{"title":"The Transformation of the Scientific Paper: From Knowledge to Accounting Unit","authors":"Y. Gingras","doi":"10.7551/mitpress/11087.003.0004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"defined in Bourdieu (1986, 2004) as a structured space of agents and institutions in competition for the accumulation of credit or “symbolic capital”— have commented on the many facets of an ongoing major transformation in the structural conditions of scientific practice: massification of research, mounting pressure to publish, relative decline of government investments, and the arrival into the research system of the ideology of “knowledge management” with its insistence on quantitative evaluation measures of productivity and “impact” of academic research (Bruneau and Savage, 2002). As discussed by many contributions to this book, these transformations of the research system led actors to respond with various strategies of “gaming” the system through manipulating the metrics to attain the required results or, as suggested by Griesemer in his contribution, to try to derail the whole enterprise of metrics, though it is not clear how one could do that. By the end of the twentieth century, the technical infrastructure of journal publishing had also started to be radically transformed through the use of internet and electronic publishing (Thompson, 2005). These new technologies of communications made it possible to skip the materiality of the scientific paper and directly produce digital papers and journals that could then circulate much faster and globally on the internet, in turn contributing to transforming the dynamic of scientific practice. Finally, the mounting concentration of scientific journals in the hands of a limited number of giant publishing firms submitted to an increasing demand of profitability on the stock exchange, engendered in the mid1990s what has been called a “crisis in scholarly publishing” due to the mounting price of journal subscription for academic libraries (Thatcher, 1995; Tenopir and King, 1997; McGuigan and Russell, 2008; Larivière, Haustein, and Mongeon, 2015). An answer to that crisis has been the emergence of the “openaccess” movement (Laakso et al., 2011). 2 The Transformation of the Scientific Paper: From Knowledge to Accounting Unit","PeriodicalId":186262,"journal":{"name":"Gaming the Metrics","volume":"32 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gaming the Metrics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11087.003.0004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7
Abstract
defined in Bourdieu (1986, 2004) as a structured space of agents and institutions in competition for the accumulation of credit or “symbolic capital”— have commented on the many facets of an ongoing major transformation in the structural conditions of scientific practice: massification of research, mounting pressure to publish, relative decline of government investments, and the arrival into the research system of the ideology of “knowledge management” with its insistence on quantitative evaluation measures of productivity and “impact” of academic research (Bruneau and Savage, 2002). As discussed by many contributions to this book, these transformations of the research system led actors to respond with various strategies of “gaming” the system through manipulating the metrics to attain the required results or, as suggested by Griesemer in his contribution, to try to derail the whole enterprise of metrics, though it is not clear how one could do that. By the end of the twentieth century, the technical infrastructure of journal publishing had also started to be radically transformed through the use of internet and electronic publishing (Thompson, 2005). These new technologies of communications made it possible to skip the materiality of the scientific paper and directly produce digital papers and journals that could then circulate much faster and globally on the internet, in turn contributing to transforming the dynamic of scientific practice. Finally, the mounting concentration of scientific journals in the hands of a limited number of giant publishing firms submitted to an increasing demand of profitability on the stock exchange, engendered in the mid1990s what has been called a “crisis in scholarly publishing” due to the mounting price of journal subscription for academic libraries (Thatcher, 1995; Tenopir and King, 1997; McGuigan and Russell, 2008; Larivière, Haustein, and Mongeon, 2015). An answer to that crisis has been the emergence of the “openaccess” movement (Laakso et al., 2011). 2 The Transformation of the Scientific Paper: From Knowledge to Accounting Unit
布迪厄(1986,2004)将其定义为为积累信用或“象征性资本”而竞争的代理人和机构的结构化空间。他对科学实践结构条件中正在进行的重大转变的许多方面进行了评论:研究的大规模化、出版压力的增大、政府投资的相对减少,以及坚持对学术研究的生产力和“影响”进行定量评价的“知识管理”意识形态进入研究体系(Bruneau and Savage, 2002)。正如本书的许多文章所讨论的那样,研究系统的这些转变导致参与者采取各种策略来“玩弄”系统,通过操纵指标来获得所需的结果,或者,正如Griesemer在他的文章中所建议的那样,试图破坏整个指标企业,尽管尚不清楚如何做到这一点。到20世纪末,通过使用互联网和电子出版,期刊出版的技术基础设施也开始发生根本性的变化(Thompson, 2005)。这些新的通信技术使人们有可能跳过科学论文的物质性,直接生产数字论文和期刊,然后这些论文和期刊可以在互联网上更快地在全球范围内传播,从而有助于改变科学实践的动态。最后,科学期刊越来越多地集中在数量有限的大型出版公司手中,以满足证券交易所日益增长的盈利需求,在20世纪90年代中期产生了所谓的“学术出版危机”,原因是学术图书馆的期刊订阅价格不断上涨(Thatcher, 1995;Tenopir and King, 1997;McGuigan and Russell, 2008;larivi, Haustein, and Mongeon, 2015)。这场危机的答案是“开放获取”运动的出现(Laakso et al., 2011)。2科技论文的转型:从知识到核算单元