Limited access is a symptom, not the disease
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Like this? Share it with your network

Share
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
2,332
On Slideshare
2,316
From Embeds
16
Number of Embeds
3

Actions

Shares
Downloads
23
Comments
2
Likes
8

Embeds 16

https://twitter.com 13
http://tweetedtimes.com 2
http://www.linkedin.com 1

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Björn BrembsFreie Universität Berlin Universität LeipzigUniversität Regensburg http://brembs.net
  • 2. Björn BrembsFreie Universität Berlin Universität LeipzigUniversität Regensburg http://brembs.net
  • 3. Dysfunctional scholarlyliterature
  • 4. • Limited access
  • 5. • Limited access• No global search
  • 6. • Limited access• No global search• No hyperlinks
  • 7. • Limited access• No global search• No hyperlinks• No data visualization
  • 8. • Limited access• No global search• No hyperlinks• No data visualization• No submission standards
  • 9. • Limited access• No global search• No hyperlinks• No data visualization• No submission standards• (Almost) no statistics
  • 10. • Limited access• No global search• No hyperlinks• No data visualization• No submission standards• (Almost) no statistics• No text/data-mining
  • 11. • Limited access• No global search• No hyperlinks• No data visualization• No submission standards• (Almost) no statistics• No text/data-mining• No effective way to sort, filter and discover
  • 12. • Limited access • No global search • No hyperlinks • No data visualization • No submission standards • (Almost) no statistics • No text/data-mining • No effective way to sort, filter and discover…it’s like the • No scientific impact analysisweb in 1995! • No networking feature • etc.
  • 13. Scientific data in peril
  • 14. Non-existent softwarearchives
  • 15. Technically feasible today (almost)• No more corporate publishers – libraries archive everything and make it publicly accessible according to a world-wide standard• Single semantic, decentralized database of literature, data and software
  • 16. Source Normalized Impact per Paper • Thomson Reuters: Impact Factor • Eigenfactor (now Thomson Reuters) • ScImago JournalRank (SJR) • Scopus: SNIP, SJR
  • 17. Only read publications from high-ranking journals
  • 18. Publikationstätigkeit(vollständige Publikationsliste, darunter Originalarbeiten als Erstautor/in,Seniorautor/in, Impact-Punkte insgesamt und in den letzten 5 Jahren,darunter jeweils gesondert ausgewiesen als Erst- und Seniorautor/in,persönlicher Scientific Citations Index (SCI, h-Index nach Web ofScience) über alle Arbeiten)Publications:Complete list of publications, including original research papers as firstauthor, senior author, impact points total and in the last 5 years, withmarked first and last-authorships, personal Scientific Citations Index(SCI, h-Index according to Web of Science) for all publications.
  • 19. Only read publications from high-ranking journals
  • 20. Only publish in high-ranking journals
  • 21. Lies, damn lies andbibliometrics
  • 22. Introduced in 1950’s by Eugene Garfield: ISI citations C12 publishedarticles A1 timepublished A2 year 1 year 2 year 3
  • 23. Introduced in 1950’s by Eugene Garfield: ISI citations 100 publishedarticles 40 timepublished 60 year 1 year 2 year 3
  • 24. Journal X IF 2010= All citations from TR indexed journals in 2012 to papers in journal X Number of citable articles published in journal X in 20010/11 €30,000-130,000/year subscription rates Covers ~11,500 journals (Scopus covers ~16,500)
  • 25. • Negotiable• Irreproducible• Mathematically unsound
  • 26. • PLoS Medicine, IF 2-11 (8.4) (The PLoS Medicine Editors (2006) The Impact Factor Game. PLoS Med 3(6): e291. http://www.plosmedicine.org/article/info:doi/10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.0030291)• Current Biology IF from 7 to 11 in 2003 – Bought by Cell Press (Elsevier) in 2001…
  • 27. • Rockefeller University Press bought their data from Thomson Reuters • Up to 19% deviation from published records • Second dataset still not correctRossner M, van Epps H, Hill E (2007): Showme the data. The Journal of Cell Biology, Vol.179, No. 6, 1091-1092http://jcb.rupress.org/cgi/content/full/179/6/1091
  • 28. • Left-skewed distributions • Weak correlation of individual article citation rate with journal IFSeglen PO (1997): Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research. BMJ 1997;314(7079):497 (15 February)http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/314/7079/497
  • 29. Data from: Fang, F., & Casadevall, A. (2011). RETRACTED SCIENCE AND THE RETRACTION INDEX Infection and Immunity DOI: 10.1128/IAI.05661-11
  • 30. "Not everything that can be countedcounts, and not everything thatcounts can be counted."
  • 31. Corporate publishers‘ profitscan easily finance all reformsImage source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/wakingtiger/3156791383/sizes/m/in/photostream/
  • 32. 4b € per year for 10,000 university libraries: 400,000 € per year per library