Search results

Bose-Einstein condensation is a scientific innovation in experimental physics whose realisation required considerable time and resources. Its diffusion varied considerably between and within five countries that were comparatively studied. Differences between countries can be explained by the variation in the national communities’ absorptive capacities, while within-country differences are due to the impact of authority relations on researchers’ opportunities to build protected space for their change of research practices. Beginning experimental research on Bose-Einstein condensation required simultaneous access to the university infrastructure for research and to grants. The former is largely limited to professors, while the latter made researchers vulnerable to the majority opinion and decision practices of their national scientific community.

This study aims to explore the interplay between community dynamics and knowledge production using the quantum computing research field as a case study. Quantum computing holds the promise of dramatically increasing computation speed and solving problems that are currently unsolvable in a short space of time. In this highly dynamic area of innovation, computer companies, research laboratories and governments are racing to develop the field.

After constructing temporal co-authorship networks, the authors identify seven different events affecting communities of researchers, which they label: forming, growing, splitting, shrinking, continuing, merging, dissolving. The authors then extract keywords from the titles and abstracts of their contributions to characterize the dynamics of knowledge production and examine the relationship between community events and knowledge production over time.

The findings show that forming and splitting are associated with retaining in memory what is currently known, merging and growing with the creation of new knowledge and splitting, shrinking and dissolving with the curation of knowledge.

Although the link between communities and knowledge has long been established, much less is known about the relationship between the dynamics of communities and their link with collective cognitive processes. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, the present contribution is one of the first to shed light on this dynamic aspect of community knowledge production.

The purpose of this paper is to introduce the online information system Redalyc as an intermediary tool that provides Latin American scientific articles with international standards (mostly related to natural sciences and developed countries) as well as with specific areas to host local research.

Redalyc is based on a semantic intersection model proposed by Russian semiologist Yuri Lotman. This model allows us to visualize the role played by Redalyc as a mediator between opposites, i.e. local science versus global science, and natural sciences versus social sciences. The paper presents some of the projects Redalyc has developed in conjunction with different countries and different scientific communities.

The paper describes some characteristics that local projects, similar to Redalyc, must have in order to become an intermediary between scientific journal production indexes that link global parameters for scientific communication with local production. The paper finds that efforts should not only be centered on the development of strategies to change certain inertias that distinguish local social scientific production (e.g. dependence on literary resources, lack of recognition of periodical media), but also on the way they could help these disciplines and local media overcome certain barriers, namely: normalization, language and technological handicaps.

The recognition of Latin American scientific production implies a dual process that not only involves local policies (scientific councils), but also requires producing reliable databases to provide scientists and journal editors with global references on how to produce visible scientific literature and pertinent knowledge for their contexts. Redalyc is currently a database that contributes in both ways.

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.

Current publication practices in the scholarly (International) Business and Management community are overwhelmingly anti-Popperian, which fundamentally frustrates the production of scientific progress. This is the result of at least five related biases: the verification, novelty, normal science, evidence, and market biases. As a result, no one is really interested in replicating anything. In this essay, the author extensively argues what he believes is wrong, why that is so, and what we might do about this. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

This is an essay, combining a literature review with polemic argumentation.

Only a tiny fraction of published studies involve a replication effort. Moreover, journal authors, editors, reviewers and readers are not interested in seeing nulls and negatives in print. This replication crisis implies that Popper’s critical falsification principle is actually thrown into the scientific community’s dustbin. Behind the façade of all these so-called new discoveries, false positives abound, as do questionable research practices meant to produce all this allegedly cutting-edge and groundbreaking significant findings. If this dismal state of affairs does not change for the good, (International) Business and Management research is ending up in a deadlock.

A radical cultural change in the scientific community, including (International) Business and Management, is badly needed. It should be in the community’s DNA to engage in the quest for the “truth” – nothing more, nothing less. Such a change must involve all stakeholders: scholars, editors, reviewers, and students, but also funding agencies, research institutes, university presidents, faculty deans, department chairs, journalists, policymakers, and publishers. In the words of Ioannidis (2012, p. 647): “Safeguarding scientific principles is not something to be done once and for all. It is a challenge that needs to be met successfully on a daily basis both by single scientists and the whole scientific establishment.”

Publication practices have to change radically. For instance, editorial policies should dispose of their current overly dominant pro-novelty and pro-positives biases, and explicitly encourage the publication of replication studies, including failed and unsuccessful ones that report null and negative findings.

This is an explicit plea to change the way the scientific research community operates, offering a series of concrete recommendations what to do before it is too late.

This chapter focuses on scientific and research networks. All six facets of knowledge networks are described. The importance of three facets is called out, including domain, knowledge, and nodes. The authors provide profiles of five networks, including an invisible college in chemistry, a professional association network in engineering, an editorial network, a national biological observation collaboration, and a national science museum.

The purpose of this paper is to analyse the presence and structure of scientific content in the Spanish version of Wikipedia by applying social networks analysis techniques.

Wikipedia articles have hyperlinks that connect them, so it is possible to represent Wikipedia as a network, in which the nodes are the articles and the edges are hyperlinks. The authors use communities detection techniques, in order to identify clusters of articles with similar content and then the authors carry out a manual analysis to detect science articles and identify the most representative scientific fields and their main features.

The authors conclude that science articles comprise 11.66 per cent of Spanish Wikipedia articles and that the most important clusters of scientific articles do not always coincide with classical science disciplines.

As Wikipedia is an open content resource, which is constructed by a community of users, and is widely employed in educational contexts by both students and teachers, this kind of analysis contributes to understanding Wikipedia better as an educational tool.

The theoretical framework for community policing attempts to answer many of the questions revolving around the new paradigm in policing. The paper traces the evolution of community policing as a paradigm in the Kuhnian sense, then proceeds to articulate how it has moved from “revolutionary science” to “normal science”. It then articulates some of the current research in community policing theory and calls for the creation of a theoretical framework under which community policing can be analyzed and evaluated. This paper then commences to articulate a theoretical framework that analyzes all of the factors bearing on this paradigm, ranging from the macro to the micro.

The purpose of this paper is to determine the challenges of scientific literacy that scientific journalism can promote or suppress as a scientific dissemination activity. To ensure that universities transfer knowledge to society, this vital activity is studied from the perspectives of their stakeholders: professors, researchers, newspaper directors and heads of research areas of two Mexican universities.

From a participatory action research perspective that consisted in applying semi-structured interviews, this study was conducted in two public universities in Chihuahua, Mexico. The group of participants constituted of a random sample of 90 Mexican professors, taken from a population of 246 subjects with the status of national researchers (confidence level = 95 per cent; margin of error = 5 per cent; P/Q correlation = 90 / 10 per cent), in addition to six local newspaper executives and eight research managers at participating universities.

Evidence suggests that scientific dissemination has a low social impact, its recognition by universities and scientific evaluation institutions is limited, and the act of making scientific content accessible to the general public is highly complex, especially when it comes to content related to the exact sciences. These results are predictable under the complex models that evaluate scientific production, because the measurement indicators that define scientific competitiveness levels prioritize specific scientific products other than dissemination products such as newspaper articles.

Data were collected from two Mexican public universities under the implication that the behavior identified through data analysis can occur in other similar environments. Although a participatory action research perspective was assumed, and because this research of a projective nature can be a part of a larger research, no particular actions or interventions were planned or executed, apart from the interviews that aimed to collect data that emerged from participants’ own practice and experiences on the issues studied. Further research can consist of developing forward-looking actions that can contribute to the development of scientific literacy, as well as to the exploration and solution of the issues identified through participants’ own practice.

One of the social roles of universities is to ensure that scientific knowledge reaches all citizens. However, there are not sufficient studies regarding scientific dissemination, especially from the perspective of professors as generators of scientific knowledge, newspaper directors and heads of research areas.

This paper aims to present results achieved by the first, and to date only, Democratic Therapeutic Communities (DTC) quality improvement program developed in Italy, in the past 10 years, named “Visiting DTC Project.” Process of bottom-up identification, definition and evaluation of good practices of TCs for adult users with long term severe mental disorders will be described. In addition, a five-phase clinical care pathway will be presented for the same user category, developed by the “Visiting DTC Project” to comply with Italian National Health Service accreditation standards for TCs.

“Visiting DTC Project” involved 40 Italian TCs, since 2012 until 2020, in an action research on good practices developed throw a democratic and bottom-up methodology. Project’s methodology is the “Democratic Peer-to-peer Accreditation,” a kind of professional scientific quality accreditation and continuous improvement process for community mental health services. Scientific model for the definition of service standards and principles of treatment is the British “Democratic Therapeutic Community,” which the “Visiting DTC Project” is organizationally inspired by.

In the eighth annual cycle of the program for TC with adult users of mental health services a significantly effective good practice procedure (GPP), with good practical efficacy, was finally identified (for the first time after eight years), but still no best practice. GPP with the title “Multi-family Community Meeting” is the Good Practice of the year 2020. No Best Practice has yet been identified. An integrated clinical care pathway for Adult DTCs Users in five phases is also presented. This care pathway organizes advanced standards of Community Group Quality in a map, to support the description and planning of the five phases of the user’s clinical work in DTC treatment.

Cooperation with local community services, organizations and networks, as well as a therapeutic environment based on informal coexistence and cooperation between TC members, are thus, together with care of family relationships, the main characteristics of the Italian experience of implementing and developing the Italian DTC treatment model. These characteristics make it clear how fragile Italian DTCs are at this moment. They are still in an early stage of development. All the most applied and effective best practice procedures are dependent on a wide and dense network of relationships, formal and informal, which cross the therapeutic environment and interconnect TC members with all other stakeholders.