Search

Le sujet de larticle 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 sagit danalyser comment ces nouvelles formes de médiations sarticulent autour dun rapprochement sensible entre le monde des bibliothèques et le monde des chercheurs, au travers de linstitutionnalisation progressive des archives ouvertes.

The paper provides a critical review of predatory journals phenomenon affecting the field of scholarly communication in the Open Access era. It gives an analytical account of the debates, the research carried and methodologies and discusses the multidimensionality of definition of predatory journals and of the new market of lists of "legitimate" and "illegitimate" journals. The article identifies the main ethical and scientific issues that predatory journals raise in the Open Access publishing era and reports on the contexts that lead researchers (young and senior) to publish in these outlets. By linking predatory journals to the field of scholarly communication, the article highlights the main issues and establishes them as research subjects. The article concludes with research avenues that contribute to the analysis of mutation in digital scholarly communication., L'article présente un état de l'art critique du phénomène des revues prédatrices qui touche le champ de la communication scientifique et en fait une de ses actualités les plus médiatisées. Il rend compte des débats en cours, des recherches menées et de leurs méthodologies. L'article discute la définition de la revue prédatrice et propose une analyse du nouveau marché de listes de revues « légitimes » et « illégitimes ». Il identifie les principaux enjeux éthiques et scientifiques que les revues prédatrices font peser sur la publication en Libre Accès et rend compte des contextes qui conduisent des chercheurs (jeunes et seniors) à y publier. En rattachant les revues prédatrices au champ de la communication scientifique, l'article en pointe les principales problématiques et les érige en objet de recherche. L'article conclut sur des pistes de recherches contribuant à l'analyse des mutations de la communication scientifique numérique. Abstract: The paper provides a critical review of predatory journals phenomenon affecting the field of scholarly communication in the Open Access era. It gives an analytical account of the debates, the research carried and methodologies and discusses the multidimensionality of definition of predatory journals and of the new market of lists of "legitimate" and "illegitimate" journals. The article identifies the main ethical and scientific issues that predatory journals raise in the Open Access publishing era and reports on the contexts that lead researchers (young and senior) to publish in these outlets. By linking predatory journals to the field of scholarly communication, the article highlights the main issues and establishes them as research subjects. The article concludes with research avenues that contribute to the analysis of mutation in digital scholarly communication.

International audience; Parmi les sujets qui agitent l’actualité de la publication scientifique, le développement de la voie dorée de l’Open access (Gold Road) est l’un de ceux qui captent le plus l’attention des différents acteurs impliqués. L’offre « Gold » qui s’étoffe pose de nouveaux enjeux pour la communication scientifique et pour les stratégies de publication des chercheurs.

Publishing and bibliometric indicators are of utmost relevance for scientists and research institutions as the impact or importance of a publication (or even of a scientist or an institution) is mostly regarded to be equivalent to a citation-based indicator, e.g. in form of the Journal Impact Factor or the Hirsch-Index. Both on an individual and an institutional level performance measurement depends strongly on these impact scores. This contribution shows that most common methods to assess the impact of scientific publications often discriminate Open Access publications — and by that reduce the attractiveness of Open Access for scientists. Assuming that the motivation to use Open Access publishing services (e.g. a journal or a repository) would increase if these services would convey some sort of reputation or impact to the scientists, alternative models of impact are discussed. Prevailing research results indicate that alternative metrics based on usage information of electronic documents are suitable to complement or to relativize citation-based indicators. Furthermore an insight into the project OpenAccess- Statistics OA-S is given. OA-S implemented an infrastructure to collect document-related usage information from distributed Open Access Repositories in an aggregator service in order to generate interoperable document access information according to three standards (COUNTER, LogEc and IFABC). The service also guarantees the deduplication of users and identical documents on different servers. In a second phase it is not only planned to implement added services like recommender features, but also to evaluate alternative impact metrics based on usage patterns of electronic documents.