document supply will become a marginalized library service.

Originality/value

Basically, open science is not library-friendly, and it does not offer a solution for the actual problems of document supply. But it may provide an opportunity for document supply to become a modern service able to deal with new forms of unequal access and digital divide.

Details

Interlending & Document Supply, vol. 44 no. 4
Type: Research Article
ISSN: 0264-1615

Keywords

1 – 10 of over 125000