(One Possible) Future of Scholarly Communication


Published on

My talk for the annual GeorgeTown Scholarly communication symposium http://www.library.georgetown.edu/scholarly-communication

Published in: Technology, Education
  • Be the first to comment

(One Possible) Future of Scholarly Communication

  1. 1. Prepared for The Scholarly Communications Symposium Georgetown University April 2012 (One possible)Future of Scholarly Communications Micah Altman, Director of Research, MIT Libraries Non Resident Senior Fellow, The Brookings Institution
  2. 2. Obligatory DisclaimersPersonal Biases:Social/Information Scientist, SoftwareEngineer, Librarian, Archivist “It’s tough to make predictions, especially about the future!”**Attributed to Woody Allen, Yogi Berra, Niels Bohr, Vint Cerf, Winston Churchill, Confucius,Disreali [sic], Freeman Dyson, Cecil B. Demille, Albert Einstein, Enrico Fermi, Edgar R.Fiedler, Bob Fourer, Sam Goldwyn, Allan Lamport, Groucho Marx, Dan Quayle, GeorgeBernard Shaw, Casey Stengel, Will Rogers, M. Taub, Mark Twain, Kerr L. White, etc. (One possible) Future of Scholarly 3 Communications
  3. 3. Collaborators*• Leonid Andreev, Ed Bachman, Adam Buchbinder, Ken Bollen, Bryan Beecher, Elana Broch, Steve Burling, John M. Caroll, Tom Carsey, Thu-Mai Christian, Patrick Clemins, Kevin Condon, Jonathan Crabtree, Merce Crosas, Diane Fournier, Jeff Gill, Myron Guttman, Gary King, Patrick King, Tom Lipkis, Freeman Lo, Christian Laevert, Jared Lyle, Marc Maynard, Michael P. McDonald, Nancy McGovern, Emily Ann-Meyers, Kevin Novak, , Thomas Plewes, Andrew Reamer, Ken Rogerson, Lois Timms-Ferrarra, Akio Sone, Bob Treacy• Research Support Thanks to the Library of Congress, the National Science Foundation, IMLS, the Sloan Foundation, the Harvard University Library, the Institute for Quantitative Social Science, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. * And co-conspirators (One possible) Future of Scholarly 4 Communications
  4. 4. Related WorkReprints available from: micahaltman.com• Board on Research Data and Information, Forthcoming, For Attribution: Developing Data Attribution and Citation Practices and Standards, National Academies Press.• Altman, M., & McDonald, M. P. (2012). Technology for Public Participation in Redistricting. In G. Moncrief (Ed.), Redistricting and Reapportionment in the West. Lexington Books.• M. Altman, J. Crabtree, “Using the SafeArchive System: TRAC-Based Auditing of LOCKSS”, Proceedings of Archiving 2011, Society for Imaging Science and Technology.• Novak, K., Altman, M., Broch, E., Carroll, J. M., Clemins, P. J., Fournier, D., Laevart, C., et al. (2011). Communicating Science and Engineering Data in the Information Age. Computer Science and Telecommunications. National Academies Press.• M. Gutmann, with Abrahamson, M, Adams, M.O., Altman, M, Arms, C., Bollen, K., Carlson, M., Crabtree, J., Donakowski, D., King, G., Lyle, J., Maynard, M., Pienta, A., Rockwell, R, Timms-Ferrara L., Young, ) 2009. "From Preserving the Past to Preserving the Future: The Data-PASS Project and the challenges of preserving digital social science data.”, Library Trends• M. Altman, Adams, M., Crabtree, J., Donakowski, D., Maynard, M., Pienta, A., & Young, C. 2009. "Digital preservation through archival collaboration: The Data Preservation Alliance for the Social Sciences." The American Archivist. 72(1): 169-182• Micah Altman, K. Rogerson. 2008. " Open Research Questions on Information and Technology in Global and Domestic Politics -- Beyond E-", PS: Political Science and Politics.• M. Altman and G. King. 2007. “A Proposed Standard for the Scholarly Citation of Quantitative Data”, D-Lib, 13, 3/4 (March/April).• Altman, M., Gill, J., & McDonald, M. (2003). Numerical issues in statistical computing for the social scientist. New York: John Wiley & Sons (One possible) Future of Scholarly 5 Communications
  5. 5. This Talk Disruptions!Could this be a good thing for science? Community initiatives Shameless plugs (One possible) Future of Scholarly Communications 6
  6. 6. Disruptions! "At the risk of stating the obvious, the complex system of relationships and products known as scholarly communication is under considerable pressure." – Ann J. Wolpert* Nature 420, 17-18, 2002* Director, MIT Libraries; Board Chair, MIT Press; my boss (One possible) Future of Scholarly 7 Communications
  7. 7. Observations• Practice of science – researchers, evidence base, and publications are all shifting to edges• Filtering, replication, integration and reuse are increasing in importance relative to publication (One possible) Future of Scholarly 8 Communications
  8. 8. S o m e B i g C h an g e s i nLots More Data SOpen o lars h i p Evidence Base More ch Shifting High Performance Collaboration (here comes everybody…) Publish, then Filter (One possible) Future of Scholarly 9 Communications
  9. 9. N B T ? … M o re , M o re , M o reM o b i leF o rm s o f p u b li c ati o nC o n tri b u ti o n &attri b u ti o nC lo u dOpenP u b li c ati o n sI n te rd i s c i p li n aryP e rs o n al d ataM as h u p sS tu d e n tsR e ad e rsF u n d e rs 10
  10. 10. plus ça change, plus cest la même folie*(And BTW the regular stuff ain’t necessarily easy, either…)•Budget constraints•Invisibility•Deadlines•Matching skillsets•Legacy systems & requirements•Personalities•Bureaucracy•Politics (One possible) Future of Scholarly 11 Communications
  11. 11. Could this be a good thing for science? (One possible) Future of Scholarly 12 Communications
  12. 12. Observations• The publication is not the science – it is a summary of it• Much of the record of science and the evidence base for it is not well-maintained (One possible) Future of Scholarly 13 Communications
  13. 13. Problems with current practice… (One possible) Future of Scholarly 14 Communications
  14. 14. Unpublished Data Ends up in the “Desk Drawer”• Null results are less likely to be published• Outliers are routinely discarded Daniel Schectman’s Lab Notebook Providing Initial Evidence of Quasi Crystals (One possible) Future of Scholarly 15 Communications
  15. 15. Increased Retractions, Allegations of Fraud (One possible) Future of Scholarly 16 Communications
  16. 16. Erosion of Evidence Base• Researchers lack Examples archiving capability Intentionally Discarded: “Destroyed, in accord with [nonexistent] APA 5-year post-publication rule.”• Incentives for Unintentional Hardware Problems “Some data were preserving evidence collected, but the data file was lost in a technical malfunction.” base are weak Acts of Nature The data from the studies were on punched cards that were destroyed in a flood in the department in the early 80s.” Discarded or Lost in a Move “As I retired …. Unfortunately, I simply didn’t have the room to store these data sets at my house.” Obsolescence “Speech recordings stored on a LISP Machine…, an experimental computer which is long obsolete.” Simply Lost “For all I know, they are on a [University] server, but it has been literally years and years since the research was done, and my files are long gone.” (One possible) Future of Scholarly Research by: 17 Communications
  17. 17. Compliance with Replication Policies is Low Compliance is low even in best examples of journals Checking compliance manually is tedious (One possible) Future of Scholarly 18 Communications
  18. 18. Some possible publication forms ofenhanced publication… (One possible) Future of Scholarly 19 Communications
  19. 19. Embed Real Data Archives in Journals• Embed remotely managed data archive in journal• Replaces “supplemental materials”• Ads – Online analysis – Independent storage – Persistent identifiers and citation – Data versioning – Enhanced discoverability and interoperability – Fixity and replication (One possible) Future of Scholarly 20 Communications
  20. 20. Streamlined “Data Paper” Publication• Data Paper = Data + Citation + Abstract + DocsTools can help• Standard templates & metadata• Data citation and persistent ID• Reviewer workflow• Overlay/embed data in journal system (One possible) Future of Scholarly 21 Communications
  21. 21. Enhanced Publication• Link from online journal systems to data in repositories• Connect tables and figures with abstracts, verifiably• Enable on-line analysis• Showcase articles with live data collections, updated results (One possible) Future of Scholarly 22 Communications
  22. 22. What will the map of science look like, when we can see also how all research contributions connect? Research & Node Layout: Kevin Boyack and Dick Klavans (mapofscience.com); Data: Thompson ISI; Graphics & Typography: W. Bradford Paley (didi.com/brad); Commissioned Katy Börner (scimaps.org) Seed Magazine, Mar 7, 2007 http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/scientific_m (One possible) Future of Scholarly ethod_relationships_among_scientific_paradigms/ 23 Communications
  23. 23. Community Initiatives“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful,committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it isthe only thing that ever has.”-- attributed to Margaret Mead (One possible) Future of Scholarly 24 Communications
  24. 24. Observations• Since knowledge is not a private good  Pure-market approach leads to under- provisioning• Planning for access to scholarly record should include planning for long-term access  beyond the life of a single institution• Important problems in scholarly communications, information science & scholarship increasingly require diverse multi- disciplinary approaches. (One possible) Future of Scholarly 25 Communications
  25. 25. Knowledge is not a Private good Storage Provisioning SoftwareSource: © Hugh Macleod,Gapingvoid Art, gapingvoid.com Best Practice• Libraries often operate on “cost- recovery-minus”• Subsidize knowledge production, Funding long-term access, reuse (Thin Preserved Market)• Recognize costs necessary for Digital broader impacts in research Content budgets 26
  26. 26. National Digital Stewardship AllianceStewardship Members of the NDSA are committed to managing digital content forcurrent and long-term use. The members of the NDSA are actively ensuring sustainedaccess to the digital content that constitutes our national legacy and empowers us asleaders in the global knowledge economy. Individually, these organizations support themanagement of digital resources; as an Alliance, we commit to protecting our nationscultural, scientific, scholarly, and business heritage. digitalpreservation.gov/ndsa/ (One possible) Future of Scholarly 27 Communications
  27. 27. ORCIDORCID aims to solve the author/contributor name ambiguity problem inscholarly communications by creating a central registry of unique identifiers forindividual researchers and an open and transparent linking mechanismbetween ORCID and other current author ID schemes. These identifiers, andthe relationships among them, can be linked to the researchers output toenhance the scientific discovery process and to improve the efficiency ofresearch funding and collaboration within the research community. orcid.org (One possible) Future of Scholarly 28 Communications
  28. 28. LOCKSS & PLN Organizations lockss.orglockss.org/community/networks/ (One possible) Future of Scholarly 29 Communications
  29. 29. DataCite & CoData datacite.org codata.org (One possible) Future of Scholarly 30 Communications
  30. 30. Shameless Plugs“A shill, plant, or stooge is a person who publicly helps a person ororganization without disclosing that he has a close relationshipwith that person or organization. Shill typically refers to someonewho purposely gives onlookers the impression that he is anenthusiastic independent customer of a seller (or marketer ofideas) for whom he is secretly working.”-- Wikipedia (One possible) Future of Scholarly 31 Communications
  31. 31. • Easy to use tools give curators the power to define replication policies, examine digital content and generate audit reportsEnsures replicated collection are geographically and institutionally distributed.• Enables institutions in peer-to-peer networks to monitor replication.• Reduces threats to digital storage and replication.• Produces an auditing trail to support standards such as Data Seal of Approval, Trustworthy Repositories Audit & Certification and ISO 16363. (One possible) Future of Scholarly 32 Communications
  32. 32. • Archive social science data collections at-risk of being lost. • Catalog and promote access to archived collections in the Data- PASS shared catalog. • Replicated preservation of archived collections. • Advocate best practices in digital preservation. data-pass.org(One possible) Future of Scholarly 33 Communications
  33. 33. Integrated Replication Data Publishing +Submission, review, and publication of articles & data together thedata.org pkp.sfu.ca (One possible) Future of Scholarly 34 Communications
  34. 34. Parting (Free) Advice“Past returns are not a guarantee of future results.” – Niels Bohr (?) (One possible) Future of Scholarly 35 Communications
  35. 35. Recap• Practice of science – researchers, evidence base, and publications are all shifting to edges• Filtering, replication, integration and reuse are increasing in importance relative to publication• The publication is not the science – it is a summary of it• Much of the record of science and the evidence base for it is not well- maintained• Since knowledge is not a private good  Pure-market approach leads to under-provisioning• Planning for access to scholarly record should include planning for long-term access  beyond the life of a single institution• Important problems in scholarly communications, information science & scholarship increasingly require diverse multi-disciplinary approaches.• Understanding scholarly communications requires understanding the research information lifecycle (One possible) Future of Scholarly 36 Communications
  36. 36. Approaches• Participate in collaborative multi-institutional efforts to improve scholarly communication• Identify your organization’s core competencies at the most abstract level• Prepare for new opportunities by betting on people (One possible) Future of Scholarly 37 Communications
  37. 37. Questions?E-mail: Micah_altman@alumni.brown.eduWeb: micahaltman.comTwitter: @drmaltman (One possible) Future of Scholarly 38 Communications