À la lecture d’ouvrages philosophiques anciens, nous sommes souvent surpris par la virulence des critiques adressées à l’écriture, dans la mesure où ces critiques nous parviennent au moyen de textes écrits. N’est-il pas paradoxal de tout à la fois rejeter et utiliser une même technologie ? Ou est-ce que les pratiques de l’oralité et de l’écriture des philosophes grecs, telles que ceux-ci les décrivent dans leurs ouvrages, peuvent être cohérentes avec leurs critiques ? Notre thèse visait, d’une part, à répondre à ce questionnement en confrontant les pratiques des philosophes anciens aux critiques qu’ils adressent à l’écriture, par le biais d’une étude systématique des discours sur la lecture et l’écriture dans des textes anciens d’auteurs et d’époques variés, et notamment des textes qui n’ont pas l’écriture pour objet. D’autre part, comme les travaux déjà publiés sur ce thème tentaient le plus souvent de trouver le point de rupture entre la tradition orale et la tradition écrite (cf. Havelock 1963, Lentz 1989), nous avons voulu inscrire notre objet d’étude dans une plus longue durée, ce qui nous a permis de constater qu’une rupture radicale entre les philosophes de tradition orale et ceux appartenant à la tradition écrite n’avait pas eu lieu, et que l’on observait plutôt une continuité des critiques et des pratiques de l’oralité et de l’écriture depuis l’époque classique jusqu’à l’Antiquité tardive. Malgré le développement de nouveaux supports matériels pour l’écriture, l’émergence d’une religion du livre, et la mise à l’écrit des poèmes homériques, la tradition philosophique grecque témoigne d’un usage circonspect de l’écriture et du refus de rejeter définitivement l’oralité. / When we read ancient philosophical works, often we are surprised to find that the Greek philosophers strongly criticize literacy, as we are still confronted with a written text. Is it not paradoxical to reject a technology while still using it? Or is the philosophers’ practice of literacy, as described in their works, consistent with their criticism? Is the philosophers’ practice of literacy, as described in their works, consistent with their criticism of it? This thesis aims to answer these questions, firstly, by comparing the ancient philosophers’ criticism of literacy to their practice of it, through the study of what various authors from various periods say about reading and writing. On the other hand, since earlier works on this topic have proposed that the classical period witnessed a sudden and, to a certain extent, definitive turn to literacy, and have tried to locate this turn in time, I have examined the situation in a broader perspective, over a longer period of time. The results show that, if we consider how philosophers criticize literacy and how they describe themselves in their own discourses, literacy patterns tended to remain similar until late Antiquity; and that, in spite of Aristotle's new use of literacy, the criticism we find in Plato lingers on. As a result, what we usually call the transition from an oral tradition to a written tradition could be better viewed as a cultural continuity. In spite of the commitment to writing recording of the Homeric poems, of the emerging of a book-centered religion, and notwithstanding an evident use of literacy, the ancient philosophical tradition testifies to a refusal, both theoretical and practical, of throwing away orality.

Nos últimos anos, os estudos de língua japonesa acadêmica mulplicaram-se, dando forma a um novo domínio de pesquisa. Apesar dos avanços no conhecimento de japonês acadêmico, há uma lacuna quanto às categorias de documentos encontradas em periódicos acadêmicos do Japão. Pesquisas passadas privilegiaram documentos do tipo ronbun (artigo), deixando de lado a existência de outras categorias relevantes de publicação. O presente estudo dirige-se a essa lacuna. A fim de identificar as principais categorias de documentos de revistas acadêmicas japonesas, examinaram-se instruções aos autores de periódicos do Japan Science and Technology Information Aggregator, Electronic (J-Stage), base eletrônica de acesso aberto do Japão. Como resultado, seis categorias foram identificadas: ssetsu (teoria compreensiva), shiry (material), kaisetsu (explicação), gencho ronbun (artigo original), shohy (crítica de livro) e tanp (relatório curto). O modo pelo qual as revistas do J-Stage descrevem essas categorias foi retratado mediante a compilação de conteúdo de instruções aos autores. Além disso, as categorias foram caracterizadas quanto à estrutura e ao propósito fundamental aparente por meio do exame de uma amostra de documentos publicados em revistas do J-Stage. Traços linguísticos gerais de documentos de periódicos acadêmicos japoneses foram ainda descritos com base em orientações encontradas em instruções aos autores. / In recent years, the body of research on academic Japanese has grown considerably, and a new research domain has emerged. Despite the advances in knowledge of academic Japanese, there is a gap concerning publication categories found in scholarly periodicals from Japan. Past studies focused on documents of the ronbun (article) type, ignoring the existence of other relevant categories. The present study addresses this gap. In order to identify the main publication categories from Japanese scholarly journals, instructions to authors from periodicals found in the Japan Science and Technology Information Aggregator, Electronic (J-Stage)an open-access, electronic database from Japanwere examined. As a result, six categories have been identified: ssetsu (general theory), shiry (material), kaisetsu (explanation), gencho ronbun (original article), shohy (book review), and tanp (short report). The way by which journals from J-Stage describe these categories was depicted by the compilation of descriptions extracted from instructions to authors. Furthermore, the six categories were characterized in terms of structure and visible fundamental purpose by means of an analysis of a sample of documents published in journals from J-Stage. Additionally, general linguistic features of Japanese journal documents were described based on directions found in instructions to authors.

O foco deste estudo é a Biblioteca Publicadora, modelo difundido em biblioteca internacional universitária ou de pesquisa para designar a biblioteca que atua em serviços de edição de conteúdos acadêmicos. Discute a produção do livro digital pelo serviço de publicação, diferente do modelo de publicação tradicional nacional voltado normalmente à produção de revistas digitais. Ao expandir seu campo de atuação, a biblioteca reafirma sua missão de preservação e circulação da informação através da reformulação e acréscimo da atividade de publicação de conteúdos digitais acessíveis irrestritamente. O trabalho destaca também a parceria Biblioteca Publicadora/Editora Universitária na construção de um modelo de publicação para conteúdos digitais, ressaltando suas dificuldades e ações por subsistência no meio acadêmico; envolvendo a busca por novos autores, leitores. Descreve a contribuição de entidades e associações, como o Library Publishing Coalition, voltadas à divulgação de práticas da publicação em formatos acessíveis via web e difusão de cursos para contribuir na formação de pessoas envolvidas na área. Este trabalho trata também das dificuldades do acesso aberto pelas vias verde, dourada, bronze, modelos híbridos, black ou piratas, além da importância do conhecimento sobre licenças de uso pela comunidade acadêmica. Apresenta estudos de caso provenientes de biblioteca de pesquisa e por editora da iniciativa privada apresentando fluxo de criação do livro digital por aplicativo de edição de conteúdo. Aponta alguns desafios da biblioteca publicadora no mundo editorial, como a relação editor/bibliotecário e as perspectivas para implementação e continuidade destas atividades. / The focus of this study is the library publishing model disseminated into international university or research libraries in order to designate the library which acts in services of academic content editions. It discusses the production of digital book by a publishing service which is different from the traditional national publication model usually aimed at the production of digital journals. By expanding its field of activity, the library reaffirms its mission of preserving and circulating information by reformulating and adding the activity of publishing freely accessible digital content. The work also highlights the partnership of the Library Publishing-University Press in the building of a model of publication for digital contents, highlighting their difficulties and actions for subsistence in the academic environment; involving the search for new authors and readers. It further describes the contribution of entities and associations, such as the Library Publishing Coalition, in order to propagate publishing practices in web-accessible formats and distribute courses to contribute to qualification for training people involved in the area. This work also deals with the difficulties of open access through green, gold, bronze, hybrid, black or pirate models, as well as the importance of knowledge about licenses for use by the academic community. It presents cases from a research library and a publishing house report as well as the workflow of production of digital books by content publishing software. In addition, it points out some challenges facing the library publishing world, such as the publisher/librarian relationship and perspectives for the implementation and continuity of these activities.

Faculty research productivity studies typically focus on the scholarly performance of the individual researcher, although environmental and organizational conditions that are largely outside of the researcher’s control can significantly impact that performance. From an institutional effectiveness perspective, it is imperative for the higher education administrators and leaders who share the responsibility of managing and supporting their university’s research enterprise to understand how the institutional environment itself impacts the productivity of its research community. In this sequential mixed methods study, a quantitative framework was tested for assessing institutional effectiveness in research administration based on the assertion that this concept can be measured indirectly, at the departmental level, based on the calculation of a program’s residual scholarly output. This is the difference between the actual amount of scholarly output a program produces compared to the predicted amount of scholarly output that its resources suggest it is capable of producing. The assumption is that the institution’s effectiveness in supporting research is largely reflected by the extent to which a program over- or under-produces scholarship based on its level of resources. The residual scholarly output was calculated for each Ph.D.-granting biomedical engineering program in doctoral universities with a Carnegie classification of “highest research activity” for the period of 2014 through 2016. A sampling of those programs that achieved among the highest and lowest residual productivity levels then became the subject of a qualitative inquiry where researchers and administrators were interviewed with two goals in mind. The more ostensive goal was to reveal what factors, characteristics, resources, and conditions distinguish under- and over-producing programs for the purpose of informing best and worst practices in research administration. Equally important, the second goal was to determine if the quantitative framework was actually successful in distinguishing institutional effectiveness in supporting research. The study concludes that the quantitative framework proved to be a successful method for detecting institutional effectiveness in supporting research, and that the primary distinguishing characteristic between high and low-functioning environments was how well programs were able to reduce the general administrative burdens that researchers face, particularly in grant management and the operation of research laboratories.

This study investigates information literacy and scholarly communication within the processes of doctoral research and supervision at a distance. Both doctoral candidates and supervisors acknowledge information literacy deficiencies and it is suggested that disintermediation and the proliferation of information may contribute to those deficiencies. Further to this, the influence of pedagogic continuity—particularly in relation to the information seeking behaviour of candidates—is investigated, as is the concomitant aspect of how doctoral researchers practise scholarly communication. The well-documented and enduring problem for candidates of isolation from the research cultures of their universities is also scrutinised. The contentious issue of more formally involving librarians in the doctoral process is also considered, from the perspective of candidates and supervisors. Superimposed upon these topical and timely issues is the theoretical framework of adult learning theory, in particular the tenets of andragogy. The pedagogical-andragogical orientation of candidates and supervisors is established, demonstrating both the differences and similarities between candidates and supervisors, as are a number of independent variables, including a comparison of on-campus and off-campus candidates. Other independent variables include age, gender, DETYA (Department of Education, Training & Youth Affairs) category, enrolment type, stage of candidature, employment and status, type of doctorate, and English/non-English speaking background. The research methodology uses qualitative and quantitative techniques encompassing both data and methodological triangulation. The study uses two sets of questionnaires and a series of in-depth interviews with a sample of on-campus and off-campus doctoral candidates and supervisors from four Australian universities. Major findings include NESB candidates being more pedagogical than their ESB counterparts, and candidates and supervisors from the Sciences are more pedagogical than those from Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences, or Education. Candidates make a transition from a more dependent and pedagogically oriented approach to learning towards more of an independent and andragogical orientation over the duration of their candidature. However, over tune both on-campus and off-campus candidates become more isolated from the research cultures of their universities, and less happy with support received from their supervisors in relation to their literature reviews. Ill The study found large discrepancies in perception between the support supervisors believed they gave to candidates in relation to the literature review, and the support candidates believed they received. Information seeking becomes easier over time, but candidates face a dilemma with the proliferation of information, suggesting that disintermediation has exacerbated the challenges of evaluation and organisation of information. The concept of pedagogic continuity was recognised by supervisors and especially candidates, both negative and positive influences. The findings are critically analysed and synthesised using the metaphor of a scholarly 'Club' of which obtaining a doctorate is a rite of passage. Recommendations are made for changes in professional practice, and topics that may warrant further research are suggested.

This study examined the effect of enhanced electronic access to information on patterns of scholarly communication. Using a panel typology, the academics at the Australian National University were surveyed in 1991 and again in 1994, with the data collected by means of mailed questionnaires. The research drew on the literature of scholarly communication and information-seeking behaviour. Principles of systems theory were used to explain the changes taking place within the academics' environments, including both the system of scholarly communication and the culture of the three disciplinary groupings: science, social science and the humanities. Three research questions directed the study focussing on the effect of enhanced electronic access to information on the academics' use of the library and on their patterns of information seeking and dissemination. Results found that between 1991 and 1994, while some aspects of communication technologies - such as email - had been almost universally adopted, overall, few changes had taken place in academics' information related behaviour. Scientists were more likely to have adopted the new technologies than social scientists or scholars from the humanities. However, there was strong evidence that a small group of academics were adopting the new technologies with enthusiasm suggesting that the overall pattern of use would change in the future.

Abstract Purpose This thesis aims to focus on how master students administer scholarly articles after they have found them. The purpose of the study is to detect how and to what extent people administer their articles from a personal information management-perspective (PIM). Method To answer the research questions, a web-based questionnaire survey was distributed which was announced to around 2,000 master students from different universities in Sweden. Most of the items in the survey focused on individual storage methods. The respondents were asked to rate the frequency of their different information administration behaviors on a seven level Likert-type-scale. Subsequently, items concerning specific information administration behaviors were posed, followed by questions on the respondent's sociodemographic status. The results were based on overall 316 answers. Analysis The quantitative data was analyzed using non-parametric tests such as Friedmans-test, Kruskal-Wallis-analysis, Wilcoxon-Signed Rank-test, Mann-Whitney-U-test and Chi-square-test with the statistical computer program SPSS. Findings The findings generally confirm that the majority of the surveyed graduate students are using scholarly articles. Regarding their information management, it is as usual to store the whole article as it is to store the reference. Further it is more common to choose electronic storage methods for articles and references than to use physical methods. The results highlight that most of the students use several method types and use them to varying extent. Neither age, computer skills, duration of study or satisfaction with their way of information storage influenced the quantity of used methods. Regarding specific handling, the storing of article copies on the computer’s hard drive were most frequently used. The respondents preferred furthermore to read the articles on a screen rather than printed paper versions. The influencing factors of gender, age, computer skills, subject discipline were affecting the choice of methods. General conclusions about these influencing factors are, however, complicated by possible occurring confounders. Moreover, the method types were used to different extents depending of subject discipline. Originality/value Most previous PIM research is concentrating on how people store information in general. The dealing and administrating with specific types of information are, however, rarely discussed. In the context of scholarly articles did research predominantly focus on seeking structures and reading patterns. The step between finding and reading an article has so far not directly been addressed in academic research. The study therefore is unique in addressing information storage systems of scholarly articles on such a large scale. Knowledge about storage patterns will help journal publishers and librarians to design more targeted solutions for journal systems and improve services like courses in information seeking. Paper type Two years master’s thesis

The academic field of political science in Europe is studied in this thesis which examines the application of bibliometrics for domain analysis. It takes its point of departure in the domain analytic approach outlined by Birger Hjørland and Hanne Albrechtsen, which claims the study of domains as central for information specialists to be able to identify information needs in their fields of practice. Three features of the domain were studied by the use of bibliometric methods. Data was extracted from the Web of Science. Impact Factor was used to select 50 journals from each of the years 1999, 2004 and 2009. Only items published by authors with European addresses were included. Co-word analysis was used to study topics within the discipline and several kinds of citation analyses were conducted to examine citation patterns of the domain. Lastly core journals, authors and works were identified by the use of citation analysis and co-citation maps were drawn for the analyses.Several subfields within the domain, as well as some differences in citation patterns of the subfields, were possible to distinguish. The domain showed to be multifaceted, yet specific European research areas were identified. Some significant changes of the citation patterns were apparent between 1999 and 2009. In 2009 there were more references per article, journal articles were cited to a higher degree, relatively older publications were cited to a greater extent and the most cited journals received a larger share of the total amount of citations.The existence of a specific European domain within political science is discussed as well as the diverse characteristics of the subfields and their implications for the bibliometric methods. Finally suggestions are presented of how bibliometrics can be used for domain analysis within library and information science as well as by information service institutions.This paper is a two years master’s thesis in Library and Information Science. / Det akademiska statsvetenskapliga fältet i Europa studeras i denna uppsats, vilken utforskar bibliometrins tillämpbarhet inom domänanalysen. Den tar sin utgångspunkt i det domänanalytiska perspektivet formulerat av Birger Hjørland och Hanne Albrechtsen, vilket hävdar studier av domäner som centrala för att informationsspecialister ska kunna identifiera informationsbehov inom sina verksamheter. Tre aspekter av domänen studerades med bibliometriska metoder, data hämtades från Web of Science. Impact Factor användes för att välja ut 50 tidskrifter för vardera av åren 1999, 2004 och 2009. Endast artiklar publicerade av författare med Europeiska adresser inkluderades. Co-word-analys användes för att studera disciplinens ämnesområden, flera olika citeringsanalyser genomfördes för att utforska citeringsmönster inom domänen och slutligen identifierades centrala tidskrifter, författare och verk genom citeringsanalys och co-citerings-kartor skapades för analyserna. Flera delfält inom domänen kunde urskiljas, samt några skillnader mellan delfältens citeringsmönster. Domänen visade sig vara multifacetterad, men specifikt europeiska forskningsområden kunde identifieras. Några betydande förändringar av citeringsmönstren var märkbara mellan åren 1999 och 2009. Artiklarna från 2009 innehöll fler referenser per artikel, tidskriftsartiklar citerades i högre grad, relativt äldre publikationer citerades i större utsträckning och de mest citerade tidskrifterna tog emot en större andel av citeringarna. Existensen av en specifik europeisk domän inom statsvetenskapen diskuteras samt hur de bibliometriska metoderna påverkas av skillnader mellan delfälten. Slutligen presenteras förslag på hur bibliometrin kan användas för domänanalys inom biblioteks- och informationsvetenskapen samt av institutioner tillhandahållande informationstjänster.

Accepted for publication in Physics World (January 2007) / With the vast majority of scientific papers now available online, this paper (accepted for publication in Physics World) describes how the Web is allowing physicists and information providers to measure more accurately the impact of these papers and their authors. Provides a historical background of citation analysis, impact factor, new citation data sources (e.g., Google Scholar, Scopus, NASA's Astrophysics Data System Abstract Service, MathSciNet, ScienceDirect, SciFinder Scholar, Scitation/SPIN, and SPIRES-HEP), as well as h-index, g-index, and a-index.

À la lecture d’ouvrages philosophiques anciens, nous sommes souvent surpris par la virulence des critiques adressées à l’écriture, dans la mesure où ces critiques nous parviennent au moyen de textes écrits. N’est-il pas paradoxal de tout à la fois rejeter et utiliser une même technologie ? Ou est-ce que les pratiques de l’oralité et de l’écriture des philosophes grecs, telles que ceux-ci les décrivent dans leurs ouvrages, peuvent être cohérentes avec leurs critiques ? Notre thèse visait, d’une part, à répondre à ce questionnement en confrontant les pratiques des philosophes anciens aux critiques qu’ils adressent à l’écriture, par le biais d’une étude systématique des discours sur la lecture et l’écriture dans des textes anciens d’auteurs et d’époques variés, et notamment des textes qui n’ont pas l’écriture pour objet. D’autre part, comme les travaux déjà publiés sur ce thème tentaient le plus souvent de trouver le point de rupture entre la tradition orale et la tradition écrite (cf. Havelock 1963, Lentz 1989), nous avons voulu inscrire notre objet d’étude dans une plus longue durée, ce qui nous a permis de constater qu’une rupture radicale entre les philosophes de tradition orale et ceux appartenant à la tradition écrite n’avait pas eu lieu, et que l’on observait plutôt une continuité des critiques et des pratiques de l’oralité et de l’écriture depuis l’époque classique jusqu’à l’Antiquité tardive. Malgré le développement de nouveaux supports matériels pour l’écriture, l’émergence d’une religion du livre, et la mise à l’écrit des poèmes homériques, la tradition philosophique grecque témoigne d’un usage circonspect de l’écriture et du refus de rejeter définitivement l’oralité. / When we read ancient philosophical works, often we are surprised to find that the Greek philosophers strongly criticize literacy, as we are still confronted with a written text. Is it not paradoxical to reject a technology while still using it? Or is the philosophers’ practice of literacy, as described in their works, consistent with their criticism? Is the philosophers’ practice of literacy, as described in their works, consistent with their criticism of it? This thesis aims to answer these questions, firstly, by comparing the ancient philosophers’ criticism of literacy to their practice of it, through the study of what various authors from various periods say about reading and writing. On the other hand, since earlier works on this topic have proposed that the classical period witnessed a sudden and, to a certain extent, definitive turn to literacy, and have tried to locate this turn in time, I have examined the situation in a broader perspective, over a longer period of time. The results show that, if we consider how philosophers criticize literacy and how they describe themselves in their own discourses, literacy patterns tended to remain similar until late Antiquity; and that, in spite of Aristotle's new use of literacy, the criticism we find in Plato lingers on. As a result, what we usually call the transition from an oral tradition to a written tradition could be better viewed as a cultural continuity. In spite of the commitment to writing recording of the Homeric poems, of the emerging of a book-centered religion, and notwithstanding an evident use of literacy, the ancient philosophical tradition testifies to a refusal, both theoretical and practical, of throwing away orality.