Search results

Scholarly communications, particularly, questions and answers (Q&A) present on digital scholarly platforms provide a new avenue to gain knowledge. However, several studies have raised a concern about the content anomalies in these Q&A and suggested a proper validation before utilizing them in scholarly applications such as influence analysis and content-based recommendation systems. The content anomalies are referred as disinformation in this research. The purpose of this research is firstly, to assess scholarly communications in order to identify disinformation and secondly, to help scholarly platforms determine the scholars who probably disseminate such disinformation. These scholars are referred as the probable sources of disinformation.

To identify disinformation, the proposed model deduces (1) content redundancy and contextual redundancy in questions (2) contextual nonrelevance in answers with respect to the questions and (3) quality of answers with respect to the expertise of the answering scholars. Then, the model determines the probable sources of disinformation using the statistical analysis.

The model is evaluated on ResearchGate (RG) data. Results suggest that the model efficiently identifies disinformation from scholarly communications and accurately detects the probable sources of disinformation.

Different platforms with communication portals can use this model as a regulatory mechanism to restrict the prorogation of disinformation. Scholarly platforms can use this model to generate an accurate influence assessment mechanism and also relevant recommendations for their scholars.

The existing studies majorly deal with validating the answers using statistical measures. The proposed model focuses on questions as well as answers and performs a contextual analysis using an advanced word embedding technique.

“Scholarly Communication” is a frequent topic of both the professional and research literature of Library and Information Science (LIS). Despite efforts by individuals (e.g. Borgman, 1989) and organizations such as the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) to define the term, multiple understandings of it remain. Discussions of scholarly communication infrequently offer a definition or explanation of its parameters, making it difficult for readers to form a comprehensive understanding of scholarly communication and associated phenomena.

This project uses the evolutionary concept analysis (ECA) method developed by nursing scholar, Beth L. Rodgers, to explore “Scholarly Communication” as employed in the literature of LIS. As the purpose of ECA is not to arrive at “the” definition of a term but rather exploring its utilization within a specific context, it is an ideal approach to expand our understanding of SC as used in LIS research.

“Scholarly Communication” as employed in the LIS literature does not refer to a single phenomenon or idea, but rather is a concept with several dimensions and sub-dimensions with distinct, but overlapping, significance.

The concept analysis (CA) method calls for review of a named concept, i.e. verbatim. Therefore, the items included in the data set must include the phrase “scholarly communication”. Items using alternate terminology were excluded from analysis.

The model of scholarly communication presented in this paper provides language to operationalize the concept.

LIS lacks a nuanced understanding of “scholarly communication” as used in the LIS literature. This paper offers a model to further the field's collective understanding of the term and support operationalization for future research projects.

This paper aims to explore the benefits of using faculty focus groups as an early component of a scholarly communications program with suggestions for planning and conducting sessions, recruiting participants and analyzing outcomes.

The paper is based on the authors' use of focus groups in the initial stages of organizing a scholarly communications program at Kansas State University.

The paper finds that focus groups are an effective method to begin identifying scholarly communication issues that resonate with faculty on a particular campus. Focus groups can be helpful in targeting efforts to begin a scholarly communications program.

Focus groups are effective in generating insights, opinions and attitudes and are low cost in terms of time and resource commitments.

There is very little in the literature about using faculty focus groups to start a campus scholarly communication program. This paper provides practical and useful information that other libraries can use to incorporate this method into their planning.

The paper aims to report on a research project that explores the extent and scope of scientific publishing, communication, and collaboration amongst Libyan scientists.

The paper commences with a literature review on scientific communication and publishing, including a specific focus on such activities in developing countries. A bibliometric analysis of the papers published by scientists in research centres affiliated to Libya's National Centre for Scientific Research was conducted in order to investigate the extent and nature of scholarly communication of Libyan scientists.

Libyan scientists are a community that works in research teams, largely comprised of scientists in Libya, but, which, on the other hand, is actively disseminating the findings of its research to a wider international audience. This is evident from the publications of 45 per cent of papers in English, and a significant level of publication in countries outside Libya. Further, the extent to which publication is through conferences and symposia is evidence of engagement in informal communication within and beyond the scientific community in Libya.

This is the first study of scientific publishing and communication activities in Libya. It offers useful insights into a variety of aspects of communication and dissemination of research findings. As such it provides a useful contribution towards understanding the potential impact of new models of scholarly publishing, both in Libya, and in other developing countries.

The purpose of this paper is to report the findings of a study to investigate the changes in scholarly communication practices among a group of scholars in the UK and build upon the results that were published in a previous paper.

The study deployed a naturalistic inquiry approach using semi-structured interviews as a qualitative research tool. A sample of 40 participants from four UK universities was interviewed to explore the changes in informal scholarly communication behaviour.

The analysis of the interviews revealed that there are three ideal types of behaviour: the “orthodox” uses formal and traditional scholarly communication approaches; the “moderate” prioritises formal communication approaches, but at the same time is trying to get benefits from informal channels; and, the “Heterodox” uses all channels available in the scholarly communication.

The value of the current study lies in using a naturalistic inquiry approach to investigate the changes in scholarly communication practices, and to explore the different scholarly communication styles. In the context of this study, the use of a naturalistic approach and grounded theory principles in connection with coding provided a stance that allows for the gathering of rich information to enable understanding and explanation of scholarly communication activities in addition to uncovering themes that related to scholarly behaviour.

Recognizing that the nature of research and scholarly communication is changing rapidly, an institutional repository (IR) is a tool for collecting, storing, accessing and disseminating scholarly communication within and without the institutions. The primary reason for establishing an IR is to increase the visibility of the institution’s research output by making it an open access with regard to copyright issues. This paper aims to propose a conceptualmodel for scholarly communication through IRs to provide an opportunity to integrate and facilitate knowledge sharing so as to enrich knowledge content and enhance global access.

This paper proceeds in three phases. In the first phase, the published literature on IRs and scholarly communication has been reviewed critically considering their empirical applications. Next, based on the understanding gained from the previous stage, a conceptual model for scholarly communication through IRs has been proposed. In the third phase, the proposed model has been developed and finalized toward its maturity.

Based on the literature, the authors have developed a conceptual model for understanding the factors that characterize not only the design but also the development of IRs practically. An IR appears theoretically sound, but it is a difficult task in practice because of some complexities. This paper attempts to set a theoretical model for IRs as a foundation to address the gap in the current literature for researchers, experts and librarians who create, maintain and use IRs, though it does not claim to be comprehensive.

A few attempts have been made to investigate scholarly communication through IRs, but this is the one of its first kind that provides a theoretical model for it. It serves as a useful starting point for those interested in knowledge management and IRs.

New information and communications technologies are transforming scholarly communication. Presents a humanities and social sciences researcher’s perspective on these changes. Argues that researchers and research intermediaries need to find new ways of working together in order to understand and take full advantage of the emerging forms and media for scholarly communication.

The purpose of this paper is to assess the current status of Institutional Repository (IR) and scholarly communications (SC) in Nigeria. The paper also deliberates the benefits of IRs including how it can help libraries in Nigeria to reduce the cost of purchasing articles and journals.

Given that the paper is an opinion of the current status of SC, a formal documented methodology is not applicable. However, it gives an overview of SC in Nigeria and traces the origin of open access awareness to 2008 when the first open access sensitization workshop was organized in Nigeria.

The study shows that Nigeria currently has 20 IRs listed in the OpenDOAR and tops the list of journals listed in the Africa Journals Online (AJOL) with 221 journal titles followed by South Africa with 96. Of the 221 Nigerian journals listed in AJOL, only 70 are open access journals.

This paper is an expression of opinion about current status of SC and particularly IRs in Nigeria. It is not based on any formal methodology. It will be useful for librarians, academic staff and academic institutions generally, especially in developing countries where IRs are still in a developmental stage. Therefore, some of the general recommendations may not be as relevant for those institutions with well-established and flourishing IRs.

The paper shows the current state of IR in Nigeria and deliberates on the impediments to successful implementation of IRs.

In this article an epistemological interpretation of the role of subject literature in scholarly communication shall be proposed. Such an interpretation will focus on the epistemological dimension of communicating knowledge through literature and how this is achieved through discursive and rhetorical means. It will be argued that library and information science (LIS) theory on scholarly communication can be supplemented and strengthened by this interpretation. By establishing a social epistemology of subject literature the article contributes with a sketch of a coherent theory of scholarly literature explaining the epistemological and communicative division of labor between the various types of subject literature. Such a theory is in line with the current revival of social epistemology in LIS. The article is structured into three main sections. The first section will outline an epistemological position that pays particular attention to knowledge acquired through social interaction in general, and through interaction with written texts in particular. The works of the later Wittgenstein and Ludwik Fleck will be used as the theoretical frameworks. Having established this epistemological framework, the second section will outline what is considered to be the main types of subject literature, with emphasis on their discursive and rhetorical functions in scholarly communication. The third section will synthesize the two other sections into a sketch of a theory that will be labeled the social epistemology of subject literature and point to some implications for LIS research of this theory.

The focus of this paper is to study the influence of social media on scholarly communication. The aim is to provide an overview of researchers' use of Web 2.0 techniques, and discuss a possible change of information behaviors in the context of scholarly communication.

A web survey was distributed to a targeted sample of university staff (professors, teachers, researchers, and doctoral students). SPSS was utilized as a main tool to synthesize and analyze data, and present the results.

Web 2.0 tools are well‐known to researchers. Most researchers are familiar with blogs, wikis, social networks, multimedia sharing, and online document. Social media provide a convenient environment for scholarly communication. Depending on different aims within the scholarly communication process, researchers choose appropriate modes of communication in their research work.

A combination of content analysis with survey and/or interviews may highlight other aspects of Web 2.0, which is not possible using a single method of content analysis.

There are few studies on the changes of scholarly communication in the context of Web 2.0. This study provides new insights for exploring the effects of Web 2.0 tools on scholarly communication and the development of new information behavior to match the scholarly environment of social media. This understanding can aid the researchers to keep abreast of new characteristics of scholarly communication and help the librarians to develop the correlative services in the scholarly environment of social media.