Lauranne C
LightNews LightNews
laurannec.bsky.social
Lauranne C
@laurannec.bsky.social
150 followers 310 following 36 posts
PhD candidate at CSI (Mines Paris-PSL) and bibliometrician at PSL University.
Posts Replies Media Videos
Reposted by Lauranne C
freddie2310.bsky.social
OpenAlex intégré au Web of Science, ou la capture du travail des “commoners” | carnetist.hypotheses.org/2572
OpenAlex intégré au Web of Science, ou la capture du travail des “commoners”
C’est une annonce qui est passée relativement inaperçue, mais qui mérite que l’on s’y arrête un instant. Clarivate a récemment annoncé l’intégration d’OpenAlex comme une nouvelle base de données au se...
carnetist.hypotheses.org
November 25, 2025 at 7:11 AM
Reposted by Lauranne C
freddie2310.bsky.social
Slides »» OpenAlex au service de l'évaluation de la recherche : l'idéal d'ouverture à l'épreuve de la qualité des données enpc.hal.science/hal-05363827 | Merci aux organisateurs du Séminaire Science Ouverte - Evaluation de la recherche et outils alternatifs @univ-spn.bsky.social
November 23, 2025 at 5:58 PM
Reposted by Lauranne C
themeta.news
🟢 La galaxie de la science a ses Guardians ?

Un groupe anonyme sévit sur les réseaux depuis un an, ciblant principalement les détectives de la littérature scientifique : les ScienceGuardians

Notre enquête : themeta.news/les-scienceg...

#VeilleESR #ResearchIntegrity
Analyse Les ScienceGuardians, fantômes de l’intégrité Un groupe d’activistes anonymes s’emploie depuis près d’un an à suivre, voire à menacer juridiquement, les détectives de l’intégrité scientifique. Chroniques d’une guerre invisible. « Les ScienceGuardians prétendent que nous sommes tous des fraudeurs mais n’apportent aucune preuve » Elisabeth Bik, détective
November 21, 2025 at 10:47 AM
Reposted by Lauranne C
lseimpactblog.bsky.social
💥New: Do acts to correct the scientific record need to move out of the shadows?

✍️ @freddie2310.bsky.social

#AcademicSky #Corrections #AcWri
Do acts to correct the scientific record need to move out of the shadows? - Impact of Social Sciences
Scientists prefer to correct errors in the scientific record informally, but is this a sustainable mechanism in expanding world of global research?
blogs.lse.ac.uk
November 20, 2025 at 4:00 PM
Reposted by Lauranne C
enroweb.com
On enchaîne avec @jrmdns.bsky.social qui nous raconte les données du Covid et quelles infrastructures informationnelles ont permis de les collecter, les traiter, les médier
November 20, 2025 at 1:10 PM
Reposted by Lauranne C
retractionwatch.com
In an ironic and possibly predictable turn of events, the conference has received “an unusually large proportion” of off-topic abstracts that show signs of being written by generative AI.
Research integrity conference hit with AI-generated abstracts
The first of three themes for next year’s World Conference on Research Integrity will be the risks and benefits of artificial intelligence for research integrity. In an ironic and possibly predicta…
retractionwatch.com
November 18, 2025 at 6:06 PM
Reposted by Lauranne C
emilienschultz.bsky.social
Article de réflexion sur les revues scientifiques "prédatrices" par Innocent Azilan de #URFISTLyon urfistinfo.hypotheses.org/5713 : différentes modalités de "prédaction" qui accompagnent les transformations de la publication scientifique mondiale
Saisir l’objet mouvant de la prédation dans la communication scientifique
(par Innocent Azilan, co-responsable de l’URFIST de Lyon entre septembre 2024 et août 2025, et doctorant en SIC) Prédation. Ce n’est (vraisemblablement) pas un mot qui rime avec science, laquelle renv...
urfistinfo.hypotheses.org
November 16, 2025 at 3:23 PM
laurannec.bsky.social
Saviez-vous que l'une des premières listes de chercheurs très cités a demandé deux ans de travail à son producteur, et plus de 750 heures de calcul par ordinateur ? 🤔
themeta.news 𝖳𝗁𝖾𝖬𝖾𝗍𝖺𝖭𝖾𝗐𝗌 @themeta.news · 12d
🟢 HCR ou ne pas être, telle est la question

Ce mercredi est parue comme chaque année la liste des #HighlyCitedResearchers

Lauranne Chaignon revient sur ses origines et sa crédibilité face aux tentatives de manipulation

themeta.news/lauranne-cha...

#VeilleESR
Interview Lauranne Chaignon Ingénieure en bibliométrie à l’Université Paris Sciences et Lettres, Lauranne Chaignon a entamé un doctorat au Centre de sociologie de l’innovation (Mines Paris – PSL) sur la liste des Highly cited researchers. Comment la liste est-elle alors devenue un indicateur d’excellence scientifique ? Progressivement, avec l’apparition du classement de Shanghai en 2003. Des scientifiques chinois l’ont développé, à la demande de leur gouvernement qui voulait savoir comment leurs universités se positionnaient au niveau mondial ; ils étaient à l’affût d’éléments sur lesquels baser leur classement. La liste des HCR a ainsi commencé à prendre de l’importance, jusqu’à devenir un indicateur destiné à évaluer la recherche d’un établissement, voire d’un pays. Figurer dans la liste est devenu un objectif en soi.
November 16, 2025 at 9:52 AM
Reposted by Lauranne C
serhiinazarovets.bsky.social
A new study by 🇨🇭 researcher analysed nearly 18,000 #PubMed papers and found 413 cases where Ukrainian cities were incorrectly listed as Russian. The work shows a clear post-2014 rise in such misattributions and highlights how #war shape academic #metadata: doi.org/10.1177/0165... #ScienceDiplomacy
Geopolitical conflict and author affiliation: Designation of Ukrainian cities under Russia in academic publishing - Paul Sebo, 2025
Geopolitical conflicts, such as the annexation of Crimea and the ongoing war in Ukraine, may influence how author affiliations are reported in academic publishi...
doi.org
November 16, 2025 at 7:16 AM
Reposted by Lauranne C
themeta.news
🟢 HCR ou ne pas être, telle est la question

Ce mercredi est parue comme chaque année la liste des #HighlyCitedResearchers

Lauranne Chaignon revient sur ses origines et sa crédibilité face aux tentatives de manipulation

themeta.news/lauranne-cha...

#VeilleESR
Interview Lauranne Chaignon Ingénieure en bibliométrie à l’Université Paris Sciences et Lettres, Lauranne Chaignon a entamé un doctorat au Centre de sociologie de l’innovation (Mines Paris – PSL) sur la liste des Highly cited researchers. Comment la liste est-elle alors devenue un indicateur d’excellence scientifique ? Progressivement, avec l’apparition du classement de Shanghai en 2003. Des scientifiques chinois l’ont développé, à la demande de leur gouvernement qui voulait savoir comment leurs universités se positionnaient au niveau mondial ; ils étaient à l’affût d’éléments sur lesquels baser leur classement. La liste des HCR a ainsi commencé à prendre de l’importance, jusqu’à devenir un indicateur destiné à évaluer la recherche d’un établissement, voire d’un pays. Figurer dans la liste est devenu un objectif en soi.
November 14, 2025 at 9:29 AM
Reposted by Lauranne C
paolocrosetto.bsky.social
Gentle request that @altmetric.com and @linkedin.com resume contact to be able to track academic LinkedIn activity on AltMetric.

More and more scientific discourse is happening on BlueSky (tracked) and LinkedIn (not tracked).

@linkedin.com let AltMetric use your API and include you! NOW!
November 14, 2025 at 11:42 AM
Reposted by Lauranne C
lucileveissier.bsky.social
Comment devient-on un·e chercheur·se très cité·e ? Réponse avec Lauranne Chaignon aujourd'hui dans TMN !

#VeilleESR
themeta.news 𝖳𝗁𝖾𝖬𝖾𝗍𝖺𝖭𝖾𝗐𝗌 @themeta.news · 12d
🟢 HCR ou ne pas être, telle est la question

Ce mercredi est parue comme chaque année la liste des #HighlyCitedResearchers

Lauranne Chaignon revient sur ses origines et sa crédibilité face aux tentatives de manipulation

themeta.news/lauranne-cha...

#VeilleESR
Interview Lauranne Chaignon Ingénieure en bibliométrie à l’Université Paris Sciences et Lettres, Lauranne Chaignon a entamé un doctorat au Centre de sociologie de l’innovation (Mines Paris – PSL) sur la liste des Highly cited researchers. Comment la liste est-elle alors devenue un indicateur d’excellence scientifique ? Progressivement, avec l’apparition du classement de Shanghai en 2003. Des scientifiques chinois l’ont développé, à la demande de leur gouvernement qui voulait savoir comment leurs universités se positionnaient au niveau mondial ; ils étaient à l’affût d’éléments sur lesquels baser leur classement. La liste des HCR a ainsi commencé à prendre de l’importance, jusqu’à devenir un indicateur destiné à évaluer la recherche d’un établissement, voire d’un pays. Figurer dans la liste est devenu un objectif en soi.
November 14, 2025 at 9:39 AM
Reposted by Lauranne C
lseimpactblog.bsky.social
🗃️From May: "Manipulations have been so obvious and large that, in 2024, over 2,000 candidates for the list were filtered out for not meeting ISI’s evaluation and selection criteria."

#Citations #AcademicSky
Is the list of Highly Cited Researchers losing credibility? - Impact of Social Sciences
For over two decades, the Highly Cited Researchers list has spotlighted global scientific influence. But behind its annual release lies a shifting story, which includes evolving methods, changing owne...
blogs.lse.ac.uk
November 13, 2025 at 5:02 PM
Reposted by Lauranne C
hansonmark.bsky.social
We wrote the Strain on scientific publishing to highlight the problems of time & trust. With a fantastic group of co-authors, we present The Drain of Scientific Publishing:

a 🧵 1/n

Drain: arxiv.org/abs/2511.04820
Strain: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
Oligopoly: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
A table showing profit margins of major publishers. A snippet of text related to this table is below. 1. The four-fold drain 1.1 Money Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis, which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024 alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher (Elsevier) always over 37%. Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor & Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3 billion in that year. A figure detailing the drain on researcher time. 1. The four-fold drain 1.2 Time The number of papers published each year is growing faster than the scientific workforce, with the number of papers per researcher almost doubling between 1996 and 2022 (Figure 1A). This reflects the fact that publishers’ commercial desire to publish (sell) more material has aligned well with the competitive prestige culture in which publications help secure jobs, grants, promotions, and awards. To the extent that this growth is driven by a pressure for profit, rather than scholarly imperatives, it distorts the way researchers spend their time. The publishing system depends on unpaid reviewer labour, estimated to be over 130 million unpaid hours annually in 2020 alone (9). Researchers have complained about the demands of peer-review for decades, but the scale of the problem is now worse, with editors reporting widespread difficulties recruiting reviewers. The growth in publications involves not only the authors’ time, but that of academic editors and reviewers who are dealing with so many review demands. Even more seriously, the imperative to produce ever more articles reshapes the nature of scientific inquiry. Evidence across multiple fields shows that more papers result in ‘ossification’, not new ideas (10). It may seem paradoxical that more papers can slow progress until one considers how it affects researchers’ time. While rewards remain tied to volume, prestige, and impact of publications, researchers will be nudged away from riskier, local, interdisciplinary, and long-term work. The result is a treadmill of constant activity with limited progress whereas core scholarly practices – such as reading, reflecting and engaging with others’ contributions – is de-prioritized. What looks like productivity often masks intellectual exhaustion built on a demoralizing, narrowing scientific vision. A table of profit margins across industries. The section of text related to this table is below: 1. The four-fold drain 1.1 Money Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis, which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024 alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher (Elsevier) always over 37%. Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor & Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3 billion in that year. The costs of inaction are plain: wasted public funds, lost researcher time, compromised scientific integrity and eroded public trust. Today, the system rewards commercial publishers first, and science second. Without bold action from the funders we risk continuing to pour resources into a system that prioritizes profit over the advancement of scientific knowledge.
November 11, 2025 at 11:52 AM
Reposted by Lauranne C
nature.com
The creators of an influential list of highly cited researchers have shaken up their methodology this year, taking a swipe at scientists who associate with those linked to possible ethical breaches

go.nature.com/3LAThwX
Influential list of highly cited researchers now shuts out more scientists: here’s why
Rule change weeds out many who co-author papers with others linked to suspicious practices.
go.nature.com
November 12, 2025 at 10:05 AM
Reposted by Lauranne C
mathildelarrere.bsky.social
carep-paris.org/annonce/comm...
Communiqué n°2 : Notre colloque se tiendra, comme prévu, les 13 et 14 novembre prochains.
Le colloque « La Palestine et l’Europe » se tiendra les 13 et 14 novembre, réaffirmant la liberté académique et le partage du savoir.
carep-paris.org
November 11, 2025 at 11:04 PM
laurannec.bsky.social
"It's tiiime!!!", comme le dit si bien Mariah Carey. C'est aujourd'hui que parait la liste 2025 des chercheurs très cités de Clarivate !

Êtes-vous prêts ? Avez-vous révisé l'histoire de cette liste ?

Si vous avez besoin d'une antisèche, c'est ici que cela se passe : direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
Highly Cited Researchers: Anatomy of a list
Abstract. The list of Highly Cited Researchers (HCR) published each year by Clarivate occupies a special place in the academic landscape, due to its use in the Shanghai rankings. This article looks at...
direct.mit.edu
November 12, 2025 at 7:39 AM
Reposted by Lauranne C
albertobaccini.bsky.social
Bug in Springer Nature metadata may be causing ‘significant, systemic’ citation inflation retractionwatch.com/2025/11/11/b...
Bug in Springer Nature metadata may be causing ‘significant, systemic’ citation inflation
Millions of researchers could be affected by a “dramatic distortion of citation counts” likely caused by flaws in how the academic publishing giant Springer Nature handles article metadata, accordi…
retractionwatch.com
November 11, 2025 at 6:12 PM
Reposted by Lauranne C
amazonchique.bsky.social
I still remember my anthropology professor’s favorite joke from college:
“What did Watson and Crick discover?”
“Rosalind Franklin’s notes.”
November 7, 2025 at 8:28 PM
Reposted by Lauranne C
lfpromethee.bsky.social
Il y a un an tout pile, je soutenais ma thèse sur les transformations de la recherche publique à l’aune des dispositifs de valorisation de ses résultats. Il y a quelques mois, celle-ci a été mise en accès libre sur HAL : hal.science/tel-05065109

L’occasion d'en exposer la démarche et l'argument 🔽
November 4, 2025 at 6:03 PM
Reposted by Lauranne C
enniusredloeb.bsky.social
These terrifying bats are looking forward to #Halloween 🦇🦇🦇😱
Bodl. Library MS. Ashmole 304; 13th century; England, St. Albans; f.47v @bodleian.ox.ac.uk
October 29, 2025 at 10:06 PM
Reposted by Lauranne C
provokedeconomy.bsky.social
Séminaire STF (Science, technologie, fascisme) @ CSI janvier-mai 2026 www.csi.minesparis.psl.eu/seminaires/s...
Science, technologie, fascisme
www.csi.minesparis.psl.eu
October 29, 2025 at 11:01 AM
Reposted by Lauranne C
pierrebat.cpesr.fr
De la longueur des remerciements dans les livres de socio

Spoiler: plus long aujourd'hui, plus long chez les groupes minorises (femmes, personnes racisees, LGTQ+) et chez ceux qui maîtrisent le mieux les enjeux académiques
October 3, 2025 at 9:49 PM
Reposted by Lauranne C
freddie2310.bsky.social
✨My new survey-based study on how chemistry researchers react to errors is now published in Accountability in Research @accountabilityair.bsky.social! A big thanks to the participants & @nanobubbles.bsky.social members for feedback 🫧. #ScienceCorrection #ResearchOnResearch doi.org/10.1080/0898...
On and off-the-record correction practices: A survey-based study of how chemistry researchers react to errors
This survey-based study (982 participants) explores chemistry researchers’ practices and motivations in correcting errors in scientific publications.While respondents believe errors should be corre...
doi.org
October 3, 2025 at 6:24 AM
Reposted by Lauranne C
grandlabo.com
La publication de recherches erronées ou frauduleuses entraîne souvent des sanctions en termes de réputation pour leurs auteurs. Quid des autres fautes professionnelles, sans rapport avec l'intégrité de la recherche, mais préjudiciables à la communauté ?
Sexual Misconduct, Accused Scientists, and Their Research
Abstract. Does the scientific community sanction sexual misconduct? Using a sample of scientists at U.S. universities involved in substantiated cases of sexual misconduct that became public, we find…
direct.mit.edu
October 1, 2025 at 5:45 AM