Inequalities in scholarly knowledge: Public value failures and their impact on global science

Monroe-White, Thema; Woodson, Thomas

doi:10.1080/20421338.2016.1147204

Cited by 9 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other studies are more restricted in scope and focus either on specific locations [3,1,13] or on specific research areas, such as tropical medicine [5], nanomedicine [23], biomedicine [6], and e-learning [8]. A good review of bibliometrics studies that explicitly take into account the spatial factor can be found in Frenken et al [7].…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These datasets were loaded in a graph database 11 resulting in a graph of 313,035,870 triples. Then we extracted via a SPARQL query 12 a TSV (tab-separated values) dump describing all the authors' contributions 13 to papers published in conference proceedings. This raw dataset counts 1,770,091 contributions for a total of 506,049 unique papers, accepted in 1,028 conferences.…”

Section: Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Geographical Trends in Research: A Preliminary Analysis on Authors’ Affiliations

Mannocci

Osborne

Motta

2018

Semantics, Analytics, Visualization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

Geographical Trends in Research: A Preliminary Analysis on Authors’ Affiliations

Mannocci

Osborne

Motta

2018

Semantics, Analytics, Visualization

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The lines delineating the Matthew effect and cumulative advantage are often blurred. 2 For our purposes, and to avoid confusion, in what follows we will prefer the broader term cumulative advantage, and define it along with DiPrete & Eirich [38] as 'a general mechanism for inequality across any temporal process … in which a favourable relative position becomes a resource that produces further relative gains'. These mechanisms are also closely related to what is referred to as preferential attachment in network theory, where power-law distributions are a result of the positionality and individual attributes of specific agents as nodes in a network shape possibilities for future accrual of resources within that network, such as larger nodes having more possibility for connection [39].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dynamics of cumulative advantage and threats to equity in open science: a scoping review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Open Science holds the promise to make scientific endeavours more inclusive, participatory, understandable, accessible and re-usable for large audiences. However, making processes open will not per se drive wide reuse or participation unless also accompanied by the capacity (in terms of knowledge, skills, financial resources, technological readiness and motivation) to do so. These capacities vary considerably across regions, institutions and demographics. Those advantaged by such factors will remain potentially privileged, putting Open Science's agenda of inclusivity at risk of propagating conditions of ‘cumulative advantage’. With this paper, we systematically scope existing research addressing the question: ‘What evidence and discourse exists in the literature about the ways in which dynamics and structures of inequality could persist or be exacerbated in the transition to Open Science, across disciplines, regions and demographics?’ Aiming to synthesize findings, identify gaps in the literature and inform future research and policy, our results identify threats to equity associated with all aspects of Open Science, including Open Access, Open and FAIR Data, Open Methods, Open Evaluation, Citizen Science, as well as its interfaces with society, industry and policy. Key threats include: stratifications of publishing due to the exclusionary nature of the author-pays model of Open Access; potential widening of the digital divide due to the infrastructure-dependent, highly situated nature of open data practices; risks of diminishing qualitative methodologies as ‘reproducibility’ becomes synonymous with quality; new risks of bias and exclusion in means of transparent evaluation; and crucial asymmetries in the Open Science relationships with industry and the public, which privileges the former and fails to fully include the latter.

show abstract

“…There is a strong inequality in the global information culture. Top universities have a different online access to a large number of high-quality scientific journals [184]. Countries that are not well connected "to a high-quality infrastructure and do not have skilled labor force, ... are locked out of the global economy and therefore slip more into poverty" [185].…”

Section: The Destruction and Emergence Of Social And Economic Structumentioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainable Digital Environments: What Major Challenges Is Humankind Facing?

Scholz

2016

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper identifies and discusses the benefits, threats, and vulnerabilities related to the digital revolution. It aims to motivate research and its funding regarding digital threats and vulnerabilities related, in particular, to anticipating unintended, undesirable rebound effects, tipping points, critically fast evolutionary change rates, trade-offs, etc. A brief analysis of the history of the mind and technology reveals slow technological development over tens of thousands of years (including the invention of a place-value digital number system). Then, a small series of groundbreaking ideas (e.g., binary logic, Shannon's symbolic analysis of relay and switching circuits, architectures of computing) enabled the industry-driven invention of programmable computing machines. Ultimately, the mastery of electron and semiconductor physics allowed for economical and seemingly unlimited storage capacity that made digital tools available to all domains of society. Based on the historical analysis, a coupled human-environment systems perspective (that includes a hierarchy assumption ranging from the human cell to the human species) enables the identification of several potential challenges to society and science. First, digital nano-engineering promotes genetic modifications (i.e., directed evolution), and synthetic biology enables a new level of the appropriation of nature. The understanding of cell-based biocomputers may call for new forms of logic. These and other challenges require thorough sustainability research in order to anticipate major changes on all levels of human systems. Second, the human individual is exposed to new forms of vulnerability. In particular, the potential epigenetic effects resulting from the excessive use of digital information of historically unknown speed, density, and contents and the loss of (the Western common-law right to) privacy resulting from big data (whose ownership is often unknown) should become subjects of research. Third, digital technologies are responsible for rapid changes in all social and economic structures. The paper suggests that thorough, discipline-based interdisciplinary research is needed in order to develop basic knowledge for creating and managing resilient relationships between human systems and their digital environments.Keywords: digital revolution; digital threats; rebound effects; genetically modified organisms (GMO); cell-based computers; cell-based computing; environmental epigenetics; loss of privacy; appropriation of nature Why Do Digital Environments Call for Special Attention? The Social Dimension of the Digital Revolution Is Not Yet Well UnderstoodThe development of Homo sapiens and human societies is characterized by a couple of fundamental transitions. The present paper starts from the proposition that, phylogenetically and historically, many impacts linked to the emergence of digital environments (E D ) have the same gravity as the mastery of fire, the development of speech, the invention of agrotechnology, and the Industrial Revolutio...

show abstract

Inequalities in scholarly knowledge: Public value failures and their impact on global science

Cited by 9 publications

References 25 publications

Geographical Trends in Research: A Preliminary Analysis on Authors’ Affiliations

Geographical Trends in Research: A Preliminary Analysis on Authors’ Affiliations

Dynamics of cumulative advantage and threats to equity in open science: a scoping review

Sustainable Digital Environments: What Major Challenges Is Humankind Facing?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About