This chapter analyzes how the new paradigm of scientific communication implies changes in management of scientific information. For this, a new scenario of scientific communication is described. Different trends characterize this situation, including Open Data and Science 2.0. To appreciate the scope of this term, the author describes and links this concept with Open Science and eScience. Science 2.0 is a concept that brings new opportunities to informal science communication. All changes in science and scientific communication have immediate consequences in information management in a practical and theoretical perspective. The most important conclusion is that information activity is being questioned with all these changes because we are not dealing with simple technological advances; we are really to face a substantial change in the information management paradigm.
TopScientific Communication, A New Scenario
Scientific communication is one subject in Information Science that has been the focus of interest for over sixty decades. In 1979 William Garvey published a book titled Communication, the essence of science. This title itself is a principle declaration. Scientific communication is a key factor in science process because it goes from hypothesis to results but really the process is only completed when results are communicates. Thus, scientific communication is the way that researchers create, use and share information.
In the recent year, when authors describe a changes in scientific communication on new technologies and how they have modeled revolutionary ways to shared, retrieval and inclusive produce research. It is unquestionable this but it is necessary to find the origin that all this changes in core of research process. Nowadays we live in a globalization context, and these determine the evolution of all spheres, science included. Scientific problem are more in magnitude, variety and complexity and seem impossible that an only scientific can create a new science or front of a very complex scientific problem. For this reason in order to solve this problem it is essential the scientific collaboration and the scientific communication.
Sonnenwald (2007) point out the importance and increasing of scientific collaboration and how it is a way “to solve complex scientific problems and promote various political, economic, and social agenda, such as democracy, sustainable development, and cultural understanding and integration” (p. 643). For Borgman & Furner (2002) outlined another reasons for collaboration among researchers. One of them is the high specialization inside in science, indeed a research problem is complex it is necessary to work together. Economical and financial problems are a very strong reasons, in terms of shared recourses, laboratories and also to get founded. In this case, when a investigation is develop by a group, financial possibility also increases.
All scientific collaboration can be classified in three categories according Sonnenwald (2007). The first criteria using for this distinction is disciplinary focus when two or more scientists shared knowledge and experience into a same discipline (intra-disciplinary), or integrating different domains(interdisciplinary, multidisciplinary or cross-disciplinary collaboration) or transdisciplinary collaboration defined in diverse manners with slight nuance but it is in general assumed as an extension of the interdisciplinary. Geographic focus addresses to characterized collaboration among researchers in order to reduce distance, one of the most notorious is the international scientific collaboration. Finally, organizational and community focus expressed the collaboration between different kinds of institutions who work together to face a scientific problem with each particular point of view and resources, for example, universities and research institutions, public administration and industry.