Science and Web 2.0: Social Bookmarking (May 2006)

Social bookmarking EMBL Centre for Computational Biology 30 th of May, 2006 Michael Kuhn

briefly: my motivation

one year of social bookmarking

before: over 100 bookmarks in browser

now: only 11 (my toolbar)

over 300 links in del.icio.us, organized with tags

concepts examples science 2.0 references

remember the Yahoo! catalog?

bookmarks: a similar hierarchy

taxonomy

taxonomy folks

a tag is a keyword you assign intuitively

homo primate eukaryote vertebrate mammal Eukaryota Metazoa Chordata Craniata Vertebrata Euteleostomi Mammalia … Hominidae Homo Tags Hierarchy

Comparison tagging is fast filing is slow can have many tags only one category intuitive description logical description dynamic and created on the spot fixed framework, created beforehand Tags Hierarchy

analyze tags and cluster them

social bookmarking in academia

keywords are already there!

keywords are not in PubMed

instead: Medical Subject Headings (MeSH terms)

let readers describe the paper: tagging

managing your references: how does it work?

fully imports bibliographic data partially imports bibliographic data supports tag intersections API to access the data from other tools can keep posts private (optional: until date) links and papers/books Nature Publishing Group no tag intersections, but can store PDFs no API yet all posts are public mainly papers/books one-man project Cite U Like

there are many social bookmarking sites

social bookmarking and collaboration

summary of this section

Social bookmarking:
… helps you to manage and organize your references
… lets you follow the references of people you know or trust
… generates recommendations of interesting references for you (but don’t expect wonders yet)

you gain: a fast way to store and retrieve information

you get: assistance in finding new papers

you profit: from the insight of other people

you give: your bibliography (your selection of publicly available information)

conflict between advancing knowledge and advancing your career

possible disadvantage: another scientist discovers an article earlier (or at all)

possible disadvantage: someone might deduce what you are working on

you have to decide if you want to contribute

(but I think it is worth it)

(also, you can keep your bookmarks private for some time in Connotea)

take-home message

With social bookmarking …
… you can better keep track of your links and references
… you implicitly share knowledge with other scientists

Next Tuesday: Stop emailing huge files: How to jointly edit manuscripts and share data

About social bookmarking:
A two-part review and introduction: http://www.dlib.org/dlib/april05/hammond/04hammond.html and http://www.dlib.org/dlib/april05/lund/04lund.html
Wikipedia articles: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_bookmarking , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tags , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folksonomy
Scientific social bookmarking:
CiteULike: http://www. citeulike .org/
Connotea: http://www. connotea .org/
General social bookmarking services:
del.icio.us: http://del.icio.us
Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/
(plus many others)
Other links:
NCBI taxonomy: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=Taxonomy
Medical Subject Headings: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/

Science and Web 2.0: Social Bookmarking (May 2006)

by biocs on Dec 06, 2008

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Usage Rights

1 Embed 1

Statistics

Science and Web 2.0: Social Bookmarking (May 2006) Presentation Transcript