Literacy for the future: Review of the LIR Annual Seminar 2026

This guest post is by Cathal Madigan, Library Assistant at TU Dublin.

On Wednesday May 13th, 2026, I had the privilege to attend the LIR Annual Seminar 2026. Hosted in the ASIERA Offices in Dublin and recorded over MS Teams, the Seminar had a theme of “Supporting Emerging Literacies,” and asked the question of how libraries design and deliver new literacy programmes. The presentations had a shared idea of literacy, with each presenter showcasing how libraries could hope to use these programmes to bolster services and assist clients.

LIR Group logo, from LIR Group website

The Seminar opened with a keynote from Dr Andrew Cox, Senior Lecturer at the School of Information, Journalism and Communication, University of Sheffield. Focusing on the emerging use cases of AI and how librarians could integrate it, Dr Cox provided an examination of the potential costs and benefits of AI integration in libraries, exploring the importance of knowing how best to safely integrate it into library structures and be aware of how students are using it in their daily activities.

Ann Byrne, Digital Librarian for Hibernia College, spoke about “digital literacy for all” and reflected on the process of creating a course in digital literacy for Hibernia College, a process that began in 2023 in the aftermath of COVID-19 as staff realised that students had no real instructions for how to use digital literacy. This made it a good choice for an open course system as it is a universal need. The pilot programme launched in 2023 and was deemed a success as part of UNESCO's Global Media and Information Literacy Week and Be Media Smart campaign from Media Literacy Ireland. The success prompted a second phase in 2025, which added new lessons and incorporated feedback like a dedicated module on AI.

ASIERA Offices, North Wall Quay, Dublin 1, where the event was hosted, from archdaily.com

Ronan Madden, Learning & Teaching Team Lead at UCC Library, discussed the new Digital and Information Literacy Framework that UCC had begun developing. A new team, the Framework provides tailored classes on request with a focus on increasing awareness of the different forms of literacy across the university, such as information, digital, media and AI literacy. Ronan outlined how the Framework had been developed and used by students and faculty at UCC, how students assisted with peer review, and how it is intended as a living document that is always innovating and expanding.

Siobhán Dunne,Teaching, Research Support and User Experience, TCD, spoke about the concept of Sustainability Literacy (i.e. the knowledge of the relationship/conflicts between humanity and the environment), discussing the Sustainability Action Plan that Trinity had launched in February 2026 after a survey for students requested sustainability awareness. One of the major components of the plan was that Sustainability Literacy would provide a new opportunity to position the library as a trusted information resource for students and staff. As an example of this, Siobhán shared how part of the Action Plan involved creating a space where students could learn about AI and its impact on the climate, and share their concerns.

A still from Siobhan Dunne’s presentation showing TCD’s Sustainability Action Plan for 2026

Patrick Keegan, Learning Specialist Librarian at RCSI, discussed a pilot workshop for postgraduate learners which included AI Literacy, or learning when would be an appropriate time to use AI. The concept of "cognitive offloading" was discussed (i.e. how the brain can only process so much information so steps must be taken to know ways to offload). Patrick emphasised how important it was to train graduates to be ready to avoid detrimental offloading when in the workplace, and that being able to retain cognitive prowess when working with patients is a key skill. The workshop he worked on provided three examples of issues healthcare students may face as AI usage becomes more commonplace; how to critically evaluate suggestions from AI, how it can disrupt learning journeys, and how to explain the choices one makes in their day-to-day operations. Patrick ended with the key takeaways from the workshop and suggested a “human in the loop” style of AI oversight where suggestions made by AI are always run by a skilled professional first before being implemented.

Dr Simone Fühles-Ubach, Library and Information Science at TH Köln, and Professor Elisabeth Kaliva, Computer Scientist and Educational Researcher at TH Köln, opened the final stage of the Seminar with a shared presentation on a research project they had been undertaking since 2020, based on the “Data Literacy” research project at TH Köln. They presented the progress and research findings of their project, focusing on the contribution and collaboration of academic libraries and the impact this had on students. The Data Literacy Initiative (DALI) at TH Köln has become a centralised shared working space for students and staff, creating an infrastructure to advise students on data literacy and usage of it while researching.

Ben Lee from Shared Intelligence, speaking about future literacy at the LIR Seminar 2026

The final speaker of the day was Ben Lee, director of think-tank consultant group Shared Intelligence. His event was named “Come Rain or Shine: futures literacy for libraries, and the role of libraries in building futures literacy among their users and communities.” Ben discussed how a report was made in 2023 to discuss the challenges facing public libraries in the United Kingdom and how to increase awareness and usage in local communities. The report suggested finding new ways to reverse declining attendance rates in libraries, and to beware the retirement cliff. Ben spoke of Futures Literacy, i.e. the concept of using the ideas of the future to inform the actions of the present. This led into a group exercise where Ben asked those in attendance to combine two uncertain future concepts on a graph to create different versions of the future, showing the different paths an uncertain future can generate, before the Seminar concluded.

The LIR Seminar proved to be a stimulating day. I was pleased to get to attend and found the experience very enlightening. The overall questions raised in the introduction of the Seminar of how libraries design and deliver new literacy programmes was appropriately answered and elaborated on. Each of the different representatives discussed how their own libraries oversaw new programmes to increase awareness of digital literacy among their clientele, providing a wide variety of alternate perspectives that showed how each of the guest speakers came to their conclusions. This allowed for improvements in their offered services and allowed for each facility to be more adept at handling queries asked by the modern library customer. 

Read More

Demystifying Joyce - A reflection of the Ulysses Book Club at Dublin City University Library

This guest post is by Alana Mahon O'Neill who is a library assistant based in the Research and Teaching directorate in DCU Library.

Please note: This article gives examples of the language in Ulysses that led to the novel being banned in several countries. 

Ulysses is considered one of the most important texts of Irish Literature and it is celebrated as a pinnacle of English modernist literature. Celebrants mark the occasion annually on Bloomsday by walking Dublin's streets, reenacting scenes from the book, and turning fiction into living history.

James Joyce's mark on Dublin City. Image credits: Wikimedia Commons.

Joyce echoes in our culture, referenced in literary works from Flann O’Brien to Sally Rooney and resonates within the musical ambitions of Kate Bush, Lou Reed, and Fontaines D.C., to name a few. Widespread literary consensus holds that Joyce has influenced much of modern literature and art, and that Ulysses alone challenges narrative structure, experiments with language, and introduces stream of consciousness.

Ulysses inspired musicians Kate Bush, Lou Reed and Fontaines D.C. who reference lines from the text in their song lyrics. Image credits: Photographs by Columbia Records via Wikimedia Commons, Garry Gross and Simone Joyner/Getty Images.

So, why haven’t more people read it? Last year, the Dublin City University (DCU) Arts and Culture department announced a Ulysses book club. The objective: meet once a month (with a break for the summer) and discuss two chapters over some tea and biscuits? Yeah, sure.

The gathering was successful thanks to Jen and Claire. Inspired by their own book club, they facilitated this reading of Ulysses as James Joyce “enthusiasts”, rather than as academics, and invited an assembly of Drumcondra residents and DCU staff. We conversed at meetings and between sessions shared links to articles, podcasts and interesting tidbits. We all had very different approaches to engaging with the material: some read the text, others preferred the audiobook. Personally, I opted for full immersion by consuming the two at once, like a VR headset. This was particularly engaging for chapters like Circe, where Joyce uses onomatopoeia for inanimate objects, which the audio production conjured up into an eerie chorus of voices.

Examples of onomatopoeia from 'Circe', chapter 15 of Ulysses

If you haven’t read Ulysses, the pictured quotes might be surprising. It was for me. Popular sentiment is that it has been rigorously analysed by prestigious academics and therefore becomes “inaccessible” for the vast majority. This negates the most fascinating aspect of the book: it’s silly.

Ulysses is full of word plays, tongue-in-cheek allegories and crude language. It’s shameless, rude and transgressive in its religious, political and social allusions. When people gush incredulously about the book being banned in Ireland, believe them.

A sample of the 'highbrow' language used in Ulysses.

Also, don’t believe them. It was never banned. Irish authorities believed so few would read the novel that there was no need to submit it to the censorship board.¹

In hindsight, it was a miracle that the book was ever published. Joyce went through incredible lengths to make Ulysses true to life. While living in Paris, he wrote back letters to family members in Dublin to confirm the minutest of details, from the time it takes for a piece of paper to float down the river Liffey,² to whether one could jump the fence at No. 7 Eccles Street,³ and the presence of a shooting star in the night sky on June 16, 1904.⁴

“I want to give a picture of Dublin so complete that if the city suddenly disappeared from the earth it could be reconstructed out of my book.” - James Joyce.⁵

Jen and Claire shared some of their “rabbit-hole” deep dives into references within and between the lines of the text. Businesses mentioned on O’Connell Street led to an elaborate unfolding of the origin of Elvery’s Elephant logo.⁶ In Drumcondra, the Goose Tavern pub may have taken its name from the flocks of Brent Geese that flock to the area in the winter months. There are many more examples, but I do not have the word count to start unpacking. It felt like every line of the book had some deeper meaning, some way to spin it to illustrate secret and nuance, a reality to the unreality. After all, more than 600 people were referenced in the text, from Irish historical figures such as Charles Stewart Parnell and Daniel O'Connell, to real people such as pub owner Davy Byrne and National Library of Ireland director Richard Irvine Best.⁷

I would also like to acknowledge that we didn’t always enjoy the process. Some of us expressed frustration at its meandering narrative, its sizeable chapters, and the likability of its protagonists. ‘Do you like Bloom, yet?’ was a frequent topic at each meeting. I think such dialogue is important because in a typical book club setting, with contemporary texts, we get to express our frustrations and delights at surface-level impressions. If a book published last year has something unlikable about it, then why not a classic, too? Joyce is thoughtful in his detail, but also rather pedantic and self-indulgent, and this is also what made Ulysses so intriguing and mysterious to his critics.

Jen and Claire’s conversations at the book club were heavily inspired by the text “Ulysses and Us”,⁸ which argues that Ulysses is written about the people of Dublin and for the people of Dublin, but only for those who are willing to seek it out.

“It is not my fault that the odour of ashpits and old weeds and offal hangs round my stories. I seriously believe that you will retard the course of civilisation in Ireland by preventing the Irish people from having one good look at themselves in my nicely polished looking-glass.” - James Joyce.⁹

Joyce initially had quite an incredulous reception in Ireland, and only started seeing recognition posthumously. With that, his most lingering legacy appears to be the preconception that his works are not made to be read by just about anyone.¹⁰

So, what are we missing out on?

It sounds like the challenge has been set; most don’t engage because they don’t think of themselves as the target audience. Self-exploration involves challenging preconceptions. Let me assure you that Ulysses is for you.

If there is one thing I could take away from this experience, it is that, one, we need more book clubs focusing on demystifying classic novels, and two, everyone should try to read Ulysses cover to cover at least once. Well, this is what I would personally declare; other passionate readers have assured me that I will read it again.

The final gathering of the Ulysses Book Club in Belvedere Library DCU, March 2026. Image credit: Kyran O'Brien/DCU, 2026.

I also want to declare my thanks to Jen and Claire, whose passion and dedication made the experience so enjoyable for everyone involved. 

¹McCourt, J. (2023). From hostility to homage. The reception of Joyce’s Ulysses in Ireland. Journal of Irish Studies, 37, 4–14. https://www-jstor-org.dcu.idm.oclc.org/stable/27301718
² Joyce, J., & Murray, J. (1922). Letter from James Joyce, in Paris, to his aunt, Josephine Murray. https://catalogue.nli.ie/Record/vtls000743146/HierarchyTree#tabnav
³ Joyce, J., & Murray, J. (1922). Letter from James Joyce, in Paris, to his aunt, Josephine Murray. https://catalogue.nli.ie/Record/vtls000743153
⁴ Olson, D. W., & Olson, M. S. (2004). The June Lyrids and James Joyce’s Ulysses. Sky & Telescope, 108(1), 76–77.
⁵ From a conversation with Frank Budgen, circa 1918-1919, Zurich. Budgen, F. (1960). James Joyce and the Making of 'Ulysses'. Indiana University Press. pp. 67-68.
⁶ Rodgers, J. (2025, Jul 11). The colourful story of the Elephant House on Dublin's O'Connell Street. RTÉ. https://www.rte.ie/brainstorm/2025/0711/1495830-elephant-house-dublin-sackville-street-oconnell-street-elverys-supermacs/
⁷ Who Were the Real Men in the Library from "and Charybdis"? (2024, Mar 28). Blooms and Barnacles. https://www.bloomsandbarnacles.com/blog/who-were-the-real-men-in-the-library-from-scylla-and-charybdis
⁸ Kiberd, D. (2011). Ulysses and us: the art of everyday living. Faber.
⁹ James Joyce, on his collection of short stories ‘Dubliners’ in letter to his publisher, Grant Richards, on 23 June 1906, in Joyce, J., & Gilbert, S. (Ed.) (1957). Letters of James Joyce. Faber and Faber. pp. 63-64.
¹⁰ McCourt, J. (2023).

Read More

Discover the Latest Issue of the Health Sciences Libraries Journal (HSLJ)

This is a guest post by the HSLJ editorial team about the latest issue of the Health Sciences Libraries Journal, Vol. 2 No. 1, (2026)

The Health Sciences Libraries Journal, Vol. 2 No. 1 (2026)

The theme throughout the current issue of HSLJ is Diversity, Equity, Belonging and Inclusion (DEBI). 

Dr Deborah Reed reflects on her career in librarianship across the UK and Ireland, exploring accessibility in Further Education and the importance of creating truly inclusive environments. Walsh et al. continue this conversation with an insightful examination of accessibility and belonging for neurodiverse librarians and library workers. While Jane Burns explores Graphic Medicine and its power to portray trauma across and between communities.

Readers will also discover the impact of the Human Library project through O’Neill and O’Connor’s account of a successful event at Dublin City University, where human “Books” and “Readers” come together to challenge stereotypes and foster understanding.

The issue also features a diverse range of contributions, including a dissertation summary by Annmarie Whyte on Australia’s role in the development of library and information science, a scaffolded model used to train librarians in systematic and scoping review services from Murphy and Adydan of Vanderbilt University, and Penny Wiggle’s engaging career journey across public, health, and school libraries.

Rounding out the issue are Mairéad Mooney’s historical exploration of James Wilkinson’s leadership of Cork City Libraries, Mc Keown and Lombard’s practice‑based insights on AI, and a report from the Health Sciences Libraries Group (HSLG) Conference in March, ensuring valuable insights are shared with the wider library community.

Whether you are interested in inclusion, professional practice or the stories of librarians past and present, this issue has something for every library and information professional.

Read the full issue here: https://journals.ucc.ie/index.php/hslj/issue/view/388.

Call for Winter 2026 submissions: The HSLJ editorial team invites new and returning authors to submit their work for our next Issue. We welcome submissions from students, researchers, and practitioners across all areas relevant to the journal. For submission guidelines and further information – https://journals.ucc.ie/index.php/hslj/about/submissions 

Research Articles - Submission Deadline: 10 July

General Submissions - Submission Deadline: 1 October

Read More

Why publish in An Leabharlann?

Guest Post by Hugh Murphy, interim editor of An Leabharlann. 

This month marks the (counts on fingers) twenty ninth anniversary of me becoming a qualified librarian.  In some ways it doesn’t feel like that, but by most professional metrics I am a probably well into dinosaur territory.  What that brings of course is experience and (hopefully) a degree of professional, if not necessarily personal maturity.  And our profession needs that – I hope.  

However, our profession also needs freshness of perspective.  This is critical as library and information studies in Ireland are shaped not only by theory and practice, but also by the ideas, research, and voices of those within it.  One of the most powerful ways we can contribute to our wonderfully varied field is through academic writing and publication in professional journals.

Publishing may seem daunting at first, but it is underpinned by a diversity of perspectives. And for our more recent graduates, a fresh perspective and outlook is a strength. You are uniquely positioned to question established practices, explore emerging technologies, and reflect on the changing role of libraries in Irish society. Whether your interests lie in digital literacy, community engagement, unique and distinctive collections, or open access and scholarship, your insights can add really meaningful value to discourse within the profession.

More than that, engaging in academic writing also strengthens your own professional development. It should sharpen your critical thinking, deepen your understanding of key issues, and hopefully enhance your confidence as a practitioner. Writing for journals such as An Leabharlann (or other LIS publications) can really enable you to compare and contrast your local experiences to a national or even global conversation.  And importantly this can help ensure that Irish librarianship (in all its aspects) is visible and influential on a wider stage.

Publication in An Leabharlann is not reserved for seasoned professionals - we actively welcome contributions from early-career library staff and we have a wonderfully supportive review process. And the great thing about working in libraries is that much of what you could write about is practice based – writing about a project you have done can be an accessible starting point.

In our last two issues of An Leabharlann we have seen voices from students and early career staff through to the full cretaceous era dinosaur. But we need to ensure that this breadth continues, and is also represented in terms of diversity of library experience.  Academic libraries, public libraries, special libraries – all are part of the national experience and we need all voices. An article may be too intimidating, so perhaps review a book or give a conference report. And for those of you who have delivered blog posts on platforms such as this, perhaps an article, with its greater length and rigour might be a really beneficial next step.

By choosing to write and publish, you are not only building your own career—you are helping to shape the future of our profession. Your voice matters. Your experiences matter. Ireland’s library sector benefits when its newest members contribute thoughtfully and confidently to its shared body of knowledge.

Take the first step: write, submit, and become part of the conversation. Send us an abstract at editor@libraryassociation.ie 

Read More

Libfocus Link-out for May 2026

Welcome to the May edition of the Libfocus link-out, an assemblage of library-related things we have found informative, educational, thought-provoking and insightful on the Web over the past while.

Stitching History Together: The University of Nebraska–Lincoln’s Quilt Research Collections and the International Quilt Museum.
Ella Shoenberger looks at the Quilt Research Collections at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries and its relationship to the International Quilt Museum.

Observing Collections a Micron at a Time: A Tools of the Trade Post.
As part of Library of Congress’s Tools of the Trade series, Megan Zins introduces us to how microscopy is used in preservation and conservation.

Cork public library set for Counting House complex after €35m purchase.
A new public library for Cork city is set to open in the restored Counting House complex on South Main Street, with plans for expanded study, cultural, music, and community spaces in a landmark €35m redevelopment project.

Decolonizing the Community-Centered Library: Making Way for Radical, Decolonized Librarianship.
Edgardo Civallero explores how libraries can move beyond “neutral” institutional models to become collaborative, community-led spaces that centre marginalised voices, local knowledge, and social justice.

From Open Access to Preprints: Are We Repeating the Same Mistakes in Scholarly Publishing?
In this Guest Post on the Scholarly Kitchen blog, Jonny Coates argues that the next few years will prove pivotal in determining whether preprints become a stable part of the scholarly ecosystem or drift into the same patterns of fragmentation and inequity that have complicated the open access transition.

Big publishers are ripping off our public libraries.
Barry Andrews reports in the Irish Examiner that the public library model is in danger due to extortionate pricing and licensing terms for the lending of e-books by major commercial publishers.

Lost copy of seventh-century poem in Old English discovered at Rome library.
In this article for The Guardian, Rory Carroll describes the discovery of the earliest surviving poem in the English language by two scholars from Trinity College Dublin.

University Libraries names first Indigenous Knowledges faculty librarian.
Katie Randall has become the first Indigenous Knowledges Librarian in The University Libraries at CU Boulder. She speaks about how her role aims to build a more inclusive and accurate understanding of the histories and futures studied in the University.

“We’re Good at Search”… Just Not the Kind That the AI era Demands - a Provocation.
Aaron Tay reflects on how a lot of us (librarians) struggle with the impact of AI on search.

The AI detection delusion.
James O'Sullivan hits the nail on the head! “...the solution to one form of technological recklessness cannot be another. Detection tools give their users the feeling of objective certainty while delivering probabilistic guesses, and in doing so, they can cause real harm to real people — students who lose marks or face disciplinary action, professionals whose reputations are damaged, and writers whose command of English is held against them by an algorithm that mistakes simplicity for artificiality.”

Read More

What does Librarianship mean to A&SL Conference attendees? A summary of thoughts

Guest post Stephanie Chen, Learning and Teaching Librarian, Academic Services, UCC Library

For the A&SL 2026 conference, I facilitated a session titled: “What does Librarianship mean to you? Putting your values into practice.” This was neither a presentation nor a case study and could easily have been a dud so I do want to extend a massive thank you to the conference organisers for being open to including this in the programme and to all the attendees for participating. 

My aim for this session was to give attendees an opportunity to reflect on themes from previous sessions and, importantly, to give them a space to reflect on their own values and personal understanding of librarianship through participation in online polls, Padlet, and individual reflections.  

This blog post brings together the responses shared from attendees during the session. I have also included the questions and activities used, along with some context, for those who were unable to attend. If you would like to work through the questions and activities yourself, please know there are no right or wrong answers. 

Professional Values 

I began the session by introducing values. Values can exist at multiple levels: societal, values of the community and users libraries serve, our own personal values, and professional values. For the purposes of the exercises, I asked attendees to try and focus specifically on their professional values. Examples of professional values include Gorman’s enduring values (stewardship, service, intellectual freedom, rationalism, literacy and learning, equity of access to recorded knowledge and information, privacy, democracy) and Lankes’ new librarianship (service, learning, openness, intellectual freedom and safety, intellectual honesty). 

To help attendees get into a reflective mindset and identify a professional value, I asked them to complete the following exercise: 

Think of a time when you felt proud of your work or a sense of achievement in work. What was the situation, what did you do? What was the underlying value.

Attendees were asked to share this underlying value in an online poll. 

Here is a word cloud of what was submitted: 

 Broadly speaking, responses could be categorised into the following themes: 

• Service
• Connection and collaboration
• EDI (Equity, Diversity, and inclusion)
• Access and openness 
• Learning and development 

The next exercise explored how strongly attendees related to professional codes of ethics from various library associations. While some associations do have explicit statements of professional values, most do not and instead have professional codes relating to ethics or conduct. An analysis of 60 code of ethics sourced from the IFLA website revealed the following broad values:

• user service & quality
• objectivity & impartiality
• privacy & confidentiality
• intellectual freedom & anti-censorship
• professional integrity & ethics
• access to information
• social responsibility
• cultural & heritage preservation
• equity & non-discrimination
• professional development

 

Values from Library Associations

The majority of attendees did relate to these values, although for a number of attendees, there does appear to be a disconnect. 

To try and explore this further, I asked attendees to engage in a sorting exercise in Padlet. From the list of values from library associations, attendees could sort these into four columns: non-negotiable values, important but flexible, aspirational values, and not important to me at all. 

Access to information and user service appeared most often as a non-negotiable value while professional development was typically viewed as being important but flexible. 

Some values, like social responsibility and cultural and heritage preservation, appeared in multiple columns. This demonstrates values do not always align between individuals and other values will take priority. 

While code of ethics can help articulate shared expectations, they can also fail to address any tensions in values, especially when our own values do not align with what these codes might say. When such conflicts arise, there is rarely an easy solution. However, I would suggest understanding our own values and reflecting on where we place importance and priority can act as a useful guide. 

Values into practice 

To give attendees something practical to take away from the session, I asked attendees to consciously foreground one value they wanted to put into practice. With this one value in mind, I asked them to consider the following: 

• One tiny action I can take next week 
• One medium-scale change I can influence this year (project, service, policy)
• One big/aspirational change I’d love to see 

Attendees were invited to share their actions on a Padlet if they were comfortable doing so. Some of the smaller actions that emerged included checking in with fellow colleagues, prioritising staff wellbeing, and approaching work with more intentional positivity. Medium-term actions focused on increasing open access, improving practices, advocacy for librarianship, and professional development. Finally, some aspirational changes from attendees centred around achieving 100% open access, starting new initiatives, and the development of new library spaces or even a new library building (a hope many of us can probably relate to!)  

Defining librarianship

To conclude the session, I asked attendees to reflect on a final question: What does it mean to be a librarian today?

I asked attendees to complete the sentence: Librarianship is…

While many responses were positive, framing librarianship as essential and even “badass”, it’s important to also acknowledge the complexity involved in the profession, as highlighted by some attendees: “Being a Jack of all trades,” “hard work,” and “tiring.” Overall, responses showed librarianship as being a collaborative, people-focused profession centred on sharing knowledge and helping others.

To finish, I’d like to highlight some definitions that personally resonated with me, but I would encourage everyone to view all the responses: 

“Advocating and enabling for social justice and lifelong learning for everyone through collections, spaces, and research”

“Fostering a love of learning new things, while also learning new things yourself”

“A great career – be a contributor not an extractor” 

Acknowledgements

Thank you to the A&SL committee for giving me the opportunity to facilitate this session and thank you to my fellow UCC Library colleagues Ronan Madden, Learning & Teaching Team Lead, and Martin O’Connor, Communications Coordinator, for supporting me in developing the session. 

Read More

Finding Strength in Difference: Reflections from the HSLG Annual Conference 2026

In March 2026, library and information professionals from across Ireland came together for the Health Sciences Libraries Group (HSLG)Annual Conference, held in person and centred on the theme Finding Strength in Difference. As a professional librarian working on behalf of the Irish food and drink industry, the day offered timely insights into how libraries can navigate rapid technological change while staying grounded in human judgement, ethics and collaboration.

Across the programme, speakers explored artificial intelligence (AI), professional identity, collaboration models and visibility. A consistent message emerged: our collective strength lies not in tools alone, but in how we design for connection, build shared understanding and support one another across diverse roles and settings.

Human judgement in an AI ocean

The conference opened with a keynote from Brendan Kelly, Professor of Psychiatry at Trinity College Dublin, who spoke about navigating “an AI ocean” while retaining human responsibility and judgement. He highlighted that while AI can augment decision-making, it introduces four tensions: epistemic (black-box systems), ethical (bias), relational (loss of human connection) and legal (accountability). 

Drawing on how society has historically reacted to new technologies, Kelly argued that panic is understandable but unhelpful. Instead, he advocated for responsible, transparent and human-led use of AI. Accountability, he stressed, always remains with the user, not the tool. Declaring AI use openly and questioning outputs critically are essential steps towards trust. This framing resonated strongly with librarians, whose professional values already centre on evaluation, context and stewardship of information.

Supporting one-person libraries through connection

The challenges faced by solo and small-team libraries were explored by Tony Linnane, Regional Library Manager at the HSE. One person libraries, he noted, develop wide-ranging and highly transferable skills, but often at the cost of professional isolation and increased risk of burnout. 

Rather than relying solely on individual resilience, Linnane emphasised the importance of intentional peer networks and shared practice. He suggested that carefully managed use of generative AI could help ease administrative workloads and service continuity, while human oversight remains central. Crucially, connection to expert networks can reduce isolation and strengthen confidence, particularly for those working alone.

Collaboration as a force multiplier

Collaboration was another strong theme, particularly in a session on HSE Library Partner Organisation collaborations delivered by Niamh Walker Headon, Library Resources Manager at the HSE. She demonstrated how formal consortia models can expand access to high quality resources, improve equity and avoid duplication of effort across organisations. 

The success of these partnerships relies on shared infrastructure, clear agreements and trust built over time. Where licensing limits access, the curation of credible free sources – such as national statistical agencies and expert blogs – can help bridge gaps. This model offers useful lessons for government and semi state bodies seeking to scale knowledge services more sustainably.

Visibility builds value

Several sessions reinforced the idea that impact depends not just on what libraries provide, but on whether people know those services exist. Bennery Rickard, Regional Librarian at the HSE, shared insights from HSE Library Day, a national awareness campaign designed to celebrate library staff and services. 

Human-centred storytelling, early promotion and shared narratives helped increase engagement, pride and visibility across dispersed teams. Key takeaways included planning impact metrics in advance, promoting library spaces as well as collections, and featuring staff voices to make the service relatable. These lessons apply widely, particularly for specialist or embedded library teams seeking to demonstrate value.

Equitable access and awareness

The importance of national infrastructure was further explored in a session on the case for a National eHealth Library for Ireland, presented by Aoife Lawton and Louise Farragher. They argued that removing barriers to trusted information supports lifelong learning and professional development at scale. 

However, access alone is not enough. Many users are unaware of existing resources, highlighting the ongoing need for promotion, training and information literacy. Libraries cannot assume people know what is available or how to use it responsibly; awareness must be continually rebuilt.

Preparing future talent

Mairéad Mc Keown and David Lombard from Bord Bia – The Irish Food Board, reflected on preparing future food industry talent through their graduate Co-Pilot Skills Programme. Their programme was underpinned by adult learning and knowledge management principles. It encouraged a culture of experimentation, critical and creative thinking and community connections 

Social learning, ethical skills and respect for differences were identified as essential foundations for a psychologically safe learning environment. 

Mairéad Mc Keown and David Lombard, Bord Bia, presenting on preparing future talent in the AI era. Picture credit Lauren Sneyd 2026.

AI literacy as a shared community skill

Aphra Kerr, Professor of Digital Media and Communication at University College Dublin, reframed AI literacy not as a technical skill, but as a community capability grounded in dialogue, critical thinking and shared learning.

She highlighted initiatives such as the EU funded ADAPT programme and AlgoWatch, which aim to make algorithms more visible and understandable to the public. Learning by doing – through workshops, labs and discussion – helps demystify AI and builds confidence without panic. These programmes emphasise empowerment over fear and align closely with librarians’ educational roles. 

Key conclusions

Across the day, three clear conclusions emerged:

1. Design for connection first if you want capability to scale and last.
2. Make AI literacy and responsible use a daily habit, not a one‑off training exercise.
3. Visibility and partnerships multiply value, especially in dispersed or specialist settings.

For librarians across different sectors, these insights reaffirm the profession’s role as a connector, guide and critical partner. In a rapidly changing world, our greatest strength remains our collective commitment to people, trust, shared understanding and progress.

Microsoft Co-pilot was used in the brainstorming for this blog post.

Read More

Review of The Academic & Special Libraries Conference 2026

Guest post by Dina Gorelik. Dina is an MLIS Student at University College Dublin

At the end of March, I had the pleasure of attending the LAI Academic and Special Libraries Conference 2026: Reimagining Librarianship: Purpose, Practice, and Possibility as one of the A&SL Bursary recipients. Throughout my MLIS coursework, professors and students have discussed the changing nature of the library profession and the challenges of this time. I was excited to be able to attend the conference to hear from professionals on the ground on what they consider the challenges and core fundamentals of librarianship today, and I was pleasantly surprised with the recurring themes discussed throughout the day, including the importance of reflective practice and using data to justify decision making in libraries and information settings.

The morning keynote speaker, Liz Jolly (University College Cork), set the tone and brought up themes which recurred throughout the day most notably speaking on the importance of reflective practice and relentless optimism as a tool for the onward journey. I was surprised to hear about reflective practice so early in the day; the concept of reflective practice has been an unexpected recurring topic of conversation throughout my MLIS coursework, and its early reference in the day solidified the importance of reflection in my future professional work.

After the morning keynote, there were two parallel sessions, and I chose to attend the one on Open Scholarship, a topic new to me but one I am interested in learning more about. The speakers discussed initiatives in individual universities as well as national initiatives to promote open access scholarship and publishing. Margaret Irons (Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies) and Colm O’Connor (Innopharma Education) were particularly inspiring in their talks on spearheading new projects. Irons spoke about her project to create an open access repository of CELTICA, the publication of the School of Celtic Studies at the Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies. Her internal advocacy began in 2016, and the repository launched in 2025, a reminder that patience and thinking long-term are vital to these sorts of projects. Colm O’Connor also shared a librarian led initiative at Innopharma Education to support student publications. O’Connor identified that students were producing high quality work but were intimidated by traditional academic publishing so he began Innopharma Insights, a journal to highlight the promising student research he was seeing. Now in its second volume, the journal is produced with the available resources of the team; for example, the journal is formatted in-house using Microsoft Word.

The afternoon session had a variety of speakers talking about collections and metadata initiatives, redesigning services, and career reflections. Two speakers spoke about evaluating and reevaluating services at their academic libraries: Genevieve Larkin (Marino Institute of Education) and Francisca Silva (Dublin Business School). Larkin spoke about the development of a five year operational plan to address tensions between the ambitions of library employees versus available resources. She discussed the power of prioritisation in assessing capacity of staff and resources. Silva led the library website redesign project at Dublin Business School. She discussed pulling in user experience and information architecture principles in conducting user research and testing, as well as developing a more cohesive library website layout. I was excited and surprised that these talks solidified the importance of using research and data to demonstrate and justify decision making in libraries, as it has been a recurring topic in my coursework.

Ultimately, I came away inspired by the commitment of professionals to their work, finding ways to serve their users and themselves as thoughtfully, resourcefully, and sustainably as possible. Throughout the day, speakers discussed identifying issues and taking initiative to create something better, often collaborating with colleagues and users to come up with the best solutions. Attendees were open to discussion and chatting with people they did not know, creating a warm and approachable atmosphere throughout the day; I met a lot of lovely librarians and students and left feeling reassured that, despite the uncertainty of the current moment, librarians and information professionals will continue to provide the best service they can, and I am excited to join in the work. The afternoon keynote speaker, Niamh Tumelty (London School of Economics and Political Science), said that she is confident about the future of libraries, and so am I.

Author’s note: Thank you to the Academic and Special Libraries Committee for the bursary to attend the 2026 Conference.

Read More

Libfocus Link-out for April 2026

Welcome to the April edition of the Libfocus link-out, an assemblage of library-related things we have found informative, educational, thought-provoking and insightful on the Web over the past while.

Images featured in this month's link-out posts

Marion Stokes and the Archive of Resistance.
In this blog post, Naomie Tessier-Antoine writes about Marion Stokes’ television archive as a form of media preservation and resistance, highlighting the role of physical media in maintaining an unaltered record of events.

How to Make a Library Promotional Strategy.
In this blog post, Angela Hursh writes about developing a library marketing strategy, focusing on setting clear goals, identifying audiences, using storytelling, and aligning promotion with organisational objectives.

Manipulating the Law: Dismantling the Miller Test and Exploiting the “Government Speech” Doctrine.
In this Bookriot artice, Kelly Jensen and Sarah Lamdan look at how two legal concepts are being misused in the U.S. to make it easier to ban books in public schools and public libraries. The first is the Miller Test. The second, the “government speech” doctrine.

Hachette yanks horror novel Shy Girl from shelves after accusations of AI use.
Hachette Book Group has removed a novel from bookshops in the U.K. following accusations of AI use by the author. Following an investigation, the publishing group concluded that author Mia Ballard used AI to generate large sections of her book 'Shy Girl.'

Hallucinated citations are polluting the scientific literature. What can be done?
Miryam Naddaf & Elizabeth Quill report in Nature that tens of thousands of publications from 2025 might include invalid references generated by AI.

The outputs we don’t count: making talk-based research contributions legible.
Ben Kaube asks in Research Information why research communication is not measured in a similar way to other research outputs.

An Unexpected Influence: Photostats in Special Collections Libraries.
Hannah Alpert-Abrams documents the influence of the introduction of Photostats on Special Collections Libraries since their inception in this Open Access article.

Are LGBTQIA+ Voices Being Pushed Out of Kid Lit?
Marlaina Cockcroft for Student Library Journal looks at how the publishing sector may be quietly rejecting LGBTQIA+ voices, as well as LBGTQIA+ voices self-censoring. An interesting look at how book bans in libraries may be forcing a chance in what is being published before it ever makes a library shelf.

When the archive breaks.
Elissa Malespina looks at why the threat to the Wayback Machine is really about disappearing data and who controls the public record.

Airport libraries take off.
Rosie Newmark highlights the emerging trend of having a public library space within airports stocked with physical books.

Operationalizing Minimal Computing Values Through Shared Computing-Platform Development: A Case Study of DigitalArc and Opaque Publisher.
Kalani Craig, Michelle Dalmau and Sean Purcell explore how minimal computing principles guided the parallel web development of two related but distinct publishing platforms, DigitalArc and Opaque Publisher.

Breaking Down Data Silos: SPARQuLb, An RDF Ecosystem to Mutualize Humanities Research Projects Needs.
Sébastien de Valeriola and Anthony Leroy present an original solution to effectively managing structured data collected or produced as part of their humanities research projects.

Read More

The Lower Decks 2.0: A Symposium on Janeway and Open Access Publishing: 21–22 May 2026 at DCU Library

This entry connects to an earlier post from 26th September 2025.

Janeway is an open-source scholarly publishing platform that has become the software of choice for editors, librarians, and publishers at universities worldwide. Our inaugural 2023 symposium celebrated the Janeway team's tenth anniversary; this second event broadens that scope to explore how users and community inform Janeway's development.

Co-organised by the Open Library of Humanities, Michigan Publishing Services, and Dublin City University Library, The Lower Decks 2.0 brings together the Janeway community in the historic city of Dublin to explore how real, idiosyncratic scholarly communities helped establish the platform and continue to shape its direction. Presentations address users and user experience, alongside updates, innovations, and use cases from institutions worldwide.

The symposium programme is now published and available here.

 

 

 

Read More

Tracing and locating the scholarly journal

I produced a brief history of the journal as an artefact and looked into its essential function(s). This work does not address the economic, political, or socio-cultural dynamics of the contemporary scholarly journal ecosystem.

Many thanks to Alan Gorman, Eileen Brennan, Jones Irwin, Martin Paul Eve and Lai Ma for reading over this sometime before I hit the button.

Tongue in Cheek {image source: Wikimedia Commons}.

 

The introduction of journal publishing transformed the collective approach to scholarly knowledge creation and dissemination among scholars and other participants in the research lifecycle, including libraries. More importantly, the widespread adoption, expansion, and refinement of journals have pushed aside a hitherto comparatively laissez-faire approach to scholarly exchange while fulfilling specific knowledge functions for the academic community.

Paper-based journal publishing was enabled by the invention of a new (mass) communication technology in the late fifteenth century – the printing press (Singleton, 1981, p. 212; McClellan, 1985, pp. 10–11; Eisenstein, 1980). As a novel form of scholarly communication, journals emerged during the scientific revolution of the Renaissance period in the mid-seventeenth century (Kearney, 1964; Kronick, 1976). At this time, learned societies (see ftn1), such as the Royal Society of London (1660) and the Académie des Sciences in Paris (1666), were established to discuss and advance the interests of scholars, as well as to arrange better and conceptually formalise the proceedings of members’ meetings and their scholarly communications (Hunter, 1994; Académie des Sciences, no date; Hall, 2002). Through a combination of organised individual and collective effort, both societies founded the first not-for-profit journals in 1665: Le Journal des Scavans and Philosophical Transactions. The move towards sharing scholarly knowledge using the journal format significantly contributed to a thriving age of academics from the perspective of the history of modern science and the trajectory of documented scholarship (Morris et al., 2013, pp. 7–8; Chapin, 1987, p. 815). Meadows (1974, pp. 66–86) notes that the methodology of the modern journal also aligns well with changing organisational communication practices and the general expansion of learned societies, as the formation of the former facilitated the coherent and permanent recording of continuous scholarly knowledge outputs in predictable, serial-type formats.

The elevation of journal publishing as an essential practice of scholarly communication required time to establish and embed itself within the expanding scholarly society network. Garvey (1967, cited in Jange and Kademani, 1999, p. 63) points out that by the middle of the 18th century, ten or so journals were in existence, with numbers growing swiftly from about one hundred in 1800 to over one thousand in 1850 and exceeding ten thousand published journals at the beginning of the twentieth century. With the growth of published journals, society organisations and their publications enabled the faster and networked diffusion of scholarly research and argument over time. Increased speed led to more effective sharing and prioritisation of scholarly knowledge among scattered groups of readers, which, in turn, fostered critical examination, quality control, and validation in legitimate scholarly fora. In addition, formally published documents could suddenly be more easily shared and enable authority control (the attribution of author merit and professional reputation) (Mukherjee, 2010; Owen, 2007, pp. 30–31). Consequently, the legacy of learned societies as organisers and channels of formal scholarly communication has both influenced and shaped the journal's developmental path as a valuable and indispensable communication medium, which continues to this day.

Coupled with the idea of the journal's organisational development are the social, cultural, and conceptual practices of peer review, citing and referencing previous scholarly work, and the establishment of manuscript structures and genres. Peer review is the widely accepted standard-bearer for quality control and assurance in scholarly works. Journal editors and scholarly referees (aka the peer reviewers) assess the academic standard and integrity of manuscripts submitted for publication. Editors and reviewers function as status judges who are charged with evaluating the quality of new knowledge and scholarly role performance in a social system (Zuckerman and Merton, 1971, p. 66). The social structure in question manifests in the lifecycle interactions of the scholarly publishing (communication) system. Peer review was formally introduced in the 18th century, and it took another two hundred years of social suffusion to become universally accepted and fully integrated into the disciplines (Spier, 2002, p. 357; Burnham, 1990). Generally, submissions to journals in the sciences have the lowest rejection rates, whereas getting published in the social sciences is harder; publishing is still more difficult in the humanities (see ftn2).

The routine of standardised citing and referencing (the procedure of acknowledging previously published work that informs one’s own scholarly thinking and argument) became widely accepted and adopted among scholars by the middle of the nineteenth century (Kim, 2001, pp. 35–37). Once ingrained, it enabled the close interlinking of current work with previous research, forming a codified, transparent network of the literature (Bazerman, 1988, p. 139). Moreover, the appearance of standardised and identifiable article structures (e.g. introduction, materials and methods, results, discussion and conclusions in the case of original research) and genres (i.e., original research, brief report, review article, case study, methodologies/methods), recalibrated the communication dynamics among scholars at the micro level and, in this sense, affected the approaches of other participants to the research lifecycle. At the same time, standardised and identifiable article structures only appear in some disciplines (recognisable structures do not exist in lateral acacdemic or creative writing). Referees must now adequately account for the nature of the article to be effective reviewers, whilst libraries must organise their indexing services to enable targeted distribution and information retrieval for their user base.

Journal publishers and dissemination services – including scholars themselves and academic and research libraries – are critical in facilitating the scholarly conversation. They provide access to and enable the utilisation of published knowledge to grow and enhance fields of scholarly research. Accordingly, the journal's five canonical and broadly agreed-upon functions determine the existential nature of scholarly communities (Horowitz, 1991; Meadows, 1974; Ziman, 1968). These include (1) the establishment of a coherent academic record, (2) the sharing and dissemination of research outputs, (3) peer review, (4) the assignment of rewards and professional recognition, and (5) the creation of scholarly communities. To contribute to and effectively shape these functions, library-based publishers must be knowledgeable operators across all five functional domains.

The first and most important function involves creating a collective knowledge base to provide standardised, continuous access to the aggregate scholarly record. The scholarly record operates much like the support structure of a house, providing a stable foundation for day-to-day scholarly activities (Dougherty, 2018, p. 19). In other words, beyond researching, writing up, and publishing new knowledge, only its permanent archival and preservation by libraries and other services complete the scholarly communication lifecycle.

The second function involves the systematic distribution of the scholarly record, triggered by publication and access through trusted venues such as recognised publishers and libraries. Unlike informal communication, which is often conducted by a limited number of people and is difficult to capture or isolate, the visible dissemination of formally published knowledge captures the importance and endurance of evidence-based facts and ideas, which are not replaceable with culturally defined beliefs, including those held by oneself (Rowland, 1997). Within this context, making scholarly works accessible and stable through formal publication and access collectively serves the needs of authors, readers, and libraries.

A third function of the journal is to maintain stability in formal knowledge, as noted earlier in the role of peer refereeing. Peer-review discourse is a rhetorical device that evaluates the quality of scholarly works (Paltridge, 2017; Thomson and Kamler, 2013). The review report includes an outline and summary of the review, critical feedback, and a recommendation or conclusion. Among other functions, it performs the essential roles of didactic assistance and discipline-specific enculturation for the professional benefit of the scholarly author (Yakhontova, 2019, p. 67 & p. 87). Successful validation moves authorial scholarship into the routine of copyediting, layout editing and final proofing prior to formal publication.

Formal publication, cataloguing and indexing by publishers, libraries and archives register scholarly achievement and trigger the assignment of rewards. This fourth function of the journal customarily materialises in the form of professional recognition, tenure, and research grants if the performance of recorded scholarship creates an impact by conforming to recognised evaluation variables and standards. These include, beyond qualitative aspects, established quantitative bibliometric indicators such as journal metrics (i.e., the ‘Journal Impact Factor’ as a proxy for assessing the quality of research outputs) and personal metrics, such as the number of citations to a piece of published scholarship (Ware, 2015, pp. 864–865; Breen, 2022a; Breen, 2022b). In short, authors and their host institutions reap rewards for their performance based on evaluative patterns embedded within the scholarly communication ecosystem.

The fifth and final function of the journal concerns its capacity to build scholarly communities within disciplinary settings. The existence of scholarly journals implies a degree of sociability among their subscribers and, in this way, constitutes an act of solidarity (Ziman, 1968, p. 61). All of this suggests that the shared socio-cultural context of the journal, in terms of scholarly interests, knowledge, terminology, and interactions, is a baseline requirement for effective formal scholarly communication.
- - - - - - - -  
ftn1: A learned society is an independent, not-for-profit scholarly organisation that serves as a forum to discuss issues of interest to its members and constituents and sets professional and scholarly standards for its fields (definition quoted from the FAQ Section of the American Council of Learned Societies) (ACLS, 2025).
ftn2: For an overview of field-based acceptance rates in scholarly peer-reviewed journals, see Björk (2019).

Cited works:
Académie des Sciences (no date) History of the French Académie des sciences, Institut de France Académie des Sciences. Available at: https://www.academie-sciences.fr/en/Histoire-de-l-Academie-des-sciences/history-of-the-french-academie-des-sciences.html (Accessed: 18 June 2021).

ACLS (2025) What is a learned society?, American Council of Learned Societies. Available at: https://www.acls.org/faqs/acls-faq/ (Accessed: 18 May 2021).

Bazerman, C. (1988) Shaping written knowledge: the genre and activity of the experimental article in science. Madison, Wis.: Univ. of Wisconsin (Rhetoric of the human sciences).

Björk, B.-C. (2019) ‘Acceptance rates of scholarly peer-reviewed journals: A literature survey’, El Profesional de la Información, 28(4), pp. 1–9. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2019.jul.07.

Breen, E. (2022a) Measuring & Reporting Research Impact: Journal Metrics, DCU Library. Available at: https://dcu.libguides.com/c.php?g=685666&p=4899836 (Accessed: 19 August 2022).

Breen, E. (2022b) Measuring & Reporting Research Impact: Personal Metrics, DCU Library. Available at: https://dcu.libguides.com/c.php?g=685666&p=4899838 (Accessed: 19 August 2022).

Burnham, J.C. (1990) ‘The Evolution of Editorial Peer Review’, JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 263(10), p. 1323. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1990.03440100023003.

Chapin, S.L. (1987) ‘Review of Science Reorganized: Scientific Societies in the Eighteenth Century, James E. McClellan III’, The Journal of Modern History, 59(4), pp. 815–817. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/1879961 (Accessed: 19 June 2021).

Dougherty, M.V. (2018) ‘Defining the Scholarly Record’, Correcting the Scholarly Record for Research Integrity. Cham: Springer International Publishing (Research Ethics Forum), pp. 19–57. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-99435-2_2.

Eisenstein, E.L. (1980) ‘The unacknowledged revolution’, The printing press as an agent of change: communications and cultural transformations in early modern Europe. Cambridge [Eng.], New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 3–42. Available at: https://dcu.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/353DCU_INST/jrp0g3/alma991005390183407206 (Accessed: 22 April 2021).

Hall, M.B. (2002) Henry Oldenburg: shaping the Royal Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Horowitz, I.L. (1991) Communicating ideas: the politics of scholarly publishing. 2nd expanded ed. New Brunswick, N.J., U.S.A: Transaction Publishers. Available at: https://dcu.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/353DCU_INST/jrp0g3/alma991000392109707206 (Accessed: 17 December 2018).

Hunter, M. (1994) The Royal Society and its fellows: 1660 - 1700 ; the morphology of an early scientific institution. 2. ed. Stanford in the Vale: British Soc. for the History of Science (BSHS monographs, 4).

Jange, S. and Kademani, B.S. (1999) ‘Metamorphosis of the Scientific Journal: Past, Present and Future’, Malaysian Journal of Library & Information Science, 4(1), pp. 61–69. Available at: https://ejournal.um.edu.my/index.php/MJLIS/article/view/6752 (Accessed: 16 May 2021).

Kearney, H.F. (1964) Origins of the scientific revolution. London: Longmans. Available at: https://dcu.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/353DCU_INST/jrp0g3/alma991000007069707206 (Accessed: 18 June 2021).

Kim, H.J. (2001) ‘The Transition from Paper to Electronic Journals’, The Serials Librarian, 41(1), pp. 31–64. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1300/J123v41n01_04.

Kronick, D.A. (1976) A history of scientific and technical periodicals. 2d ed. Metuchen, N.J: Scarecrow Press.

McClellan, J.E. (1985) Science reorganized: scientific societies in the eighteenth century. New York: Columbia University Press.

Meadows, A.J. (1974) Communication in science. London: Butterworth. Available at: https://dcu.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/353DCU_INST/jrp0g3/alma991005287209707206.

Morris, S. et al. (2013) ‘Journal metrics’, The Handbook of Journal Publishing. Illustrated edition. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, pp. 133–155. Available at: https://dcu.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/353DCU_INST/jrp0g3/alma991005350699507206.

Mukherjee, B. (ed.) (2010) Scholarly Communication in Library and Information Services: The Impacts of Open Access Journals and E-Journals on a Changing Scenario. Witney: Chandos Publishing (Chandos information professional series).

Owen, J.M. (2007) ‘The development of scientific communication’, The Scientific Article in the Age of Digitization. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands (Information Science and Knowledge Management), pp. 23–43. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-5340-1_2.

Paltridge, B. (2017) The discourse of peer review: reviewing submissions to academic journals. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Rowland, F. (1997) ‘Print Journals: Fit for the Future?’, Ariadne [Preprint], (7). Available at: http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue/7/fytton/ (Accessed: 19 July 2021).

Singleton, A. (1981) ‘Learned societies and journal publishing’, Journal of Information Science, 3(5), pp. 211–226. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/016555158100300502.

Spier, R. (2002) ‘The history of the peer-review process’, Trends in Biotechnology, 20(8), pp. 357–358. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-7799(02)01985-6.

Thomson, P. and Kamler, B. (2013) ‘Engaging with reviewers and editors’, Writing for peer reviewed journals: strategies for getting published. Abingdon: Routledge, pp. 127–144. Available at: https://dcu.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/353DCU_INST/jrp0g3/alma991005476565607206.

Ware, M. (2015) ‘Journals, Scholarly’, International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. 
Elsevier, pp. 862–868. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.41037-8.

Yakhontova, T. (2019) ‘“The authors have wasted their time...”: Genre features and language of anonymous peer reviews’, Topics in Linguistics, 20(2), pp. 67–89. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2019-0010.

Ziman, J.M. (1968) Public knowledge: an essay concerning the social dimension of science. London: Cambridge U.P. Available at: https://dcu.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/353DCU_INST/jrp0g3/alma991000049469707206.

Zuckerman, H. and Merton, R.K. (1971) ‘Patterns of Evaluation in Science: Institutionalisation, Structure and Functions of the Referee System’, Minerva, 9(1), pp. 66–100. Available at: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41827004 (Accessed: 11 August 2021).

Read More