Knowledge Management Research & Practice

, Volume 7, Issue 3, pp 218–233 | Cite as

The world wide web of research and access to knowledge

Article
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. SPECIAL ISSUE: Knowledge Management and e-Research Technologies: To Codify or to Collaborate?

Abstract

This paper examines the shift to online knowledge in research. In recent years there has been a major transformation in how formal and informal science communication is disseminated by electronic means. At the same time, researchers’ practices in accessing knowledge and information have changed, particularly in the use of search engines and digitized resources apart from traditional journals. While we still know little about how this affects the nature of research, particularly in light of disciplinary differences, we reject here the idea that the simple growth of outputs and proliferation of outputs also leads straightforwardly to a richer and more diverse information and knowledge environment. Instead, we argue that gatekeepers such as search engines which shape online visibility, combined with competition for limited attention space at the leading edge of research, leads to a different model of how access to knowledge and information is being shaped.

Keywords

e-Research scholarly communication disciplines knowledge and information knowledge creation knowledge dissemination socio-technical systems 

References

  1. Anderson C (2006) The Long Tail: How Endless Choice Is Creating Unlimited Demand. Random House Business Books, London.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson C. (2008) The end of theory: The data deluge makes the scientific method obsolete. Wired Magazine, 16 July. [WWW document] http://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/magazine/16-07/pb_theory (accessed 27 June 2008).
  3. Arms WY and Larson RL (2007) The Future of Scholarly Communication: Building the Infrastructure for Cyberscholarship. National Science Foundation and the Joint Information Systems Committee, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  4. Atkins DE, Droegemeier KK, Feldman SI, Garcia-Molina H, Klein ML, Messerschmitt DG, Messina P, Ostriker JP and Wright MH (2003) Revolutionizing Science and Engineering Through Cyberinfrastructure: Report of the National Science Foundation Blue-Ribbon Advisory Panel on Cyberinfrastructure. National Science Foundation, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  5. Bachrach S, Berry RS, Blume M, Foerster TV, Fowler A, Ginsparg P, Heller S, Kestner N, Odlyzko A, Okerson A, Wigington R and Moffat A (1998) Intellectual property: who should own scientific papers? Science 281 (5382), 1459–1460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Barjak F, Li X and Thelwall M (2007) Which factors explain the Web impact of scientists’ personal homepages? Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 58 (2), 200–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Berman FD and Brady HE (2005) Final Report NSF SBE-CISE Workshop on Cyberinfrastructure and the Social Sciences. National Science Foundation, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  8. Berman FD, Fox G and Hey T (2003) Grid Computing: Making the Global Infrastructure a Reality. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Hoboken, NJ.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Borgman CL (2007) Scholarship in the Digital Age: Information, Infrastructure, and the Internet. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  10. Caldas A, Schroeder R, Mesch G and Dutton WH (2008) Patterns of information search and access on the world wide web. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13 (4), 769–793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Centre for Information Behaviour and the Evaluation of Research (2008) Information behaviour of the researcher of the future. [WWW document] http://www.bl.uk/news/pdf/googlegen.pdf (accessed 16 January 2008).
  12. Collins R (1998) The Sociology of Philosophies: A Global Theory of Intellectual Change. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  13. Cummings JN and Kiesler S (2005) Collaborative research across disciplinary and organizational boundaries. Social Studies of Science 35 (5), 703–722.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. De Roure D and Goble C (2009) Software design for empowering scientists. IEEE Software 26 (1), 88–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. de Solla Price DJ (1986) Little Science, Big Science … and Beyond. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  16. Fry J (2006) Scholarly research and information practices: a domain analytic approach. Information Processing and Management 42 (1), 299–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Fry J and Talja S (2004) The cultural shaping of scholarly communication: explaining e-journal use within and across academic fields. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 41 (1), 20–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fry J, Virkar S and Schroeder R (2008) Search engines and expertise about global issues: well-defined territory or undomesticated wilderness? In Web Search: Interdisciplinary Perspectives (ZIMMER M and SPINK A, Eds), pp 255–276, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Garvey WD and Griffith BC (1967) Scientific communication as a social system. Science 157 (3792), 1011–1016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Garvey WD and Griffith BC (1972) Communication and information processing within scientific disciplines: empirical findings for Psychology. Information Storage and Retrieval 8 (3), 123–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ginsparg P. (1996) Winners and losers in the global research village. (Invited contribution for Conference held at UNESCO HQ, Paris, 19–23 February 1996, during session Scientist's View of Electronic Publishing and Issues Raised, Wednesday 21 February 1996). [WWW document] http://arxiv.org/blurb/pg96unesco.html (accessed 17 June 2001).
  22. Ginsparg P (2006) As we may read. The Journal of Neuroscience 26 (38), 9606–9608.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gläser J (2003) What Internet use does and does not change in scientific communities. Science Studies 16 (1), 38–51.Google Scholar
  24. Hakken D (2003) The Knowledge Landscapes of Cyberspace. Routledge, New York.Google Scholar
  25. Hallmark J (2004) Access and retrieval of recent journal articles: a comparative study of chemists and geoscientists. Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship 40, Article 1.Google Scholar
  26. Harnad S (2001) The self-archiving initiative. Nature 410 (6832), 1024–1025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Head AJ. (2007) Beyond Google: How do students conduct academic research? First Monday, 12. [WWW document] http://firstmonday.org/issues/issue12_8/head/index.html (accessed 31 March 2008).
  28. Heimeriks G and Vasileiadou E (2008) Changes or transition? Analysing the use of ICTs in the sciences. Social Science Information 47 (1), 5–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hemminger BM, Lu D, Vaughan KTL and Adams SJ (2007) Information seeking behavior of academic scientists. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 58 (14), 2205–2225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Hey T and Trefethen A (2003) The data deluge: an e-Science perspective. In Grid Computing: Making the Global Infrastructure a Reality (BERMAN F, FOX G and HEY T, Eds), pp 809–824, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Hoboken, NJ.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Hinds C and Kiesler SB (2002) Distributed Work. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  32. Houghton J and Sheehan P (2006) The economic impact of enhanced access to research findings. Victoria University Centre for Strategic Economic Studies Working Paper. [WWW document] http://www.cfses.com/documents/wp23.pdf (accessed 27 March 2008).
  33. Jasco P (2005) Google scholar: the pros and the cons. Online Information Review 29 (2), 208–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kling R and McKim G (2000) Not just a matter of time: field differences and the shaping of electronic media in supporting scientific communication. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 51 (14), 1306–1320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kling R, McKim G and King A (2003) A bit more to IT: scholarly communication forums as socio-technical interaction networks. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 54 (1), 46–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kousha K and Thelwall M (2007) Google scholar citations and Google web/URL citations: a multi-discipline exploratory analysis. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 58 (7), 1055–1065.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Matzat U (2004) Academic communication and Internet Discussion Groups: transfer of information or creation of social contacts? Social Networks 26 (3), 221–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Meho LI and Yang K (2007) Impact of data sources on citation counts and rankings of LIS faculty: web of science versus Scopus and Google scholar. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 58 (13), 2105–2125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Merton RK (1968) The matthew effect in science. Science 159 (3810), 56–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Meyer ET (2006) Socio-technical interaction networks: a discussion of the strengths, weaknesses and future of Kling's STIN model. In IFIP International Federation for Information Processing, Volume 223, Social Informatics: An Information Society for All? In Remembrance of Rob Kling (BERLEUR J, NUMINEM MI and IMPAGLIAZZO J, Eds), pp 37–48, Springer, Boston.Google Scholar
  41. Meyer ET and Dutton WH (2008) Top-down e-infrastructure meets bottom-up research innovation: fitting e-social science visions to the realities. [WWW Document] http://ssrn.com/abstract=1262211. In Proceedings of the UK e-Science All Hands Meeting, Edinburgh, UK.
  42. Meyer ET and Schroeder R (2009) Untangling the web of e-research: towards a sociology of online knowledge. Informetrics 3 (3), 246–260.Google Scholar
  43. Nentwich M (2003) Cyberscience: Research in the Age of the Internet. Austrian Academy of Sciences Press, Vienna.Google Scholar
  44. Nicholas D, Huntington P, Jamali HR and Watkinson A (2006) The information seeking behaviour of the users of digital scholarly journals. Information Processing and Management 42 (5), 1345–1365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Orlikowski WJ and Barley SR (2001) Technology and institutions: what can research on information technology and research on organizations learn from each other? MIS Quarterly 25 (2), 145–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Rip A (1990) An exercise in foresight: the research system in transition. In The Research System in Transition (COZZENS SE, Ed), pp 387–401, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sandstrom P (2001) Scholarly communication as a socioecological system. Scientometrics 51 (3), 573–605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Sathe NA, Grady JL and Giuse NB (2002) Print versus electronic journals: a preliminary investigation into the effect of journal format on research processes. Journal of the Medical Library Association 90 (2), 235–243.Google Scholar
  49. Schneider SM and Foot KA (2005) Web sphere analysis: an approach to studying online action. In Virtual Methods: Issues in Social Research on the Internet (HINE C, Ed), pp 157–170, Berg, Oxford.Google Scholar
  50. Schroeder R (2007) e-Research infrastructures and open science: towards a new system of knowledge production? Prometheus 25 (1), 1–17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Schroeder R (2008) e-Sciences as research technologies: reconfiguring disciplines, globalizing knowledge. Social Science Information 47 (2), 131–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Schroeder R and Fry J (2007) Social science approaches to e-Science: framing an agenda. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 12 (2), Article 11.Google Scholar
  53. Sellen A and Harper RHR (2001) The Myth of the Paperless Office. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  54. Spoelstra S, O’Shea T and Kaulingfreks R (2007) Marginal competencies. Ephemera: Theory & Politics in Organization 7 (2), 282–286.Google Scholar
  55. Tenopir C, King DW, Boyce P, Grayson M and Paulson K-L (2005) Relying on electronic journals: reading patterns of astronomers. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 56 (8), 786–802.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Tenopir C, King DW and Bush A (2004) Medical faculty’s use of print and electronic journals: changes over time and in comparison with scientists. Journal of the Medical Library Association 92 (2), 233–241.Google Scholar
  57. Thelwall M (2008) Bibliometrics to webmetrics. Journal of Information Science 34 (4), 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Thelwall M and Kousha K (2008) Online presentations as a source of scientific impact?: an analysis of powerpoint files citing academic journals. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 59 (5), 805–815.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Walsh JP, Kucker S, Maloney NG and Gabbay S (2000) Connecting minds: computer-mediated communication and scientific work. Journal of the American Society for Information Science 51 (14), 1295–1305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Walsh JP and Maloney NG (2007) Collaboration structure, communication media, and problems in scientific work teams. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 12 (2), Article 19.Google Scholar
  61. Whitley R (2000) The Intellectual and Social Organization of the Sciences 2nd edn, Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
  62. Wilkinson D, Harries G, Thelwall M and Price L (2003) Motivations for academic web site interlinking: evidence for the Web as a novel source of information on informal scholarly communication. Journal of Information Science 29 (1), 49–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Wuchty S, Jones BF and Uzzi B (2007) The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science 316 (5827), 1036–1039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Operational Research Society Ltd 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Oxford Internet Institute, University of OxfordOxford, OxfordshireU.K.

Personalised recommendations