CiteULike: JSicot's library [328 articles] http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot CiteULike.org en-gb Copyright © 2004-2008 citeulike.org http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2770600 <i>New Library World, Vol. 109, No. 1/2. (2008), pp. 65-74.</i><br /><br />Purpose – This literature review aims to provide a synthesis of available key information about the citation impact of Open Access journals in LIS and science in general. Citation impact is defined as a surrogate measure of citation counts. Design/methodology/approach – Based on a literature review, this paper discusses the methodology of the data collections for citation counts. The literature review is structured to address the literature about citation impact of Open Access journals. Findings – The literature review indicates that there is quite a uniform way about methodology of citation counts and substantial research about motivation for URL citations to LIS articles. Originality/value – This literature review is a comprehensive study of the main research about citation impact of Open Access journals, focused on LIS journals. Citation impact of Open Access journals Nana Turk doi:10.1108/03074800810846010 New Library World, Vol. 109, No. 1/2. (2008), pp. 65-74. 2008-05-08T10:21:33-00:00 New Library World 109 1/2 65 74 citation_impact open open_access open_journal_systems http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1688531 <i>FASEB J (20 September 2007)</i><br /><br />The evolution of the electronic age has led to the development of numerous medical databases on the World Wide Web, offering search facilities on a particular subject and the ability to perform citation analysis. We compared the content coverage and practical utility of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. The official Web pages of the databases were used to extract information on the range of journals covered, search facilities and restrictions, and update frequency. We used the example of a keyword search to evaluate the usefulness of these databases in biomedical information retrieval and a specific published article to evaluate their utility in performing citation analysis. All databases were practical in use and offered numerous search facilities. PubMed and Google Scholar are accessed for free. The keyword search with PubMed offers optimal update frequency and includes online early articles; other databases can rate articles by number of citations, as an index of importance. For citation analysis, Scopus offers about 20% more coverage than Web of Science, whereas Google Scholar offers results of inconsistent accuracy. PubMed remains an optimal tool in biomedical electronic research. Scopus covers a wider journal range, of help both in keyword searching and citation analysis, but it is currently limited to recent articles (published after 1995) compared with Web of Science. Google Scholar, as for the Web in general, can help in the retrieval of even the most obscure information but its use is marred by inadequate, less often updated, citation information.-Falagas, M. E., Pitsouni, E I., Malietzis, G. A., and Pappas, G. Comparison of Pub Med, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses. Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses. Matthew E Falagas Eleni I Pitsouni George A Malietzis Georgios Pappas doi:10.1096/fj.07-9492LSF FASEB J (20 September 2007) 2007-09-24T06:31:23-00:00 FASEB J 1530-6860 comparison gscholar pubmed scopus wos http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2683200 <i>FASEB J. (11 April 2008), fj.08-107938.</i><br /><br />The application of currently available sophisticated algorithms of citation analysis allows for the incorporation of the "quality" of citations in the evaluation of scientific journals. We sought to compare the newly introduced SCImago journal rank (SJR) indicator with the journal impact factor (IF). We retrieved relevant information from the official Web sites hosting the above indices and their source databases. The SJR indicator is an open-access resource, while the journal IF requires paid subscription. The SJR indicator (based on Scopus data) lists considerably more journal titles published in a wider variety of countries and languages, than the journal IF (based on Web of Science data). Both indices divide citations to a journal by articles of the journal, during a specific time period. However, contrary to the journal IF, the SJR indicator attributes different weight to citations depending on the "prestige" of the citing journal without the influence of journal self-citations; prestige is estimated with the application of the PageRank algorithm in the network of journals. In addition, the SJR indicator includes the total number of documents of a journal in the denominator of the relevant calculation, whereas the journal IF includes only "citable" articles (mainly original articles and reviews). A 3-yr period is analyzed in both indices but with the use of different approaches. Regarding the top 100 journals in the 2006 journal IF ranking order, the median absolute change in their ranking position with the use of the SJR indicator is 32 (1st quartile: 12; 3rd quartile: 75). Although further validation is warranted, the novel SJR indicator poses as a serious alternative to the well-established journal IF, mainly due to its open-access nature, larger source database, and assessment of the quality of citations.Falagas, M. E., Kouranos, V. D., Arencibia-Jorge, R., Karageorgopoulos, D. E. Comparison of SCImago journal rank indicator with journal impact factor. 10.1096/fj.08-107938 Comparison of SCImago journal rank indicator with journal impact factor Matthew Falagas Vasilios Kouranos Ricardo Arencibia-Jorge Drosos Karageorgopoulos doi:10.1096/fj.08-107938 FASEB J. (11 April 2008), fj.08-107938. 2008-04-17T19:07:48-00:00 FASEB J. fj.08-107938 impact_factor isi scimago scopus sjr http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/276731 <i>(3 Aug 2005)</i><br /><br />I propose the index $h$, defined as the number of papers with citation number higher or equal to $h$, as a useful index to characterize the scientific output of a researcher. An index to quantify an individual's scientific output JE Hirsch (3 Aug 2005) 2005-08-08T10:17:12-00:00 h_index scientometrie http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1373236 <i>International Journal on Digital Libraries, Vol. 6, No. 2. (April 2006), pp. 148-158.</i><br /><br />Abstract  METS is an XML document format intended for the encoding of complex objects within digital libraries. It provides the means to record all of the descriptive, administrative, structural and behavioral metadata needed to manage and provide access to complex digital content. While it was designed to promote interoperability of digital content between digital library systems and contribute to the preservation of digital library materials, a variety of practical barriers to achieving these goals remain. However, many of these obstacles are shared by other communities of practice, such as the eLearning community working on the IMS content packaging standards and the MPEG-21 community, and the digital library community faces a unique opportunity at the moment to work closely with others to try to improve the interoperability of our content not only with our own repository systems, but those being used by others. METS: standardized encoding for digital library objects Jerome Mcdonough doi:10.1007/s00799-005-0132-1 International Journal on Digital Libraries, Vol. 6, No. 2. (April 2006), pp. 148-158. 2007-06-08T18:13:12-00:00 International Journal on Digital Libraries 6 2 148 158 digital_libraries mets http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1988959 <i>International Journal on Digital Libraries, Vol. 8, No. 1. (26 November 2007), pp. 21-38.</i><br /><br />Abstract  Digital libraries (DLs) are new and innovative information systems, under constant development and change, and therefore evaluation is of critical importance to ensure not only their correct evolution but also their acceptance by the user and application communities. The Evaluation activity of the DELOS Network of Excellence has performed a large-scale survey of current DL evaluation activities. This study has resulted in a description of the state of the art in the field, which is presented in this paper. The paper also proposes a new framework for the evaluation of DLs, as well as for recording, describing and analyzing the related research field. The framework includes a methodology for the classification of current evaluation procedures. The objective is to provide a set of flexible and adaptable guidelines for DL evaluation. Evaluation of digital libraries Norbert Fuhr Giannis Tsakonas Trond Aalberg Maristella Agosti Preben Hansen Sarantos Kapidakis Claus-Peter Klas László Kovács Monica Landoni András Micsik Christos Papatheodorou Carol Peters Ingeborg Sølvberg doi:10.1007/s00799-007-0011-z International Journal on Digital Libraries, Vol. 8, No. 1. (26 November 2007), pp. 21-38. 2007-11-26T22:38:44-00:00 International Journal on Digital Libraries 8 1 21 38 digital_libraries http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2431169 <i>The 11th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics (2007)</i> Downloads vs. Citations: Relationships, Contributing Factors and Beyond Heting Chu Thomas Krichel The 11th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics (2007) 2008-02-26T19:45:57-00:00 The 11th International Conference on Scientometrics and Informetrics citation_impact scientometrie http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2418756 <i>Ariadne, No. 54. (January 2008)</i><br /><br />This article offers a twofold introduction to the JISC-funded SWORD [1] Project which ran for eight months in mid-2007. Firstly it presents an overview of the methods and madness that led us to where we currently are, including a timeline of how this work moved through an informal working group to a lightweight, distributed project. Secondly, it offers an explanation of the outputs produced for the SWORD Project and their potential benefits for the repositories community. SWORD, which stands for Simple Web service Offering Repository Deposit, came into being in March 2007 but was preceded by a series of discussions and activities which have contributed much to the project, known as the ‘Deposit API’. The project itself was funded under the JISC Repositories and Preservation Programme, Tools and Innovation strand [2], with the over-arching aim of scoping, defining, developing and testing a standard mechanism for depositing into repositories and other systems. The motivation was that there was no standard way of doing this currently and increasingly scenarios were arising that might usefully leverage such a standard. SWORD: Simple Web-service Offering Repository Deposit Julie Allinson Sebastien François Stuart Lewis Ariadne, No. 54. (January 2008) 2008-02-23T15:57:16-00:00 Ariadne 54 depot digital_repositories jisc http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2373215 <i>Argus, Vol. 34, No. 2., pp. 11-19.</i><br /><br />Les auteurs présentent un survol des logiciels de portails de bibliothèque. La notion de portail de bibliothèque est d’abord définie, puis les principales fonctionnalités de ce type de produit (métarecherche, personnalisation, authentification) sont présentées et expliquées. Un aperçu du marché des logiciels de portail est ensuite donné. Des questions reliées à la fiabilité des résultats et à la formation des utilisateurs sont également soulevées. // The authors present a brief review of software for library portals. The concept of library portals is defined and their main functionalities subsequently presented and explained (meta search engines, personalization, authentication). A general survey of the market for portal software is given before addressing certain questions about the reliability of their results and user training. Les portails de bibliothèque: Nouvelles fonctionnalités, nouveaux défis Clément Arsenault François-Xavier Paré Argus, Vol. 34, No. 2., pp. 11-19. 2008-02-14T10:07:20-00:00 Argus 34 2 11 19 federate_search library portal http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2349494 <i>Social Science Research Network Working Paper Series (29 January 2008)</i><br /><br />The growth and increasing complexity of global science poses a grand challenge to scientists: How to organise the worldwide evaluation of research programmes and peers? For the 21st century we need not just information on science, but also meta-level scientific information that is delivered to the digital workbench of every researcher. Access, usage and citation metrics will be one major information service that researchers will need on an everyday basis to handle the complexity of science.Scientometrics has been built on centralised commercial databases of high functionality but restricted scope, mainly providing information that may be used for research assessment. Enter digital libraries and repositories: Can they collect reliable metadata at source, ensure universal metric coverage and defray costs? This systematic appraisal of the future role of digital libraries and repositories for metric research evaluation proceeds by investigating the practical inadequacies of current metric evaluation before defining the scope for libraries and repositories as new players. Subsequently the notion of metrics as research information services is developed. Finally, the future relationship between a) libraries and repositories and b) metrics databases, commercial or non-commercial, is addressed.Service reviewed include: Leiden Ranking, Webometrics Ranking of World Universities, COUNTER, MESUR, Harzing POP, CiteSeer, Citebase, RePEc LogEc and CitEc, Scopus, Web of Science and Google Scholar. Access, Usage and Citation Metrics: What Function for Digital Libraries and Repositories in Research Evaluation? Chris Armbruster Social Science Research Network Working Paper Series (29 January 2008) 2008-02-07T15:31:24-00:00 Social Science Research Network Working Paper Series bibliometrie digital_libraries ir research_assessment scientometrie http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2336913 <i>Knowledge Rights and Information Sharing in the 21st Century (30 January 2008)</i><br /><br />n recent years, a number of social movements arising from and catalyzed by information technology have become the subject of public and academic fascination. These movements and their projects — open source, free software, Wikipedia, open access research, Creative Commons — propose new methods and new models of social organization in the intellectual, cultural, and innovative arenas. These movements are best understood under the rubric of “free culture”, drawing on the 2004 book of that name by Professor Lawrence Lessig. These movements are also linked to related topics of public debate, such as media reform, electronic privacy, freedom of speech online, and Net neutrality. The place of universities in society makes them powerful actors and advocates in the intellectual, cultural, and innovative arenas. Have universities learned the lessons of free culture? I will examine how the historical commitments and traditions of the university align with the modern concerns of free culture. I argue that these concerns matter more now than ever as ours is more and more an information society, in which the intellectual, cultural, and innovative arenas are ever more important to economic growth and opportunity as well as social concerns. I will develop a model of the university as a key component in the intellectual, cultural, and innovative infrastructure of society. I argue that, de facto, universities play this role to considerable extent already, although that the official and popular understanding of universities is often limited their role in education or accreditation of individuals and the conduct of scientific research. I articulate a modern vision of the university that properly locates it as an institution to address the needs of the knowledge society, and I explore the practical implications of that vision. I argue for praxis in the administration of universities along the values of academia and free culture. I aim to develop a theoretical framework for the practical application of learning in this context, and to provide the intellectual and rhetorical ammunition for those who would do so. Finally, I connect the vision to several topics of current interest — such as access to knowledge — and investigate the role of a praxis-engaged university. Free Culture and the University: Innovation, Information Sharing, and the Future of the Academy Knowledge Rights and Information Sharing in the 21st Century (30 January 2008) 2008-02-05T19:48:14-00:00 Knowledge Rights and Information Sharing in the 21st Century open_access scholary_communication university http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2330442 <i>Vol. 1 (2008)</i> The E-Resources Management Handbook Vol. 1 (2008) 2008-02-04T19:50:48-00:00 1 scholar_publishing scholary_communication http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2306872 <i>(September 2007)</i><br /><br />Les archives institutionnelles en Europe se sont développées avec des logiques très différentes. Elles se sont structurées dans des réseaux nationaux pour partager les compétences mais aussi créer des outils et services communs. Le projet européen DRIVER (Digital Repositories Infrastructure Vision for European Research) rassemble 5 réseaux européens d’archives, en Allemagne, aux Pays-Bas, au Royaume-Uni, en Belgique et en France pour établir les bases d’une infrastructure européenne fondée sur les archives scientifiques. L’Allemagne a mis l’accent sur la promotion du libre accès et la certification d’archives institutionnelles, les Pays-Bas ont structuré un réseau efficace de collecte des documents et ont créé de nombreux services à valeur ajoutée pour tirer parti de cette masse de contenus. Le Royaume-Uni a créé un partenariat d’archives qui échange des compétences mais développe aussi de nombreux services dont bénéficient les archives britanniques et mondiales. La France a inauguré une plate-forme pluri-disciplinaire sur le modèle des archives disciplinaires telles que arXiv ou CogPrints et a intégré progressivement la problématique des archives institutionnelles avec la création d’un réseau. Enfin la Belgique tire parti du projet européen DRIVER pour inciter les établissements de recherche à créer leur propre archive. Les cultures développées dans chacun des réseaux nationaux font néanmoins apparaître des divergences sur la manière dont les archives ont été créées, mais aussi sur les acteurs qui doivent les alimenter, sur les types de documents à y intégrer, sur les stratégies à développer pour atteindre une masse critique de contenus, sur les missions qu’elles doivent remplir. Les actions visant à favoriser les dépôts par les chercheurs se sont ainsi focalisées sur des aspects différents : la création de services pour les chercheurs, les incitations auprès des établissements de recherche à créer leur propre archive, les actions dirigées vers les organismes de financement de la recherche, enfin les actions visant à mettre en valeur les bénéfices pour les chercheurs en terme de visibilité de leur production scientifique. Alors que la logique institutionnelle a permis dans certains cas d’atteindre des taux de dépôts importants dans les archives, elle se heurte à la logique des services disciplinaires basés sur la contribution par les chercheurs à un corpus collectif de type Web 2.0 qui favorise les échanges et la génération d’idées nouvelles. Cependant, les réseaux nationaux d’archives semblent converger vers des priorités et des axes de développement similaires pour l’avenir, cohérents avec l’évolution des archives disciplinaires. L’intégration des archives dans un contexte plus global, européen aujourd’hui et mondial demain permettra d’articuler des services à valeurs ajoutée basés sur des types d’archives différents, répondant à des besoins variés mais créant des corpus ouverts, sources de nouvelles pratiques scientifiques. Réseaux d’archives institutionnelles en Europe: logiques de développement et convergences Anne-Marie Badolato Muriel Foulonneau (September 2007) 2008-01-30T10:31:50-00:00 driver europe ir open_archive http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2306851 <i>(April 2007)</i><br /><br />Le sujet de l’article que nous proposons consiste à identifier, à travers deux terrains distincts, un terrain nord américain et un terrain français, comment les bibliothèques académiques mettent en place de nouvelles formes de médiations leur permettant de jouer un rôle dans les modalités de publication numérique. Plus particulièrement, il s’agit d’analyser comment ces nouvelles formes de médiations s’articulent autour d’un rapprochement sensible entre le monde des bibliothèques et le monde des chercheurs, au travers de l’institutionnalisation progressive des archives ouvertes. Bibliothèques académiques et publication scientifique numérique : la médiation réinterrogée Chérifa Boukacem-Zeghmouri (April 2007) 2008-01-30T10:25:10-00:00 ir library mediation open_archive researchers_uses http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2305064 <i>in Rapporti ISTISAN 07/12 Istituto superiore di Sanita - Institutional archives for research: experiences and projects in Open Access (2006)</i> Support of open archives at national level. The HAL experience Francis Andre Daniel Charnay in Rapporti ISTISAN 07/12 Istituto superiore di Sanita - Institutional archives for research: experiences and projects in Open Access (2006) 2008-01-29T20:18:12-00:00 in Rapporti ISTISAN 07/12 Istituto superiore di Sanita - Institutional archives for research: experiences and projects in Open Access france hal open_archive http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2275784 <i>(2008)</i> A DRIVER’s Guide to European Repositories Kasja Weenink Leo Waaijers Karen van Godtsenhoven (2008) 2008-01-22T19:02:34-00:00 driver europe open_archive http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1273283 <i>D-Lib Magazine, Vol. 13, No. 3/4. (April 2007)</i><br /><br />Problem: While there has been considerable attention dedicated to the development and implementation of institutional repositories, there has been little done to evaluate them, especially with regards to faculty participation. Purpose: This article reports on a three-part evaluative study of institutional repositories. We describe the contents and participation in Cornell's DSpace and compare these results with seven university DSpace installations. Through in-depth interviews with eleven faculty members in the sciences, social sciences and humanities, we explore their attitudes, motivations, and behaviors for non-participation in institutional repositories. Results: Cornell's DSpace is largely underpopulated and underused by its faculty. Many of its collections are empty, and most collections contain few items. Those collections that experience steady growth are collections in which the university has made an administrative investment, such are requiring deposits of theses and dissertations into DSpace. Cornell faculty have little knowledge of and little motivation to use DSpace. Many faculty use alternatives to institutional repositories, such as their personal Web pages and disciplinary repositories, which are perceived to have higher community salience than one's affiliate institution. Faculty gave many reasons for not using repositories: redundancy with other modes of disseminating information, the learning curve, confusion with copyright, fear of plagiarism and having one's work scooped, associating one's work with inconsistent quality, and concerns about whether posting a manuscript constitutes "publishing". Conclusion: While some librarians perceive a crisis in scholarly communication as a crisis in access to the literature, Cornell faculty perceive this essentially as a non-issue. Each discipline has a normative culture, largely defined by their reward system and traditions. If the goal of institutional repositories is to capture and preserve the scholarship of one's faculty, institutional repositories will need to address this cultural diversity. Institutional Repositories: Evaluating the Reasons for Non-use of Cornell University's Installation of DSpace Philip Davis Matthew Connolly D-Lib Magazine, Vol. 13, No. 3/4. (April 2007) 2007-05-03T07:30:04-00:00 D-Lib Magazine 13 3/4 ir researchers_uses self-archiving http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2139935 <i>J. Cell Biol., Vol. 179, No. 6. (17 December 2007), pp. 1091-1092.</i><br /><br />10.1083/jcb.200711140 Show me the data Mike Rossner Heather Van Epps Emma Hill doi:10.1083/jcb.200711140 J. Cell Biol., Vol. 179, No. 6. (17 December 2007), pp. 1091-1092. 2007-12-18T08:22:14-00:00 J. Cell Biol. 179 6 1091 1092 impact_factor http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2219033 <i>(1999)</i><br /><br />Les méthodes employées pour le calcul d’indicateurs de politique scientifique sont fondées sur les lois bibliométriques (loi de Zipf pour les mots-clés, loi de Lotka pour les auteurs, loi de Bradford pour les périodiques). Elles s’appliquent en particulier à la littérature scientifique et nécessitent une normalisation des champs de données bibliographiques. Rassemblant des informations scientifiques et techniques normalisées et codifiées, une base est dite ‘infométrique’ ou ‘bibliométrique’ lorsque sa structure a été conçue pour obtenir des indicateurs infométriques ou bibliométriques. Il n’existe pas de producteurs directs de bases infométriques mais des bases constituées à partir de données fournies par les producteurs de bases de données bibliographiques. Le besoin croissant d’indicateurs européens, nationaux, régionaux, institutionnels demande, pour être satisfait, la mise en place de nouvelles bases de données, hybrides (multi-sources), adaptées au calcul d’indicateurs. Comment les concevoir ? Comment les alimenter ? L’objectif de l’article est double, mettre en évidence quelques points clés et les difficultés pour construire ce type de base et tirer les leçons d’expériences offrant une certaine similarité avec cette problématique. L’article aborde les problèmes de la couverture et de l’organisation de bases infométriques hybrides en analysant dans un premier temps les pratiques de trois observatoires des sciences et technologies. Après avoir mis en évidence les difficultés liées à l’hétérogénéité des données dans un tel contexte, nous proposons une approche développée dans le cadre de la veille scientifique. Nous en montrons les avantages et les limites pour la constitution de bases infométriques hybrides adaptées au calcul d’indicateurs. Cette approche est basée sur une représentation des documents par une structure d’arbre étiqueté couramment employée pour décrire des documents SGML. La méthode proposée permet de spécifier de manière déclarative les relations entre les éléments de données et leur représentation dans le système de gestion de base de données (SGBD). Cette technique s’intègre parfaitement avec le choix des observatoires de s’appuyer sur les SGBD pour l’exploitation de leurs données. Plus généralement, nous montrons que l’emploi de SGML en association avec un système de gestion de base de données (si possible orienté objet) améliore significativement les possibilités d’exploitation des données. Les autres avantages sont non seulement de permettre l’intégration de données hétérogènes dans une base, mais aussi de distribuer des informations extraites de la base de données sous forme de données SGML pour des traitements ultérieurs ou pour naviguer dans la base infométrique à travers une interface hypertexte. La conception de bases de données infométriques hybrides : analyse de la pratique de trois observatoires européens Luc Grivel Hélène Fagherazzi Philippe Fourneret Amai Zerouki (1999) 2008-01-11T13:55:55-00:00 bibliometrie http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2214154 <i>CAIS/ACSI 2007, 35e Congrès annuel de l’Association Canadienne des Sciences de l’Information. Partage de l’information dans un monde fragmenté : Franchir les frontières (2007)</i> Classification, thésaurus, ontologies, folksonomies : comparaisons du point de vue de la recherche ouverte d’information (ROI) CAIS/ACSI 2007, 35e Congrès annuel de l’Association Canadienne des Sciences de l’Information. Partage de l’information dans un monde fragmenté : Franchir les frontières (2007) 2008-01-10T11:25:09-00:00 CAIS/ACSI 2007, 35e Congrès annuel de l’Association Canadienne des Sciences de l’Information. Partage de l’information dans un monde fragmenté : Franchir les frontières folksonomy information_retrieval http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2213542 <i>Cybergeo (17 December 2007)</i><br /><br />La numérisation des ressources documentaires et la généralisation des procédures de l'évaluation scientifique renouvellent la question des usages de la bibliométrie. L'article recense les principaux outils de référence et les indicateurs en vogue. Il démontre que ces outils ne restituent que très imparfaitement la réalité de la production de recherche en sciences humaines et sociales. Il analyse les stratégies de publication émergentes sur internet et préconise des solutions pour un accès libre et partagé à l'information scientifique. Citation, Citation, Citation : Bibliometrics, the web and the Social Sciences and Humanities - Citation, Citation, Citation : la bibliométrie, Internet et les sciences humaines et sociales Christine Kosmopoulos Denise Pumain Cybergeo (17 December 2007) 2008-01-10T08:47:51-00:00 Cybergeo bibliometrie citation_impact social_sciences http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2213448 <i>Scientific American (9 January 2008)</i> Science 2.0: Great New Tool, or Great Risk? Mitchell Waldrop Scientific American (9 January 2008) 2008-01-10T08:11:24-00:00 Scientific American open_science http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2213429 <i>BBF, Vol. 52, No. 6. (2007)</i><br /><br />«Les archives ouvertes, lit-on dans la plaquette de présentation diffusée en 2006 et disponible sur le site Archives ouvertes 1, reposent sur la mise en place de serveurs où sont déposés et sauvegardés les documents issus de la recherche (projets d’articles, textes soumis pour publication, articles publiés…). La possibilité d’enregistrer les versions successives d’un texte enrichit la notion de document scientifique et peut donner naissance à de nouvelles pratiques d’écriture de chercheurs. Les archives ouvertes permettent d’accélérer la communication scientifique et de l’ouvrir gratuitement à tous les chercheurs qui ont accès à l’Internet. Cet accès libre et immédiat accroît la visibilité et souvent l’impact des résultats de la recherche. » Archives ouvertes, archives institutionnelles et protocole français Rachel Creppy BBF, Vol. 52, No. 6. (2007) 2008-01-10T08:00:20-00:00 BBF 52 6 ir open_archive http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2088581 <i>(6 Dec 2007)</i><br /><br />We study the dependence of citation counts of e-prints published on the arXiv:astro-ph server on their position in the daily astro-ph listing. Using the SPIRES literature database we reconstruct the astro-ph listings from July 2002 to December 2005 and determine citation counts for e-prints from their ADS entry. We use Zipf plots to analyze the citation distributions for each astro-ph position. We find that e-prints appearing at or near the top of the astro-ph mailings receive significantly more citations than those further down the list. This difference is significant at the 7 sigma level and on average amounts to two times more citations for papers at the top than those further down the listing. We propose three possible non-exclusive explanations for this positional citation effect and try to test them. We conclude that self-promotion by authors plays a role in the observed effect but cannot exclude that increased visibility at the top of the daily listings contributes to higher citation counts as well. We can rule out that the positional dependence of citations is caused by the coincidence of the submission deadline with the working hours of a geographically constrained set of intrinsically higher cited authors. We discuss several ways of mitigating the observed effect, including splitting astro-ph into several subject classes, randomizing the order of e-prints, and a novel approach to sorting entries by relevance to individual readers. The Importance of Being First: Position Dependent Citation Rates on arXiv:astro-ph JP Dietrich (6 Dec 2007) 2007-12-11T08:28:08-00:00 citation_impact http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2100470 <i>LIBRI, Vol. 55, No. 4. (2005)</i><br /><br />Google Scholar (http://scholar.google.com/) provides a new method of locating potentially relevant articles on a given subject by identifying subsequent articles that cite a previously published article. An important feature of Google Scholar is that researchers can use it to trace interconnections among authors citing articles on the same topic and to determine the frequency with which a specific article is cited by others as it has a "cited by" feature. We will begin with an overview of how to use it for citation analysis, and then progress through advanced search techniques. This study also compares the citation counts provided by Web of Science and Google Scholar for articles in the field of Webometrics. We make several suggestions for improvement it. Finally, it concludes that Google Scholar provides a free alternative or complement to other citation indexes. Google Scholar : the new generation of citation indexes Alireza Noruzi LIBRI, Vol. 55, No. 4. (2005) 2007-12-12T20:58:46-00:00 LIBRI 55 4 citations gscholar scientometrie http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2073899 <i>(2007)</i><br /><br />Discusses the potential of open access to overcome the divide between the mainstream and the peripheral in science, including the divide between the developed and developing world. Specific open access implementation strategies are examined with respect to this role. For example, subsidized open access journals with no article processing fees, a common practice in many if not most of the world's countries, are helpful to overcoming the divide, as is a coherent system of institutional and thematic repositories. Open Access and the divide between "mainstream" and "peripheral" science Jean Guédon (2007) 2007-12-07T17:13:23-00:00 open_access http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1104575 <i>SIGITE Newsl., Vol. 3, No. 1. (January 2006), pp. 6-9.</i> Using Really Simple Syndication (RSS) to enhance student research Jeff Cold doi:10.1145/1113378.1113379 SIGITE Newsl., Vol. 3, No. 1. (January 2006), pp. 6-9. 2007-02-13T07:39:13-00:00 SIGITE Newsl. 1550-1469 3 1 6 9 ACM Press information_literacy information_retrieval rss http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2056213 <i>International Journal on Digital Libraries, Vol. 7, No. 1. (2 October 2007), pp. 1-4.</i> Connecting digital libraries to eScience: the future of scientific scholarship Michael Wright Tamara Sumner Reagan Moore Traugott Koch doi:10.1007/s00799-007-0030-9 International Journal on Digital Libraries, Vol. 7, No. 1. (2 October 2007), pp. 1-4. 2007-12-04T08:49:35-00:00 International Journal on Digital Libraries 7 1 1 4 library open_science http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2052448 <i>The Charleston Advisor (October 2007)</i> Using Scopus to Analyze Citations Kimberly Hill Joanne Sparks The Charleston Advisor (October 2007) 2007-12-03T20:45:31-00:00 The Charleston Advisor citation_impact scopus http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/565877 <i>(2006)</i><br /><br />RAE 2008 is the latest UK research assessment exercise designed to inform the selective distribution of public funds for research by the UK's higher education funding bodies. Like previous exercises, RAE 2008 will be based upon expert review by discipline-based panels considering written submission from participating institutions. It is managed by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) on behalf of all UK HE Funding Councils. IRRA (Institutional Repositories and Research Assessment) RAE Software for Institutional Repositories Leslie Carr John Maccoll (2006) 2006-03-27T14:49:10-00:00 open_archive research_assessment http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/566083 <i>Ariadne, No. 35. (13 April 2003)</i><br /><br />Being the only country with a national research assessment exercise [1], the UK is today in a unique position to make a small change that will confer some large benefits. The Funding Councils should mandate that in order to be eligible for Research Assessment and funding, all UK research-active university staff must maintain (I) a standardised online RAE-CV, including all designated RAE performance indicators, chief among them being (II) the full text of every refereed research paper, publicly self-archived in the university's online Eprint Archive and linked to the CV for online harvesting, scientometric analysis and assessment. This will (i) give the UK Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) far richer, more sensitive and more predictive measures of research productivity and impact, for far less cost and effort (both to the RAE and to the universities preparing their RAE submissions), (ii) increase the uptake and impact of UK research output, by increasing its visibility, accessibility and usage, and (iii) set an example for the rest of the world that will almost certainly be emulated, in both respects: research assessment and research access. Mandated online RAE CVs linked to university eprint archives: Enhancing UK research impact and assessment Stevan Harnad Les Carr Tim Brody Charles Oppenheim Ariadne, No. 35. (13 April 2003) 2006-03-27T17:09:12-00:00 Ariadne 35 open_archive research_assessment http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/571858 <i>(2006)</i><br /><br />The question of whether self-archiving of preprints and/or postprints by journal authors is likely to have a significant impact on journal subscription numbers is currently a hotly debated issue of considerable policy importance for scholarly publishers. The moves by funding bodies and some institutions to request or require authors to deposit postprints has given more urgency to this issue as the archives are now likely to grow in number and more importantly in their content. This study was commissioned by ALPSP to ascertain what are the major factors contributing to journal cancellations, and thus to provide some new information for a debate that has inevitably so far been short of data. ALPSP survey of librarians on factors in journal cancellation Mark Ware (2006) 2006-03-31T16:25:39-00:00 The Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers journal_cancellation publishers_association http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/578568 <i>(18 December 2004), pp. 1-186.</i><br /><br />Les bénéfices que l'on tire de la recherche dépendent en premier lieu de l'accès aux résultats de cette recherche. Les technologies et les réseaux informatiques offrent les solutions matérielles pour libérer cet accès. Mais les modèles socié-taux et économiques font l'objet de profondes controverses autour desquelles s'affrontent les acteurs de l'édition scientifique (scientifiques, bibliothèques, sociétés savantes, éditeurs privés, pouvoirs publics, centre d'information scienti-fique et technique, etc.). Les chercheurs s'interrogent sur les voies à suivre et sur le rôle qu'ils pourraient jouer. Cet ouvrage a pour objectif de répondre à ses interrogations en plongeant le lecteur dans le contexte du milieu de l'édition scientifique en sciences humaines et sociales (SHS). Technologies et réseaux y sont présentés comme le substrat à partir duquel peuvent s'organiser les chercheurs en communautés de travail en reprenant le contrôle des processus éditoriaux avec un double enjeu : l'accès libre et la mise au point d'un nouveau cycle de recherche au sein duquel pourra se renouveler l'écriture scientifique. Le bouleversement profond des modèles de l'édition scientifique est étudié aussi bien sous l'angle de l'organisation des communautés de savoirs que sous celui de l'économie et de la logistique. Ces dernières perspectives nous conduisent à proposer un nouveau modèle de revenus en SHS pour que vive l'édition de revues en accès libre, aux côtés de l'ancien modèle, et un ensemble de mesures pour que la très grande majorité des revues SHS ne soit pas exclue des nouveaux espaces de communication ouverts par les réseaux et la Toile. Le rôle des archives ouvertes y est largement discuté comme étant la voie privilégiée pour réaliser à court terme l'accès libre et un élément essentiel du cycle éditorial. Préface de Jean-Max Noyer : l'édition électronique au coeur de la transformation des savoirs. Archives ouvertes et publication scientifique. Comment mettre en place l'accès libre aux résultats de la recherche ? Thierry Chanier (18 December 2004), pp. 1-186. 2006-04-06T16:56:05-00:00 1 186 L'Harmattan open_archive http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/579238 <i>(3 April 2006)</i><br /><br />Peer review in science and technology has been the subject of significant controversy. In a world where finding information is laborious, the knowledge that a document is from a "“trusted source" is valuable. This presentation explores whether coming of Google and other web based search engines have impacted how science is done, peer reviewed and published and whether the present peer review process is necessary and maintains the quality and focus of a journal and articles published. With increasing number of Open Access Institutional Repositories worldwide and indexed by Google, more and more scientific literature is now visible than before and hence resulting in increased worldwide access to scientific literature. Quality blogs and wikis have speeded up the process of scientific communication through informal peer reviews while the present system of formal peer review still attempts to maintain quality of a reserach paper although it tends to slow down the process of scientific communication. More debate and discussion on issues mentioned will further shed light on this important subject of peer reviews in Google environment. Peer Review in the Google Age: Is technology changing the way science is done and evaluated? Jay Bhatt Margaret Dominy Jean-Claude Bradley (3 April 2006) 2006-04-07T09:49:05-00:00 google research_assessment http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/732870 <i>(March 2005)</i><br /><br />L’usage des documents numériques par les chercheurs fait appel à des outils spécifiques de traitement. De quelle manière les chercheurs se servent-ils de ces outils ? Quelle est la spécificité de leur comportement lié à la recherche documentaire dans un environnement numérique ? Quelle est au fond leur culture informatique dans ce domaine ? Ce sont quelques unes des questions pour lesquelles cette note bibliographique tente d’établir un état de l’art par le biais d’une recherche de sources d’informations scientifiques qui, dans la mesure du possible, repose sur l’utilisation d’un langage contrôlé. Recherche informatisée de l’information : savoir et savoir-faire des chercheurs Caroline Abéla Michel Roland (March 2005) 2006-07-03T13:06:46-00:00 information_retrieval researchers_uses http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/732888 <i>preprint (11 January 2006), pp. 1-36.</i><br /><br />For electronic resources librarians, "open access" raises a variety of questions. What is OA? Is it different from free access, or is it the same? What is a Creative Commons License, which some OA providers use? What's an "e-print"? Are there different types of e-prints? What is "self-archiving"? What are the different ways that e-prints are made publicly available? What's an open access journal? Are there different types of OA journals? How can OA journals be made available at no cost? How do you search for OA materials? Why is OA desirable? Will OA flourish or fail? How will OA affect library collections and services? What can libraries do to support OA and to integrate OA materials into their collections? How will OA affect library budgets, especially collection budgets? How will OA affect electronic resources librarians' jobs? Open Access and Libraries Charles Bailey preprint (11 January 2006), pp. 1-36. 2006-07-03T13:51:08-00:00 preprint 1 36 library open_access http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1179292 <i>Journal de chirurgie, Vol. 143, No. 5. (2006), pp. 275-277.</i> Quel est l'impact du facteur d'impact ? C Mariette K Slim Journal de chirurgie, Vol. 143, No. 5. (2006), pp. 275-277. 2007-03-21T14:57:11-00:00 Journal de chirurgie 143 5 275 277 impact_factor research_assessment http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1816305 <i>DLIST (2007)</i><br /><br />Recently, a growing amount of systems that allow content annotation by their users (= tagging) has been created. Simultaneously a debate on the pros and cons of allowing users to add personal keywords to digital content has arisen. A stable category model for social tags on a linguistic as well as functional level is presented, based on data gathered from the scientific bibliography management tool connotea. Also some initial findings of a comparative analysis of social tags and author keywords are reported. Tagging tagging. Analysing user keywords in scientific bibliography management systems. Markus Heckner Susanne Mühlbacher Christian Wolff DLIST (2007) 2007-10-24T17:34:35-00:00 DLIST bibliography_management_systems folksonomy http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1877646 <i>Chronicle of Higher Education, Vol. 53, No. 41. (June 2007), 86.</i><br /><br />As the Web evolves, so will the ways people measure scholarly authority. Scholarly authority is being influenced by many of the features that have collectively been dubbed Web 2.0 by Tim O'Reilly and others, and what the author will call Authority 2.0 in order to explore more fully the shifts that seem likely in the near future. In Web 1.0, roughly 1992 to 2002, authoritative, quality information was still cherished. Content was king. Presumed scarce, it was intrinsically valuable. Web 2.0, roughly 2002 through today, takes more for granted. It presumes the majority of users will have broadband, with unlimited, always-on access, and few barriers to participation. Indeed, it encourages participation, what O'Reilly calls "harnessing collective intelligence." Its fundamental presumption is one of endless information abundance. That abundance changes greatly both the habits and business imperatives of the online environment. In this article, the author discusses examples which are by no means fully representative of all authority mechanisms currently in place in online arenas. He also discusses Authority 3.0, or Web 3.0, which most technophile thinkers believe will be driven by artificial intelligences. For universities, the challenge will be ensuring that scholars who are making more and more of their material available online will be fairly judged in hiring and promotion decisions. It will mean being open to the widening context in which scholarship is published, and it will mean that faculty members will have to take the time to learn about--and give credit for--the new authority metrics, instead of relying on scholarly publishers to establish the importance of material for them. The New Metrics of Scholarly Authority Michael Jensen Chronicle of Higher Education, Vol. 53, No. 41. (June 2007), 86. 2007-11-07T13:35:58-00:00 Chronicle of Higher Education 53 41 86 authority metrics scholary http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1970742 <i>Online Information Review, Vol. 31, No. 3. (2007), pp. 365-375.</i><br /><br />Purpose – This paper aims to understand how students experience the search tools Google Scholar and Metalib and the role of prior instruction. Design/methodology/approach – A total of 32 undergraduate students searched academic articles for their thesis work. Searches were recorded using Morae software and were analysed along with the number of articles saved and responses to a questionnaire. All searched with both tools. Half of the students received training before searching. Findings – Google Scholar performed better in almost all measures. Training had a positive effect on the amount and quality of articles saved. Responses to Google Scholar were more positive than to Metalib. However, the students were not overwhelmingly enthusiastic about either of the tools. Research limitations/implications – Each Metalib implementation is to some extent unique, which limits the extent to which results can be generalised to other implementations. Practical implications – Training is valuable for both tools. The user interface to Metalib does not conform with students' expectations and needs further improvement. Both tools strive to be a first alternative search tool for academic literature but neither performed well enough in this study to recommend it to be used in that role in an academic library setting. Originality/value – These tools are important to academic libraries but few user studies have been published, particularly on Google Scholar. To one's knowledge no other user study on these tools has looked at the effects of instruction. Keywords: Customer satisfaction, Research methods, Search engines, Students, User interfaces Metalib and Google Scholar: a user study Glenn Haya Else Nygren Wilhelm Widmark doi:10.1108/14684520710764122 Online Information Review, Vol. 31, No. 3. (2007), pp. 365-375. 2007-11-24T07:30:59-00:00 Online Information Review 31 3 365 375 gscholar metalib http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1966778 <i>Online Information Review, Vol. 31, No. 6. (2007), pp. 814-830.</i><br /><br />Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to discuss the new scientific search service Google Scholar (GS). It aims to discuss this search engine, which is intended exclusively for searching scholarly documents, and then empirically test its most important functionality. The focus is on an exploratory study which investigates the coverage of scientific serials in GS. Design/methodology/approach – The study is based on queries against different journal lists: international scientific journals from Thomson Scientific (SCI, SSCI, AH), open access journals from the DOAJ list and journals from the German social sciences literature database SOLIS as well as the analysis of result data from GS. All data gathering took place in August 2006. Findings – The study shows deficiencies in the coverage and up-to-dateness of the GS index. Furthermore, the study points out which web servers are the most important data providers for this search service and which information sources are highly represented. The paper can show that there is a relatively large gap in Google Scholar's coverage of German literature as well as weaknesses in the accessibility of Open Access content. Major commercial academic publishers are currently the main data providers. Research limitations/implications – Five different journal lists were analysed, including approximately 9,500 single titles. The lists are from different fields and of various sizes. This limits comparability. There were also some problems matching the journal titles of the original lists to the journal title data provided by Google Scholar. The study was only able to analyse the top 100 Google Scholar hits per journal. Practical implications – The paper concludes that Google Scholar has some interesting pros (such as citation analysis and free materials) but the service cannot be seen as a substitute for the use of special abstracting and indexing databases and library catalogues due to various weaknesses (such as transparency, coverage and up-to-dateness). Originality/value – The authors do not know of any other study using such a brute force approach and such a large empirical basis. The study can be considered as using brute force in the sense that it gathered lots of data from Google and then analysed the data in a macroscopic way. An exploratory study of Google Scholar Philipp Mayr Anne-Kathrin Walter Online Information Review, Vol. 31, No. 6. (2007), pp. 814-830. 2007-11-23T14:45:40-00:00 Online Information Review 31 6 814 830 gscholar http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1081362 <i>Research Evaluation, Vol. 15, No. 3. (1 December 2006), pp. 209PAGE>-219.</i> Potential sources of bias in research fellowship assessments: effects of university prestige and field of study Bornmann Lutz Daniel Hans-Dieter Research Evaluation, Vol. 15, No. 3. (1 December 2006), pp. 209PAGE>-219. 2007-02-01T03:37:39-00:00 Research Evaluation 0958-2029 15 3 209PAGE> 219 Beech Tree Publishing research_assessment http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/347751 <i>Scientometrics, Vol. 65, No. 3. (December 2005), pp. 391-392.</i> Does the h-index for ranking of scientists really work? Lutz Bornmann Hans-Dieter Daniel doi:10.1007/s11192-005-0281-4 Scientometrics, Vol. 65, No. 3. (December 2005), pp. 391-392. 2005-10-11T12:26:26-00:00 Scientometrics 0138-9130 65 3 391 392 Kluwer Academic Publishers h_index research_assessment http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2032158 <i>Cybermetrics, Vol. 11, No. 1. (November 2007)</i><br /><br />We propose the b index as a measure of scientific excellence at the micro and meso levels, as a promising supplement to the h index and its variants (such as g index and R index). The b index as a measure of scientific excellence. A promising supplement to the h index. L Bornmann R Mutz H-D Daniel Cybermetrics, Vol. 11, No. 1. (November 2007) 2007-11-30T20:23:41-00:00 Cybermetrics 11 1 b_index h_index scientometrie http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2011977 <i>Documentaliste, sciences de l'information (2007)</i> Une approche système d’information des archives ouvertes JM Francony Documentaliste, sciences de l'information (2007) 2007-11-29T08:54:01-00:00 Documentaliste, sciences de l'information open_archive si http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2004043 <i>(October 2006)</i><br /><br />Only 15% of articles are currently being made Open Access (OA) through spontaneous self-archiving efforts by their authors. They average 25%-250% more citations in all 12 disciplines tested so far. Ninety-four percent of journals endorse immediate OA self-archiving. There is no evidence that self-archiving induces subscription cancellations. The ?OA advantage? consists of: Early Advantage (early self-archiving produces both earlier and more citations), Usage Advantage (more downloads for OA articles, correlated with later citations), Competitive Advantage (relative citation advantage of OA over non-OA articles: disappears at 100% OA), Quality Advantage (OA advantage is higher, the higher the quality of the article) and Quality Bias (authors selectively self-archiving their higher quality articles ? a non-causal component: disappears at 100% OA). We are currently comparing the OA advantage for mandated and spontaneous (self-selected) self-archiving. Deposit rates in Institutional Repositories (IRs) remain at 15% if unmandated, but climb toward 100% OA if mandated, confirming surveys that predicted 95% compliance. In the UK, 4 of the 8 research funding councils and the Wellcome Trust mandate self-archiving and it is being considered by the European Commission and the US federal FRPAA. There is no reason for universities to wait for the passage of the legislation. Five universities and two research institutions (including CERN) have already mandated it, with documented success. An Immediate-Deposit/Optional-Access Mandate covers all cases and moots all legal issues: metadata are immediately visible webwide and, where needed, access to the postprint can be set as Closed Access instead of OA throughout any embargo period. Software to support this approach (that allows the author to email individual copies of non-Open Access papers to individual requesters) has been created for both EPrints and DSpace repository platforms. Repositories for Institutional Open Access: Mandated Deposit Policies Les Carr Alma Swan Arthur Sale Charles Oppenheim Tim Brody Steve Hitchcock Chawki Hajjem Stevan Harnad (October 2006) 2007-11-28T13:35:48-00:00 access citations impact institutional mandated mandates open open_archive policies policy-making repositories research self-archiving http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/2003177 <i>(2007)</i><br /><br />Cette communication dresse un bilan du développement de l’édition scientifique numérique en 15 ans. Elle pointe un ensemble d’étapes et considère en particulier les évolutions de l’économie du secteur. En considérant les critères d’open access, d’expertise scientifique et de financement, différents modèles sont identifiés. La dimension prospective finale anticipe différentes configurations envisageables. L’accent est mis sur la nécessité de prendre en considération l’open access dans le cadre du développement des infrastructures de la recherche. Evolution de l'édition scientifique, 15 ans après G Chartron (2007) 2007-11-28T11:27:03-00:00 history scientific_publishing http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1913373 <i>SCRIPT-ed, Vol. 4, No. 3., 285.</i> Copyright and research: an archivangelist’s perspective A Adams doi:10.2966/scrip.040307.285 SCRIPT-ed, Vol. 4, No. 3., 285. 2007-11-14T11:26:51-00:00 SCRIPT-ed 4 3 285 mediation open_archive scholary_communication http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1812959 <i>Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (19 October 2007)</i> Information seeking behavior of academic scientists Bradley Hemminger Dihui Lu KTL Vaughan Stephanie Adams Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology (19 October 2007) 2007-10-23T21:44:50-00:00 Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology information_retrieval researchers_uses scholary_communication http://www.citeulike.org/user/JSicot/article/1019496 <i>(1998), pp. 231-248.</i> Building Information Infrastructures for Social Worlds - The Role of Classifications and Standards Geoffrey Bowker Susan Star (1998), pp. 231-248. 2006-12-30T01:03:20-00:00 231 248 Springer-Verlag information_architecture social_networks taxonomy