Informationsvidenskab og kulturformidling, STO
Actors, institutions and processes in scientific and scholarly
communication. Actors include researchers, mediators (with,
for example, peer reviewers and information specialists) and users.
Institutions include, for example, publishers, libraries,
journals, databases, disciplines and Cochrane centers.
Processes include, for example, knowledge production, information
seeking and retrieval, research evaluation, and information
The actors, institutions and processes are studied from
different perspectives, including sociological, philosophical,
science studies and bibliometric perspectives, but always
with a specific focus on information studies.
Among the concepts covered are the information chain, UNISIST
model, digital media, Wikipedia, information quality, theories
and traditions, (including Robert K. Merton' normative
view and social epistemology) and their importance for the
study of scholarly communication.
Competence objectives for the module
The objective of the module is to provide the student with
knowledge and understanding of:
Positions and basic concepts in science studies
Knowledge production in different fields and domains, including
social sectors, research fields, research traditions, as well as
the interaction between these sectors and their patterns of
publication and forms of documents.
Bibliometric models and methods for research analysis and
studies of scholarly communication.
Describing different theories, methods, and traditions in
Discuss concepts in the sociology of science and the philosophy
of science in specific problems in relation to scholarly
To plan and make bibliometric investigations of knowledge
production and knowledge mediation.
The examinee is able to
In a reflective way to set out positions and basic concepts in
the sociology of science and their importance for knowledge
production and its application and impact.
Independent design and complete bibliometric analyses of
knowledge production and its later application i a given
To reflect upon theoretical and methodological strengths and
weaknesses in studies of knowledge production and scholarly
communication by the candidate herself or by other
Eksempler på litteratur der tænkes anvendt på kurset:
Cotta-Schønberg, Michael (2012). Forskningsbibliotekernes
strategiske situation 2012. I: Viden i spil:
Forskningsbibliotekernes funktioner i forandring. (21-66).
Frederiksberg: Samfundslitteratur (or corresponding text in
Hjørland, Birger (2016). Informetrics needs a foundation in the
theory of science. In Cassidy Sugimoto (red.). Theories of
Informetrics and Scholarly Communication (pp. 20-46) Berlin:
Walter de Gruyter.
Regazzi, John J. (2015). Big data, big science, and social
acedemic networks. In Scholarly communications: A history from
content as king to content as kingmaker (pp. 209-222).
Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.
Willinsky, John & Moorhead, Laura (2014). How the
rise of open access is altering journal publishing. In The
future of the academic journal. 2nd. edition (pp. 195-222).
Class teaching, lectures, group work, and
seminars based on the interests and projects of the
Selvbetjeningen på KUnet
Eksamen (Written take-home assignment,
Exam language: Danish or English
Extent: 15-20 normalsider + 10 normalsider pr. studerende udover