Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
New Paradigms In Scholarly Communication (Ibm)
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

New Paradigms In Scholarly Communication (Ibm)


Published on

Published in: Education, Technology

1 Comment
No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

No notes for slide


  • 1. Open Science & Open Research - New Paradigms in Scholarly Communication Cornelius Puschmann University of Düsseldorf [email_address] 25 June 2008
  • 2. Issues
  • 3. Where are we?
    • The Web has given a huge and growing global community access to a wealth of knowledge
    • The bulk of this knowledge is not created by academics, whose main job is “knowledge creation”, but by “amateurs” who donate their spare time
    • Much of what academics create is locked away in specialized journals and publications
    • Paradox: those who could contribute most lag behind furthest
    • What are the reasons and where is change taking place?
  • 4. Non-reasons
    • Proprietary, valuable information? (patents etc) in most cases no
    • Lost publishing revenue? (selling books) generally no, very few publications make the author money
    • Plagiarism? possible, but the risk exists with any form of publishing
  • 5. Is it really “publishing”?
    • our interpretation of the Web is shaped by metaphors associated with paper, printing and publishing
    • e.g. “web sites / pages / forms ”, “ email ”,
    • but Web 2.0 is increasingly detaching itself from these sources
  • 6. Why academia is resistant to opening up
    • parts of academia are still highly invested in paper
    • information overload
    • “Is change a good thing?”
    • “Why would I want people to find me?”
    • “It's open access if I have access, right?”
  • 7. Reaction to perceived information overload
    • many researchers use paper-age methods to work with digital information
    • browsing instead of searching
    • “putting things on the Web” instead of “research happening on the Web”
    • finality vs. versioning
    • controlling quality and making available are conflated
  • 8. “Is change a good thing?”
    • researchers tend to be traditionalists
    • peer-review, quality control etc central paradigms
    • lack of control, order and selection on the Web seen with skepticism by some
    • goal is generally to preserve tried and trusted procedures and port them to the Web (but does that work?)
  • 9. “Why would I want people to find me?”
    • small, highly specialized and tightly knit research communities
    • inward-looking
    • assumption that nobody outside the field cares
    • lack of interdisciplinary focus
  • 10. “It's open access if I have access, right?”
    • most academics have easy access to scholarly journals through their libraries
    • the libraries cover the subscription costs
    • many perceive this as “open access”
    • academics aren't directly affected by the costs associated with commercial publishing since they don't have to pay for it
    • younger researchers often can't risk challenging traditions - “publish or perish”
  • 11. Change
  • 12. Digital Humanities
    • new approach to Humanities (literary studies, musicology) using computational approaches and presentation techniques
    • new tools and methods have the potential to shine a new light on “old data”
  • 13. WALS
    • interactive atlas of the world's languages and their typological features (syntax, lexicon, phonology)
    • originally on paper and CD-ROM
    • now interactive, uses Google Maps
    • feature set and maps can be used for other projects (remixing)
  • 14. OpenWetWare
    • collaborative wiki for research labs in biology/biological engineering
    • started by grad students in 2004
    • originally used by two labs, now international project
  • 15. ThoughtMesh
    • system for collaboratively tagging and linking scientific texts
    • content of parts can be assessed without reading everything
    • opens the door for “vertical papers”, i.e. finding, reading and citing small chunks of information instead of horizontally digesting the entire article
  • 16. SciVee
    • basically YouTube for scholarly content
    • “pubcast” accompanies/supplements a written paper
    • one clip for a paper on motor neurons in the spinal cord of mice has garnered 225.000 views since December 2007
    • especially attractive for content that can be described visually
  • 17. Encyclopedia of Life
    • Wikipedia for the world's species
    • developed (mostly) by experts using scientific taxonomy
    • attempt to concentrate all knowledge on living organisms on Earth in one resource
    • will include video, audio, photos and illustrations
  • 18. Current approach to research and publishing + records uses = public not public
    • “human-readable” only
    • static
    • primarily textual
  • 19. “Web-enabled” approach to research and publishing + records uses = public
    • semantically annotated
    • dynamic and interactive
    • different modes of presentation (audio, video)
  • 20. Integrating and interlinking academic content
  • 21. Using blogs in teaching
  • 22. “Web-enabling” content from scholarly journals
  • 23. E-journal editor's blog
  • 24. Thanks for listening!