Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

OSFair2017 Worksop | Innovative dissemination practices & Altmetrics

121 views

Published on

Peter Kraker, Michela Vignoli & Rainer Bachleitner give an overview of an innovative dissemination framework & present the OpenUP Innovative Dissemination Toolbox.

Workshop title: Innovative dissemination practices & Altmetrics

Workshop abstact:
The goal of the workshop is to further the understanding of innovative dissemination practices in open science and their relationship with altmetrics. In the first part of the workshop, OpenUP project researchers will give an overview of an innovative dissemination framework. The framework describes good practices and gives recommendations on how to create a successful research dissemination strategy beyond traditional academic dissemination. A special focus will lie on how to reach target audiences beyond the research community (e.g. business or the general public). Participants will be able to test the framework and a toolbox based on their dissemination needs and to give feedback in a discussion that involves the perspective of all stakeholders of dissemination and assessment (researchers and research organizations, funders, policy makers, journalists, practitioners & businesses etc.). In the second part, we will present a taxonomy linking channels of dissemination and altmetrics indicators. In between, we will present best practice examples of innovative dissemination.

DAY 2 - PARALLEL SESSION 3
http://opensciencefair.eu/workshops/parallel-day-2-1/innovative-dissemination-practices-and-altmetrics

License: CC-BY, unless otherwise noted

Published in: Science
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

OSFair2017 Worksop | Innovative dissemination practices & Altmetrics

  1. 1. 1 Innovative Dissemination Practices and Altmetrics Workshop at OSFair2017 Sep 8, 2017
  2. 2. 2017.09.29 2 Agenda • Introduction & Innovative dissemination framework (Peter Kraker) • Innovative dissemination toolbox (Michela Vignoli & Rainer Bachleitner) • Linking dissemination channels and altmetrics (Stephan Gauch) • Case studies: • Theatrical workshop (Menelaos Sotiriou) • Open Science Cafe (Martine Oudenhoven)
  3. 3. 2017.09.29 3 Introduction [Video copyrighted]
  4. 4. 2017.09.29 4 Introduction
  5. 5. 2017.09.29 5 Introduction [Images copyrighted]
  6. 6. 2017.09.29 6 Introduction • Dissemination of research has changed considerably following the digitisation of science • Most research findings are now disseminated in a way that is born digital  Innovative dissemination: research dissemination going beyond academic publishing: blogging, academic social networks, science slams, open notebooks…
  7. 7. 2017.09.29 7 OpenUP H2020 project on OPENing UP new methods, indicators and tools for peer review, impact measurement and dissemination of research results
  8. 8. 2017.09.29 8 Innovative dissemination in OpenUP • User-driven exploration of the emerging landscape of innovative dissemination • Goal: provide OpenUP stakeholders with an entry point to innovative dissemination • Activities in Year 1: • Practices evaluation and mapping: Methods, tools and user needs • Literature review • Survey of more than 1000 European researchers • Case studies of innovative dissemination • Workshop at Open Science Conference (w WP5) • Framework and Toolbox for Innovative Dissemination
  9. 9. 2017.09.29 9 Innovative dissemination in OpenUP See our project report: Peter Kraker, Rainer Bachleitner, Viltė Banelytė, Ilire Hasani-Mavriqi, Daniela Luzi, Roberta Ruggieri, Electra Sifacaki, Vilius Stanciauskas, Michela Vignoli, Mappet Walker (2017). D4.1: Practices evaluation and mapping: Methods, tools and user needs. Project OpenUP. Online at http://openup- h2020.eu/project-material/project- deliverables/
  10. 10. 2016-08-11 10 Literature Review
  11. 11. 2017.09.29 11 Non-research audiences considered important [© TNS-BMRB & PSI, 2015 N=2,454]
  12. 12. 2017.09.29 12 But the general public is still underserved [European Commission, 2013 N=27,563 ]
  13. 13. 2016-08-11 13 Survey
  14. 14. 2017-09-13 14 Methodology • Goal: to collect data on researchers’ preferences and perspectives on peer review, non-traditional dissemination and impact measurement (i.e. altmetrics) • Target groups/researchers: randomly selected main authors of publications in arXiv, PubMed, RePEc and a number of other sources: • Implications for the survey sample: 1) scientific discipline; 2) career stage; 3) gender • Respondents were employed by organisations based in the EU- 28, Switzerland or Norway • Survey ran from 20 January to 23 February • 1347 responses received, of which 976 completed
  15. 15. 2017.09.29 15 Importance of dissemination to non- research audiences
  16. 16. 2017.09.29 16 Use of innovative dissemination channels 4.53% 5.08% 6.06% 7.69% 8.49% 9.06% 9.63% 10.00% 14.15% 16.59% 22.48% 22.69% 27.40% 33.26% 54.14% 56.75% 58.96% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Wikipedia Open lab books/interactive notebooks Podcasts, Video sharing sites Television/radio programs Blogs, other wikis (excluding Wikipedia) Print media (e.g. leaflets, folders) Exhibitions, performances Other channels Git repositories (e.g. GitHub) Non-specialist social networks Popular science publications Press releases E-Mail/Newsletters Events for the general public/specific target audiences other than… Personal/Project Website Academic social networks Open access repositories/ preprint servers
  17. 17. 2017-09-13 17 Main factors/barriers affecting uptake of innovative dissemination 8.35% 8.96% 9.11% 11.88% 14.92% 39.60% 46.97% 49.71% 49.93% 54.23% 56.20% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Privacy and/or ethical concerns Other factors Legal/contractual barriers Lack of presentation and communication skills Missing IT infrastructure Lack of knowledge about non-traditional dissemination tools and methods I do not need non-traditional dissemination to reach my target audiences. Lack of financial support for non-traditional dissemination Lack of organizational support for non-traditional dissemination Lack of acknowledgement/credit given to non-traditional dissemination in my research field Time constraints
  18. 18. 2017.09.29 18 Other examples of innovative dissemination • About 100 entries under an open question on outstanding success when using innovative dissemination channels: • Different examples, including television, radio, lectures, newspapers, reaching policy makers and effective use of social media.
  19. 19. 2016-08-11 19 Case Studies
  20. 20. 2017.09.29 20 Setup • Focus on projects rather than platforms/methods • Initial collection of leads by the OpenUP consortium (16 projects, 8 platforms/ methods) • Crowdsourcing further leads • Google Spreadsheet • Runtime: Oct 4-23 • Received 39 further leads (18 projects, 21 platforms)
  21. 21. 2017.09.29 21 Case Study Leads
  22. 22. 2017.09.29 22 Selected Cases 1. Pluto Fly-By 2. Galaxy Zoo 3. Polymath Project 4. Frontiers for Young Minds 5. Gut (Giulia Enders) 6. Projet SOHA 7. Science at Home 8. Transcribe Bentham 9. Homer Multitext Project 10.Innovations in Scholarly Communications
  23. 23. 2017.09.29 23 Methodology Purpose of dissemination Dissemination activities Dissemination outputs Tools used Disseminated materials Media formats Start of dissemination Dissemination phases Who initiated the dissemination? Target audience Reception & Impact Connection to peer review and metrics Quality of materials Estimated cost Openness of dissemination Interoperability Gender representation Gender distribution • Study cases along the following dimensions • Why? What & How? When? Who? • Effort, Openness & Gender
  24. 24. 2017.09.29 24 Example: Human Brain Project
  25. 25. 2017.09.29 25 Example: Human Brain Project
  26. 26. 2017.09.29 26 Example: Galaxy Zoo
  27. 27. 2017.09.29 27 Example: Galaxy Zoo
  28. 28. 2017.09.29 28 Example: Galaxy Zoo
  29. 29. 2017.09.29 Insights (Openness) • Even the most innovative dissemination efforts may not provide CC-licensed materials • On the other end of the spectrum: projects where all project outputs are CC BY- or CC0-licensed  Researchers need guidance in terms of choosing the right license for their materials
  30. 30. 2017.09.29 Insights (Gender) Four relevant aspects with respect to gender: 1. Gender distribution within the team 2. Representation of gender in the disseminated materials 3. Gender sensitivity and inclusiveness of dissemination tools and platforms 4. Gender aspects of the target audience
  31. 31. 2017.09.29 31 Main Insights • Dissemination in an open science context starts in the earlier stages of a research project  becomes an integral part of the research cycle • Dissemination becomes more interactive  dissemination = participation • There is an avantgarde of researchers successfully employing an immense variety of innovative dissemination methods • …but the majority of researchers are not using them, even though they see the need to engage with the general public
  32. 32. 2016-08-11 32 Framework
  33. 33. 2017.09.29 Introduction • Goal: Provide stakeholders with an entry point to innovative dissemination, so that they can choose methods and tools based on their audience, their skills and their requirements. • Method: • Stakeholder & requirements analysis • Flexible mapping of user needs and requirements to methods, skills and respective costs
  34. 34. 2017.09.29 Stakeholders
  35. 35. 2017.09.29 Objectives
  36. 36. 2017.09.29 Objectives – Exercise 1 • Please use the red dots to mark the four most important objectives for disseminating research from the researchers’ point of view in the current science system (5 minutes) • To move to an open science system, what should be the four most important objectives for disseminating research from the researchers’ point of view? Please use your blue dots to mark them (5 minutes)
  37. 37. 2017.09.29 Objectives – Exercise 2 • Which changes/improvements are needed to facilitate transition to dissemination objectives that are most important for open science? Please write them down on the cards provided
  38. 38. 2017.09.29 Mappings • Objectives  methods • Methods  media and tools/channels • Methods  target audiences • Methods  resources/skills and costs • Enables stakeholders to find innovative dissemination methods based on their needs and requirements
  39. 39. 2017.09.29 Mappings
  40. 40. 2017.09.29 Mappings
  41. 41. 2016-08-11 41 Toolbox
  42. 42. 2017.09.29 42 OpenUP Hub: Dissemination Toolbox • I am a…
  43. 43. 2017.09.29 43 Discussion • What is your scenario? • Do you have experience in disseminating research to businesses or the general public? • What are the barriers? • Which kind of support do you need?
  44. 44. 2017.09.29 44 Some key messages Think well about what you want to offer to the company. Go there and personally talk to the company, find out what they need. Offer targeted solutions. Involve someone from the marketing department to package the information/content well.
  45. 45. 2017.09.29 45 Information to give to the general public is often overlooked, but it is very important. It is important to break the information down, and to do it right. General audiences are interested in a lot of science stuff. The important thing is that they can get something away from the story, that they gained some knowledge. Use parallel channels: think of a strategy for social media. Especially when a topic is currently prominent and publicly discussed this can be very powerful.
  46. 46. 2016-08-11 46The OpenUP project received funding through the H2020 Framework Programme, GA No: 710722 Thank you for your attention!
  47. 47. 2017.09.29 47 Working Definitions Dissemination = Planned process involving… • … consideration of target audiences • … the settings in which research findings are received • … communicating and interacting with wider audiences in ways that will facilitate research uptake in decision-making processes and practice (where appropriate) Innovative dissemination = Dissemination that goes beyond traditional academic publishing (e.g. academic journals, books, monographs), conferences and workshops.
  48. 48. 2017.09.29 48 Research Process Model Based on Kraker & Lindstaedt (20
  49. 49. 49 Example: Pluto Fly-by
  50. 50. 50 Example: Pluto Fly-by
  51. 51. 51 Example: Pluto Fly-by
  52. 52. 2017.09.29 52 Example: Transcribe Bentham
  53. 53. 2017.09.29 53 Example: Transcribe Bentham
  54. 54. 2017.09.29 54 Example: Transcribe Bentham
  55. 55. 2017.09.29 55 Example: Projet SOHA

×