Observations
on the Future of Grey Literature[1]
Joachim
Schöpfel
The
article provides an overview on the definition and evolution of grey literature
(GL) in the emerging environment of online resources and open access to
scientific and technical information. First, it gives some empirical evidence
on the importance of GL in scientific publications from different domains,
especially education, based on citation analysis. Other topics: the impact of
Internet on the production of GL, the place of grey resources in open archives
and institutional repositories, the development of bibliographic control and
standardization of GL and the difficulties of identification and accessing of
grey documents. The article ends with some prognostics on the future of GL and
open questions for research in library and information sciences on GL.
Cartographers
everywhere, even those who map the archipelagos of knowledge (Baltz, 2003),
need a few landmarks to guide their sketches and explorations. There are several
definitions of grey literature, the most common being the so-called ‘Luxemburg
definition’, which was discussed and approved during the 3rd international
conference on grey literature in 1997: “(Grey literature is) that which is
produced on all levels of government, academics, business and industry in print
and electronic formats, but which is not controlled by commercial publishers”.
This
definition in itself contains two of the main characteristics of “grey”
resources: On the one hand they are universal and ubiquitous, but on the other
hand, they are difficult to identify and to obtain through conventional
publishing circuits. The Luxemburg definition is also vague enough to reflect
the problem of determining exactly what a type of literature variously
described as «underground», «ephemeral» or «non-conventional» really means. To
quote two experts from the British Library, “grey literature is difficult to
define” (Wood and Smith, 1993).
In fact,
the term traditionally covers three categories of documents – conference
proceedings, reports and doctoral theses - that are often printed in short
runs. Nevertheless, the borderline with “white” or “conventional” literature is
permeable, since some conference proceedings are published by commercial
publishers, as monographs in serial publications or journals, and the same is
true for some reports. As for doctoral theses, especially in the humanities and
social sciences, some are also found on the commercial publishing market.
However,
regarding all the other documents that circulate outside conventional
publishing circuits, the lack of “commercial oversight” raises real problems
for teachers and researchers as well as for information professionals when
it comes to locating and acquiring them. The lack of “commercial oversight” and
promotion (advertising) also often implies a lack of “bibliographic oversight”.
In other words, these documents are often inadequately referenced in catalogues
and databases, so that searches through this category of scientific information
requires specialised knowledge on sources and circuits – as evidenced by the
INRP’s Observatoire des thèses concernant l’éducation (Observatory
on theses in education sciences)[2].
Information
professionals – including archivists, librarians, researchers and teachers –
have been contributing to studies on grey literature for nearly 30 years now,
compiling a rich corpus of articles and, since 1993, international conference
papers on grey literature[3]. In 1985, several European
countries founded the EAGLE association to identify and disseminate grey
literature. In the 1990s, national and inter-ministerial initiatives in France
(including GRISELI and LIGRIA, see Comberousse, 1995 and Desmichel, 1998)
resulted in particular in the establishment of two national
“one-stop shops” for accessing reports (
Rather
than attempting to summarise the full range of this abundant literature, our
study offers observations on its importance and how it is evolving in the
digital environment. We also include comments on the problem of descriptive
referencing and distribution, to conclude with a series of open questions.
Grey
literature has a role of its own as a means of distributing scientific and
technical information (see Sondergaard et al., 2003), and professionals insist
on its importance for two main reasons: research results are often more
detailed in reports, doctoral theses and conference proceedings than in
journals, and they are distributed in these forms up to 12 or even 18 months
before being published elsewhere (see Wood and Smith, 1993).
But how
do researchers actually use grey literature? One way of evaluating this is to
analyse the citations given in their publications. In order to obtain a
statistical evaluation, we used two different sources: a Franco-Dutch study
launched in 2004 and the journal entitled Perspectives Documentaires en
Education.
We look
first at some results from the Franco-Dutch study (Schöpfel et al. 2005, Farace
et al. 2006), which analysed 64 scientometric articles published between 1987
and 2005 and citing several thousands references altogether. The table below
shows the proportion of grey literature cited in publications from different
scientific disciplines:
Field |
Grey literature citations |
Soil science |
14% |
Biology |
5-13% |
Veterinary medicine |
6% |
Psychiatry (addiction) |
1% |
Psychology |
3% |
Engineering Sciences |
39-42% |
Economic Sciences |
9-17% |
Sociology |
7-9% |
Education Sciences |
14-19% |
Table
1: Proportions of grey literature cited in scientific publications
These
analyses show that the relative importance of grey literature is largely
dependent on research disciplines and subjects, on methodological approaches
and on sources used. In some fields, especially the life sciences and medical
sciences, there has been a traditional preference for conventional distribution
media (journals), while in others, such as agriculture, aeronautics and the
engineering sciences in general, grey literature resources tend to predominate.
In
particular, public administrations and public and industrial research
laboratories produce a great deal of “grey” material, often for internal or
“restricted” circulation (see Ullah et al., 2004, for example).
For a
more accurate idea of the way grey literature is used in education sciences, we
analysed several recently published articles from Perspectives Documentaires
en Education. The results vary widely.
We looked
first at four studies published in
In
another example, Auricombe (2001), in his study on searches and uses of
documentation by researchers and teachers studying CNAM distance learning
courses, highlights the importance of grey literature, from which 21% of his
own references are taken (e.g. INTD and ENSSIB theses).
Finally,
we analysed the different studies and notes in issue n° 60 of Perspectives
Documentaires en Education (2003). 15 of the 198 sources quoted by the
authors (= 7%) refer to conferences, seminars, legal texts and doctoral theses.
The other citations, such as those in the same issue’s “current bibliography”,
refer to books and journal articles.
A
comparison was made with two studies in education sciences published in other
journals: Okiy (2003), analysing 4012 references to 70 theses submitted in
Nigeria, found that 14% of the sources were from grey literature (theses,
reports, conferences, etc.). An analysis of 1842 references from theses
submitted in the US (Beile et al., 2004) produced a figure of over 19% of
“grey” document sources.
To sum
up, the relative proportion of grey literature in scientific information varies
widely with scientific fields but also with subjects, methodologies and even
geographic origin. Grey literature plays a considerable part in the education
sciences, accounting on average for 10-20% of all sources used.[4]
To return
now to the definition of grey literature, we indicated earlier that the term
traditionally refers to reports, conference proceedings and doctoral theses. We
will now take a closer look at what these cover in reality. SIGLE, the European
database of grey literature, has been supplied since the 1980s with information
from organisations in several EU countries. Its 800,000+ references are
distributed as follows:
Document types |
Proportion |
Reports |
62.7% |
Theses |
31.7% |
Conferences |
2.3% |
Data files |
2.1% |
Translations |
0.9% |
Other |
0.3% |
Table
2: Distribution of different document types in the SIGLE database
Reports
are the most numerous by far among the different types of grey literature. But
the ‘reports’ category covers a wide variety of very different documents:
institutional reports, annual or activity reports, project or study reports,
technical reports, reports published by ministries, laboratories or research
teams, etc. Some are distributed by public bodies (ADEME, CERTU, Documentation
Française, European Commission, for example), others are confidential,
protected or circulated to a restricted readership, such as technical reports
or those from industrial laboratories. Some are voluminous, with statistical
appendices, while others are only a few pages long.
In the
other categories, scientometric studies (see Farace et al., 2006) offer a
tremendous range of grey resources: besides theses and conference proceedings,
they also include unpublished manuscripts, news bulletins, recommendations and
standards, patents, technical notes, data and statistics, presentations,
personal communications, working papers, laboratory research books, preprints,
university studies, lecture notes, and so on.
However
diverse, these documents all have one point in common: they contain unique and
significant scientific and technical information that is often never published
elsewhere. The lack of descriptive referencing and adequate circulation is
therefore, as we have said, a real problem for scientific communication.
However,
the Internet is now changing the whole picture. Not only because of changing
user behaviour (see for example a recent study by Le Roux, 2005, on document
specialists in the teaching professions), but also, and especially, because
more and more grey literature is being published on the Web. Even so, as a
study from the German centre for information in the social sciences has pointed
out (Artus, 2005), the emergence of a new medium for publications does not
necessarily mean that more grey literature is appearing. But although the
switch from paper to digital has not increased the number of publications, it
has radically changed access and distribution methods and, especially,
accentuated the ephemeral and volatile nature of grey literature.
There is
no need here to describe the movement towards open access to scientific
information, which has been crystallising since 1994 around various initiatives
to promote open archives. For an introduction to the topic, we refer readers to
a number of recent resources (Chanier, 2004, Fily, 2005, Aubry and Janik,
The case
of the first preprint server, ArXiv, set up by P. Ginsparg at Los Alamos in
1991, is nonetheless of interest for the purposes of this study[7]. This was a means for
distributing research results organised by and for physicists, with no
intermediaries, which was entirely independent from any commercial circuit for
scientific publications. In this sense, the server (which contains over 350,000
documents today) corresponded exactly to the definition of grey literature.
However,
the case is more complex than that. “Preprints” would not have existed without
“print” - in other words, ArXiv would not have existed without scientific
journals. Ginsparg’s aim was simply to circulate results quickly and
immediately. The point was not to bring commercial publishing into question,
since Ginsparg did not offer any alternative to the peer review system, which
was still run by the conventional publishing circuit. ArXiv was in fact
creating a kind of symbiosis between grey literature and traditional
publishing, which was linked to the highly specific organisation of the nuclear
physics community.
The
creation of the first open archive within the CNRS in 1998, by Franck Laloë, a
physicist with the ENS, obeyed a broadly similar logic[8], advocating direct, fast,
free scientific communication between researchers in the same field.
But the
crisis that has hit scientific journals (see Chartron, 2002 and Keller, 2001)
and the appropriation of the NICTs by information professionals have helped to
turn the new means of distribution into an alternative model of scientific
publishing. In France, the CCSD’s HAL is fast becoming the main countrywide
institutional archive. This has two objectives:
§
Economic:
to offer a cheaper alternative to scientific publications by exercising
increasing pressure on STM publishers.
§
Administrative:
to facilitate oversight over scientific production from the various research organisations
(EPST, universities) by identifying and evaluating researcher publications via
a central database.
Given the
methodological and hermeneutic diversity of the different scientific
communities, one may well wonder whether a system that has operated for 15
years in physics will be equally effective in other fields, especially in view
of the “constraints induced by research evaluation methods” (see Prévot, 2005,
on the subject of Earth Sciences).
What is
the part played by grey literature in this new environment? The first
international ‘Directory of Open Access Repositories’ (OpenDOAR), established
by the Universities of Nottingham and Lund[9], identifies 349 different
sites, including
Document types |
Number of archives |
% of OpenDOAR sites |
Theses |
211 |
60% |
Reports |
146 |
42% |
Conferences |
146 |
42% |
Preprints |
89 |
26% |
Student theses |
72 |
21% |
Working papers |
66 |
19% |
Table
3 : Presence of different document types in the OpenDOAR archives
At first
sight, these figures seem to suggest that grey literature is relatively well
represented in open archives. 60% of recently identified sites contain doctoral
theses, and over 40% of open archives contain conference proceedings and
reports. However, the picture becomes less clear with an analysis of archive
descriptions, which shows that the number of sites explicitly dedicated to grey
literature is much smaller: only 45 sites are identified for doctoral theses
(13%), 30 for reports (9%) and just 8 for conference proceedings (2%).
Observations made at the 7th international conference on grey literature in
2005 indicate that these documents are often swamped within the sheer mass of
documents that are deposited in archives and/or difficult to identify. The
development of open archives does not therefore seem to have changed the
situation of grey literature to any great extent.
We
conclude this section with a few remarks on the situation in France. Even
though 9 archives, including HAL, contain conference proceedings, these are
referenced at the same level as articles (individual communications) without
any specific search functions for this type of information (grouping by
conference, etc.). The same is true for reports: although a number of archives,
especially institutional ones (IFREMER, Institut Jean Nicod, MSH-Alpes),
obviously contain reports, as far as we know there is only one project (LARA,
run by INIST-CNRS, based on DSpace) that has been developed exclusively as a
repository for scientific and technical reports (see Stock et al., 2006).
The
situation is different for doctoral theses, where more advances have been made.
This is probably accounted for by three factors: an international environment
(NTLTD, ETD conferences), the national ABES system (SUDOC, the STAR project)
and the scientific issues raised in doctoral theses (see Le Hénaff and Thiolon,
2005). Nevertheless, the situation in France is still characterised by the
heterogeneity of institutional, thematic and thesis archives (e.g. Cyberthèses,
PASTEL, TEL), which together account for only a small proportion of national
production (see Paillassard et al., 2005). Although this situation is
unsatisfactory in comparison with other countries, it will undoubtedly evolve
in the coming months towards more systematic identification and deposits of
French doctoral theses in electronic format, through the ABES and CCSD sites.
We said
earlier that the lack of “commercial oversight” of grey literature implies a
lack of “bibliographic oversight”. In other words, “grey” documents are often
inadequately referenced in catalogues and databases. This does not mean that
there are no standards or recommendations for cataloguing reports, conference
proceedings, theses and so on. However,
contrary to the situation with journals and books, the absence of commercial
stakes has contributed to the (very relative) “success” of the rules that have
been set out.
The way
the different types of grey literature are referenced still depends more on
choices made by the bodies that produce, collect or distribute these documents
than on any national or international standard (ISO, ISBD, AFNOR etc.). The
failure of the international report numbering standard (ISRN) is symptomatic in
this respect - having been the only country with an active ISRN agency (INIST)
for several years, France eventually had to agree to the ISO abandoning the
standard. The only remaining exception in France concerns doctoral theses
submitted to French universities, for which the Téléthèses database and, later,
SUDOC cataloguing, imposed a uniform bibliographic format.
At
European level, input requirements for the SIGLE database forced the network’s
member countries to attempt to harmonise their “grey” resources around a single
SGML format. But input to SIGLE ceased in April 2005, and the network – the
EAGLE association – has gone into liquidation. The predictable outcome is
that each organisation will be returning to its own referencing methods and
rules, outside any kind of uniform bibliographic oversight.
The rapid
development of the Internet and its ever-multiplying on-line resources is
affecting bibliographic oversight in two ways (see Artus, 2005). On the one
hand, such “wild growth” is speeding a decline in the application of formal and
qualitative standards, with the risk of grey literature becoming “even more
greyish”. On the other hand, the same risk has also boosted awareness, in all
countries, of the need to define a few minimal data – called metadata – to
provide a framework for referencing digital documents.
Examples
include: a project aiming to adapt the Dublin Core to reports (Jeffery et al.,
2002) or doctoral theses; the French “Thèses Electroniques Françaises” (TEF)
initiative, which is working on a set of metadata and a single XML schema[10], the “Text Encoding
Initiative” (TEI)[11] designed to develop and
recommend, at international level, common tagging standards that are
independent from IT upgrades, and the creation by the CNRS and INRIA, in 2005,
of a TEI support centre for Europe, located in Nancy and built around the
ATLIF, LORIA and INIST organisations, which will probably also address the
matter of grey literature.
The
problem of poor standards and lack of uniformity in referencing documents
deposited in institutional archives was the reason why the JISC, in Britain,
set up a committee in early 2006 to look into the interoperability of these
archives and to describe their resources in order to facilitate their
identification by end-users.
One final
example: after the 7th international conference on grey literature
in 2005, P. de Castro and S. Salinetti from the Istituto Superiore di Sanità in
Rome initiated an international committee on grey literature which would
develop recommendations (the “Nancy Style”) for the production and distribution
of scientific and technical reports. The first version of the document is now
published on the Web[12] (GLISC, 2006), and
translations into French and Italian are under way.
This
example is symptomatic in some ways of the problem of bibliographic oversight
of grey literature. This is an international issue to which national responses
have only brought partial solutions, thereby actually increasing the diversity
of data and the difficulties involved in identifying and locating documents.
And because there are no commercial issues at stake, improved referencing will
always be dependent on the initiatives and willingness of producer or
distributor organisations and a few committed professionals.
Identifying,
locating and obtaining grey literature is generally not easy – and this is
inherent to its nature. To get some idea of the problem, readers might attempt
a search for the reports, studies, conference proceedings and doctoral theses
cited by Ndoye (2003) or Landesmann (2003) in issue n° 59 of Perspectives
Documentaires en Education…
For 20
years, the SIGLE database offered a solution at EU level, insofar as its
partner organisations were under obligation to keep referenced documents at
their end-users’ disposal via lending or document delivery services.
Users
today are faced with a huge variety of sites, archives, catalogues and
databases, which makes searches for “grey” information not only painstaking but
sometimes prohibitive as well, not to mention the linguistic difficulties involved.
In view
of the rapidly changing face of STI within the digital environment, all the
major traditional centres collecting and distributing grey literature, such as
the British Library, the Canadian Institute for Scientific and Technical
Information, the TIB in Hanover or INIST, have begun to develop free access
services to these documents, especially for theses and preprints, but also for
reports and so on (see Boukacem-Zeghmouri and Schöpfel, 2006).
However,
there is still a notable absence – at least at national and European levels –
of portals and search tools that are specifically dedicated to “grey”
documents. Even Elsevier have started to
index doctoral theses in electronic format in their Scirus search
engine. The initiative from members of the EAGLE association to launch a
metasearch engine dedicated to European grey literature collections is still in
the draft stage (see Schöpfel, 2006). Meanwhile, users have no other choice but
to conduct searches individually using whatever means they have to hand, or to
keep using the search services provided by traditional organisations (SCD, BU,
INIST).
Grey
literature will remain a challenge for information and documentation
professionals as well as an interesting field for research and activity, in
five areas at least (see Stock et Schöpfel, 2004):
The
need for a new definition: The traditional definition of grey literature needs to be refined and
supplemented through an accurate analysis of new means of access and distribution,
in line with Mackenzie Owen’s observation (1997) that “Grey does not imply any
qualification (but) is merely a characterization of the distribution mode”.
The
need for an economic model: Despite the absence of “commercial oversight”, collecting, distributing
and searching grey literature all come at a price, which may in fact be much
higher than for article or book searches. To date, there is no economic model
in this area and analysis is much needed in terms of investments, direct and
indirect costs, acquisition prices and so on.
The
need to oversee archiving practice: New technologies of information and
communication facilitate resource archiving in general, and there is strong
incentive from the “open access” movement. Nevertheless, the question of “who
should archive what, where, when, and for how long” has remained largely
unanswered to this day. Given the policy – and financial – aspects involved,
answers are urgently needed, even for only part of grey literature resources.
The
need for a new ‘value chain’: In the last few years, in the Netherlands, Rosendaal (2004) has been
researching the process whereby universities have been reappropriating
publications, and highlights the radical changes affecting the ‘value chain’ of
scientific publications. Evaluations of scientific publications and their
quality are set to become major issues in the context of emerging STI trends.
The impact of new technologies of information and communication on
non-commercial circuits is a complex matter that has been little analysed to
date – and the potential field for research is vast.
The
need to clarify the legal aspects: In our study, the issue of intellectual
property rights in grey literature has been deliberately left aside.
Nevertheless, the legal status of grey resources and rights in their use
(deposit, archiving, distribution, etc.) is (another) major challenge for the
future of this form of STI. The legal environment in France and internationally
is evolving rapidly, and no documentary analyses have so far addressed the
legal aspects and economic issues at stake in the field of grey literature.
To
conclude, we offer some prognoses for further reflection.
It seems certain that:
§
Grey
literature will not disappear, but will continue to play a part alongside
commercial publishing.
§
The
borderline between “grey” and “white” (commercial) literature will become
increasingly indistinct, particularly in an environment that is moving towards
free access to STI.
§
The
proportion of “grey” documents published on the Web will increase rapidly.
§
The
Internet will encourage greater diversity in “grey” resources (raw research
results, notes and personal comments, lectures, etc.).
It seems likely that:
§
Bibliographic
oversight of grey literature will remain problematic despite the trend towards
standardisation of digital documents.
§
Open
archives will offer more appropriate services and functions for some segments
of grey literature, not only for preprints but also for doctoral theses and
reports .
§
Some
organisations – especially public bodies but also in the private sector
(Elsevier, Google, etc.) – will develop tools and services to aid more
efficient exploitation of “grey” resources on the Web.
It seems unlikely that:
§
Searching
and collecting grey literature will become as easy as for journals and books
from the traditional publishing sector.
§
The
new tools for collecting, depositing and archiving will make grey literature
less ephemeral and volatile than in the past.
Artus H.M. (2005). “Old WWWine in New Bottles? Developments in electronic information and communication: structural change and functional inertia”. The Grey Journal, vol. 1, n° 1, p. 9-16.
Aubry C. et Janik J. (2005). Les archives
ouvertes : enjeux et pratiques. Paris : ADBS.
Auricombe S. (2001). “Recherches et usages de l’information documentaire : analyse des pratiques des chercheurs et enseignants-chercheurs sur la formation du CNAM”. Perspectives Documentaires en Education, n° 52, p. 61-69.
Baltz
C. (2003). “Quand la documentation se réveillera…” Documentaliste, vol. 40, n° 2, p. 148-153.
Beile P.M., Boote D.N. et Killingsworth E.K. (2004). “A microscope or a mirror? A
question of study validity regarding the use of thesis analysis for evaluating
research collections”. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, vol. 30,
n° 5, p. 347-353.
Boukacem-Zeghmouri C. et Schöpfel J. (2006). “Access and Document Supply: A Comparative Study of Grey Literature”. In : D. Farace et J. Frantzen (ed.). GL7 Conference Proceedings. Seventh International Conference on Grey Literature : Open Access to Grey Resources. Nancy, 5-6 December 2005. Amsterdam : TextRelease, p. 186-193.
Chanier T. (2004). Archives ouvertes et publication scientifique : comment mettre en place l’accès libre aux résultats de la recherche ? Paris : L’Harmattan.
Chartron
G. (ed.) (2002). Les chercheurs et la documentation numérique. Paris :
Editions du Cercle de
Comberousse M. (1995). “Les nouvelles technologies au service de la littérature grise (GRISELI)”. Bulletin des Bibliothèques Française, vol. 40, n° 2, p. 51-53.
Desmichel C. (1998). “Pour un meilleur accès aux rapports administratifs non publiés”. Documentaliste, vol. 35, n° 2, p. 97-100.
Duarte C.L. (2003). “TIC et documentation scolaire”. Perspectives Documentaires en Education, n° 59, p. 51-55.
Farace D.J., Frantzen J., Schöpfel J., Stock
C. et Boekhorst A.K.
(2006). “Access to Grey Content : An Analysis of Grey Literature Based on
Citation and Survey Data”. In : D. Farace
et J. Frantzen (ed.). GL7 Conference Proceedings. Seventh International Conference on Grey
Literature : Open Access to Grey Resources. Nancy, 5-6
December 2005. Amsterdam : TextRelease, p. 194-203.
Fily M.F. (2005). « Introduction au concept d’archive ouverte ». http://archivesic.ccsd.cnrs.fr
GLISC – Grey Literature International Steering
Committee (2006). Guidelines
for the production if scientific and technical reports : how to
write and distribute grey literature. Rome : Istituto Superiore di
Sanità.
Jeffery K.G., Lopatenko A. et Asserson
A. (2002). “Comparative study of metadata for scientific
information : The place of CERIF in CRISs and scientific repositories”.
In : W. Adamczak et A. Nase (éd .). Proceedings CRIS
2002 6th International Conference on Current Research Information Systems.
Kassel : University Press, p. 77-86.
Keller A. (2001). “Future development of electronic journals : a Delphi survey”. The Electronic Library, vol. 19, n° 6, p. 383-396.
Landesmann M. (2003). “Identités et trajectoires universitaires de professeurs mexicains”. Perspectives Documentaires en Education, n° 59, p. 9-18.
Le Hénaff D. et Thiolon C. (2005). “Gérer et diffuser des thèses électroniques : un choix politique pour un enjeu scientifique”. Documentaliste, vol. 42, n° 4-5, p. 272-280.
Le Roux L. (2005). “Circulation de l’information et « navigation communautaire chez les enseignants-documentalistes”. In : Colloque du SIF « Les institutions éducatives face au numérique ». Paris, Carré des Sciences, 12-13 décembre 2005.
Lüdke M.
(2003). “Une sociologue brésilienne au croisement de diverses cultures de
recherche”. Perspectives
Documentaires en Education, n° 59, p. 19-28.
Mackenzie Owen J. (1997). “The Expanding Horizon of Grey
Literature”. GL3 Conference Proceedings. Third International Conference on
Grey Literature. http://eprints.rclis.org/archiv/00002596.
Ndoye A.K.
(2003). “Les déterminants du rendement scolaire des filles en Afrique
subsaharienne : une revue de literature”. Perspectives Documentaires en Education, n° 59, p. 97-113.
Okiy R.B. (2003). “A citation analysis of education theses at the Delta State
University, Abraka, Nigeria”. Collection Building, vol. 22, n° 4, p.
158-161.
Paillassard P., Schöpfel J. et Stock C. (2005). “How to get a French doctoral thesis, especially when you aren’t French”. Publishing Research Quarterly, vol. 21, n° 1, p. 73-93.
Prévot M.
(2005). “La publication scientifique à accès libre : de l’idéal aux
modalités concrètes. Application aux sciences de la terre”. Bulletin de
Liaison de
Roosendaal H. E. (2004). « Driving change in the research
and HE information market ». Learned Publishing, vol. 17, n° 1, p.
1-6.
Schöpfel J. (2006). “MetaGrey Europe, A Proposal in the Aftermath of EAGLE-SIGLE”.
In : D. Farace et J. Frantzen (ed.). GL7 Conference
Proceedings. Seventh International Conference on Grey Literature :
Open Access to Grey Resources. Nancy, 5-6 December 2005. Amsterdam :
TextRelease, p. 34-39.
Schöpfel J., Stock C., Farace D.J. et Frantzen
J. (2005). “Citation Analysis and Grey Literature :
Stakeholders in the Grey Circuit”. The Grey Journal, vol. 1, n° 1, p.
31-40.
Sondergaard T. F., Andersen J. et Hjorland
B. (2003). “Documents and the communication of scientific and scholarly
information. Revising and updating the UNISIST model”. Journal of
Documentation, vol. 59, n° 3, p. 278-320.
Stock C. et Schöpfel J. (2004). “Grey Literature in an Open
Context : From Certainty to New Challenges”. In : D. Farace et J. Frantzen (ed.). GL5 Conference Proceedings. Fifth
International Conference on Grey Literature : Grey Matters in the
World of Networked Information. Amsterdam, 4-5 December 2003.
Amsterdam : TextRelease, p. 199-202.
Stock C., Rocklin E. et Cordier
A. (2006). “LARA : Open Access to Scientific and Technical
Reports”. In : D. Farace et
J. Frantzen (ed.). GL7 Conference Proceedings. Seventh
International Conference on Grey Literature : Open Access to Grey Resources. Nancy, 5-6 December 2005.
Amsterdam : TextRelease, p. 87-93.
Ullah M.F., Kanwar S.S. et Kumar
P. (2004). “A quantitative analysis of citations of research reports
published by National Institute of Hydrology, Rorkee”. Annals of Library and
Information Studies, vol. 51, n° 3, p. 108-115.
Wood D.N. et Smith A.W.
(1993). “SIGLE : A Model for International Co-operation”. Interlending
& Document Supply, vol. 21, n° 1, p. 18-22.