Search results

“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.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on library and information services (LIS) and how library professionals overcome the challenges of COVID-19 pandemic in the current reality.

This study used quantitative and qualitative methods to investigate the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on Bangladesh’s LIS professionals. A structured online questionnaire was designed for the purpose of a quantitative survey. The respondents of this study were LIS professionals in all categories of libraries (e.g. academic libraries, public libraries, special libraries and national library) in Bangladesh. A total of 106 responses from LIS professionals in Bangladesh were received. This study analyzed qualitative data using Braun and Clark’s technique for thematic coding. Researchers interviewed librarians in two phases (during the COVID-19 pandemic and after COVID-19) about how libraries cope up with the COVID crisis. The descriptive findings were examined using diverse descriptive statistics (i.e. frequency numbers and percentages), and for examining the significant differences among demographics’ information regarding challenges faced by LIS professionals, Mann–Whitney and Kruskal–Wallis tests were conducted. The qualitative responses were carefully analyzed for familiarizing, coding and theme generation.

The result showed that most LIS professionals (i.e. 46.2% and 43.4%) had faced difficulties in accessing e-resources from home and had failed to maintain balance between work and personal life and to offer remote library services. The LIS professionals mostly used Facebook Messenger and Zoom to communicate with their colleagues and users. Furthermore, many LIS professionals (50.0%) secured their health and safety, adopted hygienic procedures at their workstations and provided virtual reference services. The qualitative findings show that though some libraries have faced challenges in providing online sources and services due to the absence of authority interest, budget scarcity and inadequate information and communication technology infrastructure, some libraries took the initiative to establish library institutional repository and make it available for users from home.

The present study only concentrated on the staff and their actions during and after the pandemic, which was mentioned as a limitation. It would be more effective if the study also considered the user’s viewpoint. The researchers hope that this study will help LIS professionals to support and provide digital and innovative service initiatives in their organization.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first of its kind study in Bangladesh where the staff of all types of libraries expressed their views on the problems they faced during the COVID-19 pandemic and the steps they took recently to overcome them.

It's hard to envision a system more global and more integrated than research. Many stakeholders affect and are affected by changes in the research ecosystem; the ecosystem differs in significant ways across the globe and between researchers, institutions and fields of study; and there are many questions that exclusive action can't address. There are also broad ecosystem-level questions that need answering. For these reasons alone, global approaches to reform are needed.

The first step in this exploration isn't to start looking for “solutions”, but to develop a better understanding of how our needs and interests overlap. By identifying the broad contours of common ground in this conversation, we can build the guardrails and mileposts for our collaborative efforts and then allow the finer-grained details of community-developed plans more flexibility and guidance to evolve over time.

What are these overlapping interests? First, the people in this community share a common motive – idealism – to make research better able to serve the public good. We also share a common desire to unleash the power of open to improve research and accelerate discovery; we are all willing to fix issues now instead of waiting for market forces or government intervention to do this for us; and we want to ensure that everyone everywhere has equitable access to knowledge.

There is also very broad agreement in this community about which specific problems in scholarly communication need to be fixed and why, and well as many overlapping beliefs in this community. OSI participants have concluded that four such beliefs best define our common ground: (1) research and society will benefit from open done right; (2) successful solutions will require broad collaboration; (3) connected issues need to be addressed, and (4) open isn't a single outcome, but a spectrum.

OSI has been observing and debating the activity in scholarly communication since late 2014 with regard to understanding possible global approaches and solutions for improving the future of open research. While the COVID-19 pandemic has made the importance of open science abundantly clear, the struggle to achieve this goal (not just for science but for all research) has been mired in a lack of clarity and urgency for over 20 years now, mostly stalling on the tension between wanting more openness but lacking realistic solutions for making this happen on a large scale with so many different stakeholders, needs and perspectives involved.

Underlying this tension is a fundamental difference in philosophy: whether the entire scholarly communication marketplace, driven by the needs and desires of researchers, should determine what kind of open it wants and needs; or whether this marketplace should be compelled to adopt open reform measures developed primarily by the scholarly communication system's main billpayers-funders and libraries. There is no widespread difference of opinion in the community whether open is worth pursuing. The debate is mostly over what specific open solutions are best, and at what pace open reforms should occur.

OSI has proposed a plan of action for working together to rebuild the future of scholarly communication on strong, common ground foundation. This plan – which we're referring to as Plan A – calls for joint action on studies, scholarly communication infrastructure improvement, and open outreach/education. Plan A also calls for working together with UNESCO to develop a unified global roadmap for the future of open, and for striving to ensure the community's work in this space is researcher-focused, collaborative, connected (addressing connected issues like peer review), diverse and flexible (no one-size-fits-all solutions), and beneficial to research. UNESCO's goal is to finish its roadmap proposal by early 2022.

For a full discussion of OSI's common ground recommendations, please see the Plan A website at http://plan-a.world.

This study aims to assess the scholarly communication competence of Zambian library and information science (LIS) professionals by evaluating their awareness, knowledge and practices regarding scholarly publication.

Applying a quantitative research approach, the study used a specially designed questionnaire. Responses from 57 professionals across universities and colleges in Zambia were gathered using convenience sampling. Data analysis involved descriptive statistics, mean and standard deviation calculations and t-values and p-values to understand respondents’ perceptions and knowledge of scholarly communication and publication.

The findings revealed significant gaps in respondents’ knowledge and awareness, particularly regarding predatory journals, journal selection factors, open-access models, publication challenges, reference management software (RMS) usage and research obstacles. The study underscored the necessity for increased training and capacity-building initiatives among Zambian LIS professionals to enhance their scholarly communication competence.

This research contributed to the field by highlighting deficiencies in scholarly communication awareness among Zambian LIS professionals. It emphasised the need for targeted interventions, awareness programs and educational support to improve academic literacy and scholarly publication practices. Additionally, the study suggested future research avenues, such as longitudinal studies and strategies for enhancing RMS adoption, to advance scholarly practices among Zambian professionals further.

This study aims to explore the evidence-based usage patterns of higher education commission (HEC) subscribed e-journal databases in the university digital library used by the scholarly community and the academics’ online searching behaviour at a higher education institution in Pakistan.

The study used an explanatory sequential mixed methods approach. Raw transaction log data were collected for quantitative analysis, and the interview technique was used for qualitative data collection and thematic analysis.

Log analysis revealed that HEC subscribed databases were used significantly, and among those, scholarly databases covering various subjects were more frequently used than subject-specific society-based databases. Furthermore, the users frequently accessed the needed e-journal articles through search engines like Google and Google Scholar, considering them sources of free material instead of the HEC subscribed databases.

It provides practical implications for examining the evidence-based use patterns of e-journal databases. It suggests the need for improving the access management of HEC databases, keeping in view the usage statistics and the demands of the scholars. The study may also help create market venues for the publishers of scholarly databases by offering attractive and economical packages for researchers of various disciplines in developing and underdeveloped countries. The study results also guide the information professionals to arrange orientation and information literacy programs to improve the searching behaviour of their less frequent users and enhance the utilization of these subscribed databases.

The study is part of a PhD project and, to the best of the authors’ knowledge, is the first such work in the context of a developing country like Pakistan.

International business as a field values perspectives from various contexts, but scholars from emerging markets face a number of often-unseen challenges preventing them from fully contributing to the field. This study aims to explain those challenges and what the author has done to manage them.

This is a Reflexive piece in which the author makes sense of her own experience as a scholar not only of but also in an emerging market, as well as the experiences at her school in seeking to develop a high-quality doctoral program.

When leading scholars interact, whether in writing or in person, they tend to be in academically and otherwise well-resourced locations. This is true even for the leading international business scholars of emerging markets, and it imposes time and financial costs on scholars located in emerging markets wanting to participate in such conversations. Having experienced such challenges, the author worked with colleagues to design a doctoral program that could nurture rich scholarly conversations at the school. However, there remains a clear and pervasive tension between the inclusive aspirations of the field and the tendency for cutting-edge academic conversations to be concentrated in the developed world.

The experiences of emerging market scholars remain underrepresented in the field. By drawing on her own experience, both as a scholar and the head of the doctoral program at her school, the author provides suggestions for how to think about and develop a more inclusive scholarly conversation.

It reports new research and innovative ideas and technology presented at the UKSG Conference held in Glasgow, Scotland. The report is to disseminate outcomes from the conference plenaries, lightning talks, breakout sessions and exhibitions. Topics like open access, global equity, artificial intelligence and scholarly communication, research archiving and preservation among others are described as presented during the conference.

This paper uses the viewpoint method in reporting a United Kingdom Serials Group (UKSG) experience of a conference held in April, 2023 in Glasgow, Scotland.

The scholarly community debated much that is trending on various topics and concluded that a lot needs to be done in collaborations, open access, research into new ways of dealing with contemporary issues and new technologies.

The paper presents the issues discussed at the UKSG Conference 2023 have not been presented before. Current trends are brought to the fore.

This paper aims to analyse the character and strength of the claims made in an emerging literature offering a sociology of financial reporting principles.

The analysis evaluates exemplary works in the literature against the characteristics of the paranoid style first identified by Richard Hofstadter: overheated claims of a far-reaching, malign and collusive machinery of influence; a reductive, rationalistic and dualistic reading of events; weak empirics; and weak theorisation.

A significant stream within the literature is coming to be constructed in the paranoid style. Paranoid stylistics, used as a diagnostic tool, alerts us here to distorted judgement.

Alternative ways of avoiding the dangers of paranoid-style readings are suggested, ranging from resisting the temptations towards such readings to a radical re-working of the epistemics of “socio-accounting”.

The danger of allowing the conclusions advanced in the literature to go unchallenged is that they may influence society’s attitude to accounting, public policy-making and scholars’ willingness to contribute to the crafting of reporting principles and standards.

Although paranoid style analysis has been widely used to examine narratives in other academic fields, to the best of the author’s knowledge, this is the first study to apply it to scholarly accounting.

This study aims to discern medieval information literacy (IL) practices through scrutiny of medieval manuscripts: both the content and the “marks of usage” evident therein.

Analysis of the writing of scribes. Engagement with selected primary texts (manuscripts) and prior scholarly investigations.

Ample evidence exists of the practice of IL in the medieval era, and how it was transmitted and negotiated across time and space. Popular guides for scholars, including Hugh of St. Victor's Didascalicon, and the marks of usage left on manuscripts by readers/scribes, are evidence of how members of scholarly communities engaged in collaborative metacognitive work, helping each other with tasks such as understanding the ordinatio (organisation) of texts; cross-referencing; locating information; and making judgments about relevance, amongst others. New practices were stimulated by key historical transitions, particularly the shift from ecclesiastical to secular settings for learning.

This is a preliminary study only, intended to lay foundations and suggest directions for more detailed future investigations of primary texts. The scope is Eurocentric, and similar work might be undertaken with the records of practice available elsewhere, e.g. the Arab world, South and East Asia.

Some previous work (e.g. Long, 2017) has investigated medieval scholarly communities by retrospectively applying notions from practice theory, but no prior work has specifically focused upon IL as the practice under investigation.