Author: Charlie Rapple
Abstract: My last post was about institutional conservatism in relation to research evaluation and reward. I illustrated it with a brick wall bearing the words “insert head here” because so many wicked problems in scholarly communications today can be traced back to this underlying cause, and its immutability is therefore so frustrating to those trying to tackle its symptoms.
One of the many symptoms is that publishers and researchers are inextricably linked, mutually dependent, and likely to remain so for the foreseeable future. Evaluation processes — even those that are evolving away from simplistic publication counts or Impact Factor-based points systems — still mean that publication in an established journal is important for researchers, much as quality submissions are important for publishers. It is into this stasis that “scholarly collaboration networks” (SCNs) have emerged, originally as places for researchers to form connections (à la LinkedIn) but increasingly used for “content swapping” and / or “quasi-legal downloading of research papers”
Citation: Rapple, Charlie. “Updated Figures on the Scale and Nature of Researchers’ Use of Scholarly Collaboration Networks ” – The Scholarly Kitchen [Online] April 7, 2017 https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2017/04/07/updated-figures-scale-nature-researchers-use-scholarly-collaboration-networks/.