Micro‐credits in scientific publishing
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/00220411111183546 |
| Date | 18 October 2011 |
| Pages | 958-974 |
| Published date | 18 October 2011 |
| Author | Roberto Casati,Gloria Origgi,Judith Simon |
| Subject Matter | Information & knowledge management,Library & information science |
Micro-credits in scientific
publishing
Roberto Casati, Gloria Origgi and Judith Simon
CNRS-EHESS-ENS Institut Nicod, Paris, France
Abstract [Roberto Casati, Gloria Origgi, Judith Simon (CC-BY-SA)]
Purpose – New technologies allow for efficient dissemination of scientific knowledge objects (SKOs).
Yet they are likely to transform SKOs as well. The aim of this paper is to propose a way to structure
SKOs that allows for both a clear individuation of the main scientific contributions and a fine-grained
structure of credits and evaluation.
Design/methodology/approach – The authors review and analyze existing practices of
structuring SKOs in different disciplines.
Findings – Provisionally considering the published paper as an atomic SKO, possible subatomic
structures of SKOs are investigated. It is hypothesized that SKOs are meant to satisfy two separated
but interdependent sets of constraints, one related to the contribution the SKO makes to the body of
knowledge, and another related to the contribution the SKO makes to the reputation of its authors. It is
hypothesized that existing SKO structures are not optimal for satisfying both sets of constraints at
once.
Research limitations/implications – A broader analysis may be needed that covers the totality of
existing practices.
Practical implications – Guidelines are offered. This paper, including the present abstract, is an
example of what the scientific paper of tomorrow could be like.
Social implications – The paper proposes better apportioning of scientific credits and evaluation;
substantive evolution of the academic publishing and credit attribution models.
Originality/value – The idea that the communication and evaluation function of a SKO are
differently reflected in their structure is novel. The proposed fine-grained credit attribution system is
novel. The molecular/atomic/sub-atomic distinction is a new way to fix the terminology.
Keywords Scientific communication, Scientificevaluation, Online publication,Reputation measures,
Scientometrics,Credit attribution, Researchwork, Publications
Paper type Conceptual paper
Initial idea
Roberto Casati, Gloria Origgi
Writers
Roberto Casati, Gloria Origgi, Judith Simon
Production
Franc¸ois Recanati (Lab director)
Organization
CNRS-EHESS-ENS Institut Nicod
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0022-0418.htm
JDOC
67,6
958
Received 28 April 2010
Revised 15 December 2010
Accepted 21 December 2010
Journal of Documentation
Vol. 67 No. 6, 2011
pp. 958-974
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
0022-0418
DOI 10.1108/00220411111183546
Financial support
Future and Emerging Technologies (FET) programme within the Seventh Framework
Programme for Research of the European Commission, under FET-Open grant
number: 213360.
Authorizations
Casati, Origgi, Simon: all modifications possible. [This list can be changed as the text
evolves]
Everyone may contribute to the “Further case studies list”, “External comments”,
sections of this document.
Licensing
(CC-BY-SA)
Signed referees
Prepublication comments by
Giuseppe Veltri, Carles Sierra
Status
In progress/finished/submitted/under review/published
Liquid version
You may contribute to a wiki version of this paper, to be found at the address http://
www... (example)
1 Two dimensions of scientific knowledge objects [Roberto Casati
(CC-BY-SA)]
Scientific knowledge objects (SKOs) are members of a large class of items that are used
in producing, disseminating, and revising knowledge. The class paradigmatically
includes articles in peer-reviewed scientific journals, reviews, books, collections of
articles, handbooks, PhD dissertations, communications at conferences, encyclopediae;
it also includes datasets, pictures, diagrams, experimental stimuli, pieces of software,
as well as drafts (non published or pre-published), opinions, peer reviews. More
controversially, SKOs comprise patents as a form of publication of scientific
knowledge. Recent additions to the class of SKOs are blog entries, discussions in fora,
self-archived contributions. The exact borders of the class of SKOs may be fuzzy, but
there is a consensus about the core, paradigmatic cases.
The design of SKOs hasa long history that reflects the evolution of their use. Ancient
SKOs were material for class discussion (Aristotle); handmade copies of translations of
foreign treatises (Averroes’); letters in scientific correspondences (Leibniz);
communications to learned societies (Newton); disclosures of results to funding bodies
(Galileo); thelist is open-ended. Technological leapshave oftentimes determined changes
in the way SKOs are disseminated. The invention of printing has made non-obvious
forms of communication possible;instantaneous broadcast has furtheredthe possibilities
of communication (e.g. McLuhan, 1962; Eisenstein, 1980). Online publication is the last,
current step. A rather consensual claim is that these leaps have not only increased
availability, but have changed the very structure of the SKO and that, if they have not,
Micro-credits in
publishing
959
To continue reading
Request your trial