The Changing nature of scholarly communication: what does this mean for researchers?
A paper given by Branwen Hide, Liaison and Partnership Officer at the (Research Information Network).
This document summarizes the key findings of a study on the use of microblogging in academic research in Romania. The study found that while microblogging is slowly being adopted by Romanian researchers, there is still some concern about using tools like microblogs and blogs for research. Over 70% of respondents used microblogging for professional communication and collaboration, but less than 25% used it for inquiring or building learning communities. Microblogging provides benefits like collective intelligence and networking, but also disadvantages like privacy/ethics concerns. Overall microblogging is on an upward trend for supporting Romanian research.
The document discusses various strategies for researchers to maximize the impact of their work, including where and how to publish. It addresses choosing journals based on impact factors, open access publishing models, and alternative publication venues. It also covers measuring the impact of published work through metrics like readership, citations, and influence. The overall goal is to help researchers gain visibility, recognition and make the most of disseminating their research findings.
Knowledge or Credit? The (Un)changing Face of Academic Publishing from the Ph...Cornelius Puschmann
Held on 12 March 2012 at the event "Social Science and Digital Research: Interdisciplinary Insights", convened by the Oxford Internet Institute's Oxford eSocial Science Project (OeSS). Program: http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/events/?id=486
What are libraries doing to promote the use of electronic resources? This combination session will use a thorough literature review and a systematic plan to identify which are the most commonly used techniques and marketing strategy, and propose a suite of methods for evaluating and marketing electronic reference resources.
Excerpt:
In academia, technology is progressing rapidly and ‘digitizing’ is the new excitement that gives butterflies to the researcher’s belly. Researchers are uploading and digitizing their fieldwork findings and productions, by uploading photos to databases, creating short films, uploading books onto personal websites, or creating websites for visual consultation of their fieldwork—to name a few virtual tools. But the most interesting aspect arising from this technological progression is the way in which the virtual world is becoming a space, more or less a tool for translation. It is crossing disciplinary fields, and as a result, this overlapping is affecting the methods used in research, even the way we think and work in academia. Academia is becoming more interdisciplinary, pushing the boundaries as the exchange of ideas, methods, discourse, resources, and fieldwork approaches is becoming more fluid. As an art historian trained in the humanities, and an anthropologist trained in the social sciences, I am encountering this daily with my own work, with other undergraduate and graduate students, and even professors, librarians, Image consultants, etc.
Thesis:
The perspective of researching the research is different from selecting a subject or topic that appears foreign, waiting for us researchers to uncover and dissect. But with every relationship, both ends need to be heard. In this sense my primary objective is to explore researcher’s tools in the virtual world and whether virtual, specifically digital, methods have the consequence of distance, or encourage intimacy between the researcher and the subject(s), the virtual and physical world, and between disciplinary fields.
Purpose/Objective:
This study will push boundaries between two disciplinary fields: anthropology and art history (social sciences and the humanities) through the research of virtual spaces that act as virtual tools for the research. This will be achieved primarily by creating a database and cataloging digital images. As fields are becoming more cross interdisciplinary, the virtual world is becoming the primary space for channeling that exchange of fieldwork, discourse, methods, resources, and theories.
To read more from this paper, email art historian, Madelyne Oliver, at:
madelyne.oliver@yahoo.com
This document summarizes the key findings of a study on the use of microblogging in academic research in Romania. The study found that while microblogging is slowly being adopted by Romanian researchers, there is still some concern about using tools like microblogs and blogs for research. Over 70% of respondents used microblogging for professional communication and collaboration, but less than 25% used it for inquiring or building learning communities. Microblogging provides benefits like collective intelligence and networking, but also disadvantages like privacy/ethics concerns. Overall microblogging is on an upward trend for supporting Romanian research.
The document discusses various strategies for researchers to maximize the impact of their work, including where and how to publish. It addresses choosing journals based on impact factors, open access publishing models, and alternative publication venues. It also covers measuring the impact of published work through metrics like readership, citations, and influence. The overall goal is to help researchers gain visibility, recognition and make the most of disseminating their research findings.
Knowledge or Credit? The (Un)changing Face of Academic Publishing from the Ph...Cornelius Puschmann
Held on 12 March 2012 at the event "Social Science and Digital Research: Interdisciplinary Insights", convened by the Oxford Internet Institute's Oxford eSocial Science Project (OeSS). Program: http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/events/?id=486
What are libraries doing to promote the use of electronic resources? This combination session will use a thorough literature review and a systematic plan to identify which are the most commonly used techniques and marketing strategy, and propose a suite of methods for evaluating and marketing electronic reference resources.
Excerpt:
In academia, technology is progressing rapidly and ‘digitizing’ is the new excitement that gives butterflies to the researcher’s belly. Researchers are uploading and digitizing their fieldwork findings and productions, by uploading photos to databases, creating short films, uploading books onto personal websites, or creating websites for visual consultation of their fieldwork—to name a few virtual tools. But the most interesting aspect arising from this technological progression is the way in which the virtual world is becoming a space, more or less a tool for translation. It is crossing disciplinary fields, and as a result, this overlapping is affecting the methods used in research, even the way we think and work in academia. Academia is becoming more interdisciplinary, pushing the boundaries as the exchange of ideas, methods, discourse, resources, and fieldwork approaches is becoming more fluid. As an art historian trained in the humanities, and an anthropologist trained in the social sciences, I am encountering this daily with my own work, with other undergraduate and graduate students, and even professors, librarians, Image consultants, etc.
Thesis:
The perspective of researching the research is different from selecting a subject or topic that appears foreign, waiting for us researchers to uncover and dissect. But with every relationship, both ends need to be heard. In this sense my primary objective is to explore researcher’s tools in the virtual world and whether virtual, specifically digital, methods have the consequence of distance, or encourage intimacy between the researcher and the subject(s), the virtual and physical world, and between disciplinary fields.
Purpose/Objective:
This study will push boundaries between two disciplinary fields: anthropology and art history (social sciences and the humanities) through the research of virtual spaces that act as virtual tools for the research. This will be achieved primarily by creating a database and cataloging digital images. As fields are becoming more cross interdisciplinary, the virtual world is becoming the primary space for channeling that exchange of fieldwork, discourse, methods, resources, and theories.
To read more from this paper, email art historian, Madelyne Oliver, at:
madelyne.oliver@yahoo.com
Supporting the Patron Research Life CycleLynda Kellam
The document discusses the author giving out their cell phone number to students to better support them throughout the research process.
It begins by showing statistics on increasing interactions between librarians and patrons over recent years. It then contrasts the traditional model of waiting for help at the reference desk with a new model of more proactive and ongoing support.
The author argues that by making themselves available to students outside of in-person meetings, they can help shape better research habits and intervene earlier when students have questions or run into obstacles. The goal is to move students toward an ideal iterative research process rather than leaving them to panic at the last minute.
Confessions of an ex-librarian: research support across divisional bordersReed Elsevier
This document discusses the stages a librarian went through in adapting to changing research needs and environments. It begins with the librarian getting acquainted with new factors like the Research Libraries Consortium project and literature on the evolving research process. The librarian then pursued understanding new modes of research like Mode 2 knowledge production and the triple helix model. This led to a stage of commitment to support the entire research lifecycle. However, disagreements with colleagues on the librarian's role led to a stage of disillusionment. Finally, the librarian reached a stage of finding balance by acknowledging changes, collaborating with stakeholders, and empowering researchers through the correct use of tools.
Supporting research life cycle librariansSherry Lake
The document discusses the role of academic libraries in supporting the research data lifecycle. It notes trends like increasing data regulation and a lack of data management training for researchers. Libraries are well-positioned to help address these challenges due to their expertise in areas like intellectual property, relationship building, and providing access to information. The document outlines how roles like the data research scientist and research data management librarian can help libraries engage with researchers throughout the entire data lifecycle from collection to long-term preservation.
From research life cycle to networks: The role of the libraryCameron Neylon
Google for "research life cycle" and you'll find a million images. Everyone has their own cycle, not all of them compatible. In this talk I argue that we need to move from a cycle conception of research information flows towards one based on networks. The library has the skills and values to act as a professional guide to this terriroty.
Supporting Libraries in Leading the Way in Research Data ManagementMarieke Guy
Marieke Guy, Institutional Support Officer, Digital Curation Centre, UKOLN, University of Bath, UK presents on Supporting Libraries in Leading the Way in Research Data Management at Online Information, London 20th -21st November 2012
African solutions to African problems: the role of research management tools ...Reed Elsevier
Describes SciVal as an efficient tool to find potential research collaborators on the African continent to support the ideology of African solutions to African problems.
Publishing the Full Research Data LifecycleAnita de Waard
This document discusses strategies for supporting open science through the full research cycle and data/software preservation. It outlines current practices for managing, storing, publishing, and reusing research data and software. It proposes improvements like requiring researchers to post datasets to repositories under embargo linked to any subsequent publications to reduce workload, better track outputs, and improve data linking and availability. The goal is to make data sharing and open science practices more seamless and effective.
The document discusses the changing nature of scholarly communication and how researchers are publishing and disseminating their work. It notes that factors like increased research funding, technological advances, and policy changes are influencing researcher behaviors and practices. Researchers are now using more electronic and open access publishing as well as social media and web 2.0 tools to disseminate their work. The document recommends that libraries support these changes by maintaining access to electronic content, providing training and guidance on communication channels and tools, and helping set standards for curation and preservation of scholarly outputs.
The Internet, Science, and Transformations of KnowledgeEric Meyer
Talk on June 7, 2012 in the Harvard SAP Speaker Series (Office of the Senior Associate Provost for the Harvard Library).
http://www.provost.harvard.edu/harvard_library/sap_speakers_series.php
Do Libraries Meet Research 2.0 : collaborative tools and relevance for Resear...Guus van den Brekel
Presentation June 30th 2009 Toulouse at LIBER Conference 2009
http://liber2009.biu-toulouse.fr/
Research Libraries & Web 2.0. Scientists engage in science & research 2.0, libraries should follow, outreach, engage, explore and facilitate etc
Preserving the Inputs and Outputs of Scholarshiptsbbbu
Tim Babbitt discusses the changing context of research and scholarship due to digitization and the internet. The inputs and outputs of research are increasingly digital and complex, including data, code, presentations, and more. ProQuest has a history of preserving scholarship through microfilming and is exploring how to preserve the full range of digital scholarly outputs and their linkages in a sustainable way. Key questions include balancing new and old preservation methods and moving beyond preserving individual objects to also preserving networks and linkages between scholarly works.
The Liber 2009 presentation repeated for a Dutch audience IN Dutch but with the english slides (just the first one is in Dutch :-)
Samenwerking Hogeschool bibliotheken SHB, 5 november 2009
This presentation provides the fundamentals about open access as part of the broader open agenda and locating it within changing scholarly communication and new forms of research dissemination. Adds a developing country perspective.
Presentation at EMTACL10, http://www.ntnu.no/ub/emtacl/
Guus van den Brekel
Central medical library, UMCG
Virtual Research Networks: towards Research 2.0
In the next few years, the further development of social, educational and research networks – with its extensive collaborative possibilities – will be dictating how users will search for, manage and exchange information. The network – evolved by technology – is changing the user's behaviour and that will affect the future of information services. Many envision a possible leading role for libraries in collaboration and community building services.
Users are not only heavily using new tools, but are also creating and shaping their own preferred tools.
Today's students are incorporating Web 2.0 skills in daily life, in their social and learning environments.
Tomorrow's research staff will expect to be able to use their preferred tools and resources within their work environment.
Today's ánd tomorrow's libraries should support students and staff in the learning and research process by integrating library services and resources into their environments.
Scientific Information Integration & Discovery Service: Getting the most rele...Filipe MS Bento
The scientific community is undergoing one of the most dynamic and demanding times of its existence. Never in its history, the community was so extensive, never published as much as today, never the knowledge life cycle was so short. New data, new interpretations, new theories and new members emerge every day: the number of publications is immense and it is not always clear how to construct a search strategy that proves to be effective and efficient, so to obtain relevant and significant information.
It is in this context that a new service is being developed aiming to aggregate significant sets of resources and services that until now were dispersed, powering them with innovative features, some of them a mashup made of data obtained in real time from external services, but more than that, to promote the logic cooperation of users of such resources, whom can take advantage of comments from those have used then before, but also can add value and see the local indexed resources’ social network.
Thus, it advanced the term "Search 4.0" for this new paradigm of search, discovery, access, recommendation and sharing of resources, resulting from a natural social dynamic amongst the four key elements – user, resources, semantic mapping of metadata (several million records indexed locally) and user’s communities (their peers, users with common interests). In full interaction enhanced by the system, these four elements generate a dynamic social network, self-sustainable and with guarantee of future preservation, a social network not only of human actors as of resources themselves taking the role of actors.
This poster exposes some core concepts and solutions adopted for this innovative bibliographic information search system model, where not only the document is the point of reference, but to a new extent, the user himself and all his surroundings.
Open Access: Trends and opportunities from the publisher's perspectiveCaroline Sutton
Presentation given for "Scientific Publishing in Natural History Institutions" meeting sponsored by the European Distributed Institute of Taxonomy (EDIT), 22-23 June 2009, Bratislava, Slovak Republic.
So What is the Real Impact of Web 2.0 on Researcher Workflow? ALISS
So What is the Real Impact of Web 2.0 on Researcher Workflow?
Anna Drabble Head of Digital & Product Development, Emerald.
This paper presents the findings of new research conducted by Emerald and UCL and other partners.
Research communications - Slides for discussionRichard Davis
This document discusses ideas for using research communications like publications, data, blogs, and repositories to showcase researchers' work and impact. It notes that blogs are evolving to contain high-quality scholarship and serve as an alternative to traditional journals that are not widely read. Researchers can use blogs to develop ideas, collaborate with others, and disseminate work more broadly than publications alone. The document recommends using various online platforms and tools to showcase research outputs, collaborate, and increase engagement, visibility, and career opportunities.
OBJECTIVES: Translational research focuses on the bench-to-bedside information transfer process — getting the information from researchers into the hands of clinical decision makers. At the same time, researchers who manage international research collaborations could benefit from increased knowledge and awareness of online collaboration tools to support these projects. Our goal was to support both needs through building awareness and skills with online and social media.
METHODS: The Library developed a curricula targeted specifically to academic researchers focusing on collaboration technologies and online tools to support the research process. The curricula will provide instruction at three levels: gateway, bridge, and mastery tools. The goal of Level One is to persuade researchers of the utility of online social tools. To develop the program, input was solicited from researchers identified as leaders in this area as well as focus groups of students to discover which tools are already being used.
RESULTS: Training is being provided on those tools identified as most likely to engage researchers (Google Docs, Skype, online scheduling, Adobe Connect, citation sharing tools). The curricula is being delivered as workshops duplicated as podcasts and in other online media.
CONCLUSIONS: Online and social media are practical tools for supporting distance collaborations relatively inexpensively while offering the added benefit of placing selected information in online spaces that facilitate discovery and discussion with clinical care providers, thus supporting the fundamental research processes at the same time as promoting bench-to-bedside information transfer.
This document summarizes key aspects of computational research methods and the myExperiment platform. It discusses how myExperiment allows researchers to automate, share, and reuse workflows and other methods. It also addresses challenges around reproducibility, provenance, collaboration, and incentives for sharing methods. MyExperiment provides social features and aims to build a community around openly exchanging and improving computational research techniques.
Supporting the Patron Research Life CycleLynda Kellam
The document discusses the author giving out their cell phone number to students to better support them throughout the research process.
It begins by showing statistics on increasing interactions between librarians and patrons over recent years. It then contrasts the traditional model of waiting for help at the reference desk with a new model of more proactive and ongoing support.
The author argues that by making themselves available to students outside of in-person meetings, they can help shape better research habits and intervene earlier when students have questions or run into obstacles. The goal is to move students toward an ideal iterative research process rather than leaving them to panic at the last minute.
Confessions of an ex-librarian: research support across divisional bordersReed Elsevier
This document discusses the stages a librarian went through in adapting to changing research needs and environments. It begins with the librarian getting acquainted with new factors like the Research Libraries Consortium project and literature on the evolving research process. The librarian then pursued understanding new modes of research like Mode 2 knowledge production and the triple helix model. This led to a stage of commitment to support the entire research lifecycle. However, disagreements with colleagues on the librarian's role led to a stage of disillusionment. Finally, the librarian reached a stage of finding balance by acknowledging changes, collaborating with stakeholders, and empowering researchers through the correct use of tools.
Supporting research life cycle librariansSherry Lake
The document discusses the role of academic libraries in supporting the research data lifecycle. It notes trends like increasing data regulation and a lack of data management training for researchers. Libraries are well-positioned to help address these challenges due to their expertise in areas like intellectual property, relationship building, and providing access to information. The document outlines how roles like the data research scientist and research data management librarian can help libraries engage with researchers throughout the entire data lifecycle from collection to long-term preservation.
From research life cycle to networks: The role of the libraryCameron Neylon
Google for "research life cycle" and you'll find a million images. Everyone has their own cycle, not all of them compatible. In this talk I argue that we need to move from a cycle conception of research information flows towards one based on networks. The library has the skills and values to act as a professional guide to this terriroty.
Supporting Libraries in Leading the Way in Research Data ManagementMarieke Guy
Marieke Guy, Institutional Support Officer, Digital Curation Centre, UKOLN, University of Bath, UK presents on Supporting Libraries in Leading the Way in Research Data Management at Online Information, London 20th -21st November 2012
African solutions to African problems: the role of research management tools ...Reed Elsevier
Describes SciVal as an efficient tool to find potential research collaborators on the African continent to support the ideology of African solutions to African problems.
Publishing the Full Research Data LifecycleAnita de Waard
This document discusses strategies for supporting open science through the full research cycle and data/software preservation. It outlines current practices for managing, storing, publishing, and reusing research data and software. It proposes improvements like requiring researchers to post datasets to repositories under embargo linked to any subsequent publications to reduce workload, better track outputs, and improve data linking and availability. The goal is to make data sharing and open science practices more seamless and effective.
The document discusses the changing nature of scholarly communication and how researchers are publishing and disseminating their work. It notes that factors like increased research funding, technological advances, and policy changes are influencing researcher behaviors and practices. Researchers are now using more electronic and open access publishing as well as social media and web 2.0 tools to disseminate their work. The document recommends that libraries support these changes by maintaining access to electronic content, providing training and guidance on communication channels and tools, and helping set standards for curation and preservation of scholarly outputs.
The Internet, Science, and Transformations of KnowledgeEric Meyer
Talk on June 7, 2012 in the Harvard SAP Speaker Series (Office of the Senior Associate Provost for the Harvard Library).
http://www.provost.harvard.edu/harvard_library/sap_speakers_series.php
Do Libraries Meet Research 2.0 : collaborative tools and relevance for Resear...Guus van den Brekel
Presentation June 30th 2009 Toulouse at LIBER Conference 2009
http://liber2009.biu-toulouse.fr/
Research Libraries & Web 2.0. Scientists engage in science & research 2.0, libraries should follow, outreach, engage, explore and facilitate etc
Preserving the Inputs and Outputs of Scholarshiptsbbbu
Tim Babbitt discusses the changing context of research and scholarship due to digitization and the internet. The inputs and outputs of research are increasingly digital and complex, including data, code, presentations, and more. ProQuest has a history of preserving scholarship through microfilming and is exploring how to preserve the full range of digital scholarly outputs and their linkages in a sustainable way. Key questions include balancing new and old preservation methods and moving beyond preserving individual objects to also preserving networks and linkages between scholarly works.
The Liber 2009 presentation repeated for a Dutch audience IN Dutch but with the english slides (just the first one is in Dutch :-)
Samenwerking Hogeschool bibliotheken SHB, 5 november 2009
This presentation provides the fundamentals about open access as part of the broader open agenda and locating it within changing scholarly communication and new forms of research dissemination. Adds a developing country perspective.
Presentation at EMTACL10, http://www.ntnu.no/ub/emtacl/
Guus van den Brekel
Central medical library, UMCG
Virtual Research Networks: towards Research 2.0
In the next few years, the further development of social, educational and research networks – with its extensive collaborative possibilities – will be dictating how users will search for, manage and exchange information. The network – evolved by technology – is changing the user's behaviour and that will affect the future of information services. Many envision a possible leading role for libraries in collaboration and community building services.
Users are not only heavily using new tools, but are also creating and shaping their own preferred tools.
Today's students are incorporating Web 2.0 skills in daily life, in their social and learning environments.
Tomorrow's research staff will expect to be able to use their preferred tools and resources within their work environment.
Today's ánd tomorrow's libraries should support students and staff in the learning and research process by integrating library services and resources into their environments.
Scientific Information Integration & Discovery Service: Getting the most rele...Filipe MS Bento
The scientific community is undergoing one of the most dynamic and demanding times of its existence. Never in its history, the community was so extensive, never published as much as today, never the knowledge life cycle was so short. New data, new interpretations, new theories and new members emerge every day: the number of publications is immense and it is not always clear how to construct a search strategy that proves to be effective and efficient, so to obtain relevant and significant information.
It is in this context that a new service is being developed aiming to aggregate significant sets of resources and services that until now were dispersed, powering them with innovative features, some of them a mashup made of data obtained in real time from external services, but more than that, to promote the logic cooperation of users of such resources, whom can take advantage of comments from those have used then before, but also can add value and see the local indexed resources’ social network.
Thus, it advanced the term "Search 4.0" for this new paradigm of search, discovery, access, recommendation and sharing of resources, resulting from a natural social dynamic amongst the four key elements – user, resources, semantic mapping of metadata (several million records indexed locally) and user’s communities (their peers, users with common interests). In full interaction enhanced by the system, these four elements generate a dynamic social network, self-sustainable and with guarantee of future preservation, a social network not only of human actors as of resources themselves taking the role of actors.
This poster exposes some core concepts and solutions adopted for this innovative bibliographic information search system model, where not only the document is the point of reference, but to a new extent, the user himself and all his surroundings.
Open Access: Trends and opportunities from the publisher's perspectiveCaroline Sutton
Presentation given for "Scientific Publishing in Natural History Institutions" meeting sponsored by the European Distributed Institute of Taxonomy (EDIT), 22-23 June 2009, Bratislava, Slovak Republic.
So What is the Real Impact of Web 2.0 on Researcher Workflow? ALISS
So What is the Real Impact of Web 2.0 on Researcher Workflow?
Anna Drabble Head of Digital & Product Development, Emerald.
This paper presents the findings of new research conducted by Emerald and UCL and other partners.
Research communications - Slides for discussionRichard Davis
This document discusses ideas for using research communications like publications, data, blogs, and repositories to showcase researchers' work and impact. It notes that blogs are evolving to contain high-quality scholarship and serve as an alternative to traditional journals that are not widely read. Researchers can use blogs to develop ideas, collaborate with others, and disseminate work more broadly than publications alone. The document recommends using various online platforms and tools to showcase research outputs, collaborate, and increase engagement, visibility, and career opportunities.
OBJECTIVES: Translational research focuses on the bench-to-bedside information transfer process — getting the information from researchers into the hands of clinical decision makers. At the same time, researchers who manage international research collaborations could benefit from increased knowledge and awareness of online collaboration tools to support these projects. Our goal was to support both needs through building awareness and skills with online and social media.
METHODS: The Library developed a curricula targeted specifically to academic researchers focusing on collaboration technologies and online tools to support the research process. The curricula will provide instruction at three levels: gateway, bridge, and mastery tools. The goal of Level One is to persuade researchers of the utility of online social tools. To develop the program, input was solicited from researchers identified as leaders in this area as well as focus groups of students to discover which tools are already being used.
RESULTS: Training is being provided on those tools identified as most likely to engage researchers (Google Docs, Skype, online scheduling, Adobe Connect, citation sharing tools). The curricula is being delivered as workshops duplicated as podcasts and in other online media.
CONCLUSIONS: Online and social media are practical tools for supporting distance collaborations relatively inexpensively while offering the added benefit of placing selected information in online spaces that facilitate discovery and discussion with clinical care providers, thus supporting the fundamental research processes at the same time as promoting bench-to-bedside information transfer.
This document summarizes key aspects of computational research methods and the myExperiment platform. It discusses how myExperiment allows researchers to automate, share, and reuse workflows and other methods. It also addresses challenges around reproducibility, provenance, collaboration, and incentives for sharing methods. MyExperiment provides social features and aims to build a community around openly exchanging and improving computational research techniques.
e-Research 2.0: Taking the measure of Web 2.0 in e-ResearchEric Meyer
This document discusses how Web 2.0 technologies are enabling new forms of collaborative research known as Science 2.0 or Open Science. It analyzes several examples including GeoVue, a virtual globe for overlaying data; JOVE, a journal publishing platform; science blogging; and The Pynchon Wiki, a collaborative online annotation of a novel. These tools lower barriers to participation and encourage contributions from outside academia. However, challenges include a lack of recognition for contributions and ensuring quality amid more open and diffuse forms of online research.
Metadata and Semantics Research Conference, Manchester, UK 2015
Research Objects: why, what and how,
In practice the exchange, reuse and reproduction of scientific experiments is hard, dependent on bundling and exchanging the experimental methods, computational codes, data, algorithms, workflows and so on along with the narrative. These "Research Objects" are not fixed, just as research is not “finished”: codes fork, data is updated, algorithms are revised, workflows break, service updates are released. Neither should they be viewed just as second-class artifacts tethered to publications, but the focus of research outcomes in their own right: articles clustered around datasets, methods with citation profiles. Many funders and publishers have come to acknowledge this, moving to data sharing policies and provisioning e-infrastructure platforms. Many researchers recognise the importance of working with Research Objects. The term has become widespread. However. What is a Research Object? How do you mint one, exchange one, build a platform to support one, curate one? How do we introduce them in a lightweight way that platform developers can migrate to? What is the practical impact of a Research Object Commons on training, stewardship, scholarship, sharing? How do we address the scholarly and technological debt of making and maintaining Research Objects? Are there any examples
I’ll present our practical experiences of the why, what and how of Research Objects.
Innovations in Scholarly Communication and the Rise of Web 2.0 ScholarshipThomas King
This document discusses how innovations in web technologies like Web 2.0 have changed scholarly communication. It outlines how traditional scholarly practices of conducting research, publishing findings, and disseminating work have been impacted by new collaborative online environments and tools that allow for more open and immediate sharing of ideas. While peer review and rigorous standards remain important, the rise of social media, open access publishing, and new metrics are shifting how research is produced and evaluated.
The Scholar Blogs or Today, Tomorrow: Practices and Perceptions of Value, Imp...Carolyn Hank
The document discusses research into how academic scholars perceive blogging and its preservation. It presents results from questionnaires and interviews with 153 scholar bloggers. Key findings include:
- Blogs are seen as part of scholars' scholarly record when they are publicly available, allow use and exchange, and subject to critical review.
- Blogging improves various aspects of scholarly life like visibility, teaching, and productivity. It also leads to more invitations to present, collaborate, publish, and serve.
- Scholars see themselves and hosting platforms as most responsible and capable of preserving blogs long-term, though preserving blogs is a lower priority than other scholarly works. Personal back-ups and export tools are the main preservation methods.
- Most
Library champions for disability Meeting Notes January 22nd 2021ALISS
The meeting notes summarized the following:
- The Library Champions for Disability meeting was held via Zoom with 22 attendees and chaired by Heather Dawson from LSE Library.
- Attendees shared experiences of helpful resources for supporting students remotely, including RNIB Bookshare, Home Office accessibility posters, and webinars from Daisy Consortium and AbilityNet.
- An update was provided on RNIB Bookshare which has over 650,000 titles and supports over 30,000 students. Introductory webinars on using Bookshare were announced.
- CILIP's plans for launching a new Disability Network in 2021 were introduced, including establishing a chair, committee members, and terms of reference to
Disability- higher education, libraries, teaching and learning bibliography m...ALISS
This document contains abstracts from several sources related to disabilities in higher education, libraries, teaching and learning. The abstracts discuss topics such as:
- Government considerations in the UK to remove the need for assessments for students with dyslexia to receive financial support.
- Experiences of disabled students in Norwegian higher education and barriers they face.
- Inclusion of students with disabilities in South African universities and policies to support their needs.
- Effects of faculty training programs on inclusion of disabled students.
- Tools and guidelines to improve accessibility of online information for disabled users.
- Support services and accommodations preferred by college students with autism spectrum disorder.
- Assessment of quantity, quality and readability of online
The sound of the Crowd: David Tomkins, Bodleian Digital Library ALISS
The document discusses a project called "What's the Score at the Bodleian?" which uses crowd-sourcing to transcribe music scores held in the Bodleian Library, summarizing the progress made over 3 years in transcribing approximately 95% of 40,000 pages and lessons learned around how to best structure the transcription process. It also provides details on how to access the crowd-sourcing site, delivery site for completed transcriptions, related blog, and contact information for the project.
Incorporating student content at city- Diane Bell, City UniversityALISS
The document discusses various ways that City University London Library incorporates student input and content. It describes projects like Read for Research, which allows students to recommend books for the library to purchase. It also discusses using student feedback to help develop resources like a researcher library guide and employability workshops. The library has experimented with crowdsourcing ideas from students for collection development and service design. However, there are challenges to incorporating all student suggestions due to limits on time, money, and other resources.
The British Library conducted a survey of 600 readers in January/February 2015 to understand who uses the reading rooms and how. Key findings include:
1) Most readers were from higher education or conducting professional research. Over half were London-based.
2) Readers primarily used the reading rooms for academic works, research degrees, and personal interest. Printed books and journals remained the most used materials.
3) Dedicated reading rooms for specific disciplines remained important for many readers to have materials and support in one place. However, remote access to electronic resources was the most requested improvement.
4) Compared to 2009 data, certain activities like browsing shelves and using printed indexes were in decline, while use
The minutes from the ALISS AGM on July 1st are summarized. Sally Patalong was re-elected as chair. The committee and finances were reported on. Events from the past year were recapped, including conferences, visits, and workshops. Membership increased slightly from 122 to 130 members. Upcoming activities include a workshop on crowd sourcing and library visits.
Developing digital literacies in undergraduate students: SADL project - ALISS
The SADL project at the London School of Economics aimed to improve undergraduate students' digital literacies. It worked with student ambassadors and four academic departments to develop workshops on topics like research skills, reading, and managing information. Evaluation found the workshops and ambassador role were valuable but needed more structure. The project also highlighted differences between disciplines and challenges of scaling support across the university. Ongoing work focuses on developing peer learning, sustaining student leadership, and gaining departmental buy-in.
A presentation about the British Library News Media services given by Dr Luke McKernan
Lead Curator, News and Moving Image
The British Library. 20th April 2015 for an ALISS visit.
How SCIE supports the information needs of health and social care professionalsALISS
Sue Jardine, Information Specialist, How SCIE supports the information needs of health and social care professionals
Supporting Practitioners in Health and Social Care.
ALISS conference 11th February 2015
Searching systematically: supporting authors of Cochrane reviews. ALISS
This document discusses supporting authors in conducting systematic reviews. It provides an overview of the review process and outlines where an information specialist can provide input, such as developing comprehensive search strategies, running searches across multiple databases, managing retrieved records, and documenting the search process. The review lifecycle typically takes 18 months to 2 years and involves writing a protocol, searching for studies, writing the review, and conducting updates. Maintaining high methodological standards is important to ensure rigorous and transparent reviews.
Speedy professional conversations around learning and teaching in higher educ...ALISS
Speedy professional conversations around learning and teaching in higher education via the brand new tweetchat #LTHEchat
Sue Beckingham, Sheffield Hallam University
Chrissi Nerantzi, Manchester Metropolitan University
Peter Reed, University of Liverpool
Dr David Walker, University of Sussex
Building a Collection of the Historical UK Web for scholarly useALISS
The document discusses the British Library's efforts to build a collection of the historical UK web for scholarly use. It provides details on the library's web archiving program, including that it started in 2003 and now collects UK websites under legal deposit requirements. It also describes the library's strategies for broadly crawling the .uk domain and collecting special collections, and challenges around providing access to comprehensive web archives.
Useful resources for student training and orientationALISS
This document provides a list of resources for training students in information literacy skills. It summarizes various tutorials, modules, and courses available from universities in the UK, Europe, Australia, and the Open University. These resources cover topics like research skills, evaluating information, academic writing, and copyright issues. The document also lists several journals and discussion forums that can help librarians stay up to date with information literacy practices.
Doing something different staff development and workplace learning at Cardiff...ALISS
This document discusses workplace learning initiatives at Cardiff University. It began in 2005 with a pilot job rotation program involving 3 staff pairs rotating roles for 6 weeks. This helped improve skills and relationships. It later expanded to include Do Something Different days, where staff spend a day in another department, and job shadowing. These initiatives aim to help staff learn new skills, build relationships across the university, and increase job satisfaction. They have been popular programs that the document suggests could continue expanding to involve more areas of the university.
Knowledge, skills and reskilling – where does the MSc fit in?ALISS
This document discusses the skills and knowledge needed for information professionals and how an MSc can help develop them. It raises questions about what skills will be needed in the future and how to design an MSc to meet those needs. It also examines the types of skills employers want, such as digital literacy, advocacy, and data management. The document argues that developing professionals requires a lifelong, collaborative process between individuals, educators, employers, and professional associations.
Knowledge, skills and reskilling – where does the MSc fit in?
The Changing nature of scholarly communication: what does this mean for researchers?
1. The changing nature of scholarly
communication
What does this mean for researchers?
Dr. Branwen Hide
August 3rd, 2010
2. Outline
Introduction
Current research practices
Researcher publishing practices
Factors influencing researcher behaviours
Changes in scholarly communications
Conclusions
Recommendations for librarians
Food for thought
3. Basic research life cycle
Development of
research idea
Literature reviews,
archival material, e-mails,
Post-publication face-face meetings, Research
distribution conferences, networking Production
Conferences, seminars, Bench research, field
Personal communications, research,
technical reports, grey conceptualizing
literature, popular literature,
newspapers, grant
applications, networking
Pre-publication
Publication dissemination
Conferences, meetings,
Peer reviewed high departmental seminars,
impact publications personal communications,
(journals or monographs) emails
4. Publication and Dissemination:
Why do researchers publish?
To maximize dissemination to the target
audience
Gain peer esteem
Career rewards
How do researchers publish?
Formal and informal means
Related to disciplinary norms
Including: monographs, journals, conference proceedings
etc.
6. 1. The research landscape
significant increase in research expenditure
increasing emphasis on the demonstration, and
maximization of social and economic returns
from that investment
“the journal article is the currency of research…”
RIN (2010), E-journals and Researchers
7. 100%
Other
90%
Meeting
80%
abstract
70% Editorial
60%
Book review
50%
40% Proceedings
30% Book
chapter
20%
Book
10%
Article
0% Article
2003 2008 2003 2008 2003 2008 2003 2008 2003 2008 2003 2008 2003 2008
Bio-medicine Sciences Engineering Social Humanities Education Total inc.
studies Arts
The raise in the importance of journal articles
RIN (2009), Communicating knowledge: how and why researchers publish and disseminate their findings
9. Web 2.0 tools and resources
web based tools and resources which encourage wide
scale informal dissemination, sharing, collaboration,
and re-purposing of content and innovative ways to
interact with and use these web based platforms.
Ware, M (2003). Web 2.0 and Scholarly Communication
10. Who uses the web and why
A strong belief that web 2.0 tools will:
enable and encourage new forms of research
promote new forms of scholarly communications
drive innovation
Web based tools and resources have been
developed to todate support these ideas
Wide scale usage ?
11. Researchers as generators of knowledge
Using web 2.0 tools to producing, commenting on, and share scholarly
content
Type of Scholarly
Communications
Activity
PhD Research Lecturer
Student Assistant
RIN (2010), If they buid it will they come. Researchers us of web 2.0 tools and resources
12. Researcher as a user of knowledge:
Digital resources as a research tool
Electronic publications
Online databases
Using aggregated Google search data
Using social media to distribute large population-
based surveys
Text mining of existing data bases
and social networking sites
Data mashups
New research areas
http://cyberbrethren.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/web-applications-desktop-software.jpg
13. 3. Policy developments
Grand Challenges Funding cuts
dissemination
Research Assessment Library budget constraints
Public engagement
Knowledge Transfer
Impact
Open access publishing
Quality Assurance
Data management plans Internationalization
Innovation
Data sharing mandates
14. Changes to publication practices
electronic and open access publishing
posting text, slides and images online
add value to publications – dynamic links
new and innovative publishing platforms
data as a publication
social media for the dissemination of
research outputs
15. UKPMC, UKDA, Mendeley, Connotea, Times
Research 2.0 Archives EMBL,H-net.org, Economists online,
Researchgate, Friend Feed
Development of
research idea Ensembl , myExperiment,
Mendeley, Conneta, citeUlike, Literature reviews, online EBI, UKDA
Connotea, Twitter, Omeka, data bases, online archival
ScholarPress, academia.edu, material, online discussions Research
Friendfeed, open humanities Production
press, Researchgate,
EBI, UKDA, UKPMC Text mining, virtual lab
equipment, online-
Publication and analysis, reuse of existing
distribution data
Peer reviewed outputs (E-
journals, e-books, open access
publications), subject specific Friendfeed, Researchgate, UKDA
repositories, Blogs, wikis, academia.edu, arXiv, H-net.org,
online-forums, networking
sites, slideshare, Flicker, Pre-publication
YouTube, institutional dissemination
repositories, reference sharing
sites, subject specific Blogs, wikis, networking sites,
repositories, Society web on-line forums, databases
pages
16. Conclusion
Scholarly communications can not be seen in
isolation
Developments must support technological
and policy initiatives
Developing practises must improve upon
existing research practises
Disciplinary differences
Local support and encouragement is
increasingly important
17. Recommendations for libraries
Maintain and improve access to e-content
Especially for those not working on site
Provide guidance and advice on the different
communication channels
Skills training:
Data management (preservation & curation), IP, copyright and
FoI etc.
Help set standards for curation and preservation
Raise awareness of web 2.0 tools and services
Provide advice, training and encouragement
Publicise examples of successful use and good practice
Both as a vehicle for dissemination but also as a research tool
18. Food for thought
Can social media/web 2.0 tools help researchers
meet policy objectives?
Is everything we need really online?
Is traditional peer review adequate to monitor the
quality of less formal/new outputs?
Is a new system of quality assessment required for
blogs and other social media as well as for data?
Does using online resources affect the way we
interact with our data/primary resources?
19. Dr. Branwen Hide
Liaison and Partnership Officer
Research Information Network
Branwen.hide@rin.ac.uk
www.rin.ac.uk
Editor's Notes
I have been asked to talk about the changing nature of scholarly communications and the implications this has for researchers But I would like approach this in a slightly different manner and look at current researcher practises and talk about the factors that influence researcher behaviour And then examine what the implications are for those within the scholarly communications landscape I hope that when I finish you will understand why I have chosen to approach the topic in this way. As for personal background – I have been working for the RIN for 2 years as the liaison and partnerships officer and prior to the I completed a PhD at Oxford in Biochemistry.
I have just put together a simplified version of a research life cycle to help us identify the basic components of research and to think about how we approach the different steps There is a lot of overlap between the different stages but we tend to still think about and talk about the different stages as discrete steps Might be more accurate in this context to talk about it in simpler terms related to the role of researcher and researchers 1) to generate knowledge 2) to use knowledge Important to bare in mind these 2 different and often conflicting roles when talking about both researcher behaviour and scholarly communications
We know that in general the reasons why researchers publish has not changed very much for the past few years And that the types of out puts they publish has not changed that much either – it is more medium in which they are produced that has changed. What I mean is that researchers still produce journal articles – they are just now more likely to be produced electronically; instead of writing a letter to a journal commenting on a paper you might write a blog – but the principle and the reasoning behind them is the same. But we are all well aware the scholarly communications landscape is changing. So the question is what is instigating these changes?
The perception, and in many cases, the realty that their work is being monitored and assessed has a major influence on how it is communicated And as a result research outputs are becoming increasingly important commodity
As a result starting to see an increase in journal article production in areas that didn’t traditional publish in journals. Such as humanities and education
World wide web User generated content Social media Open research practices Suppercomputing Cloud computing Mobile computing (blackberry and ipad) - Many of these underpin or are a result of web 2.0 technology
Producers of knowledge: dissemination and sharing Users of knowledge: collaborations and re-purposing the definition is not limited to technologies but also includes the changing ways in which individuals and groups produce and communicate information
Over the past few years, there has been a growing increase in the use of the internet within research, and tied to this is the rapid development of new tools and services being launched by commercial players as well as arising from the efforts of research communities, information service providers and knowledge intermediaries such as publishers and conference organizers Researchers and proponents of open research practises report a number of benefits of using these tools and resources: Saves time, enhances collaborations, find new sources of information, enhanced visibility, Given these benefits it is believed that the majority of researchers use or plan to use these tools in the future
Yet depsite the advantages i mentioned before, few researchers are using web 2.0 tools and resouces for dissemination many researchers are reluctant due to fears of being ‘scooped’, missinterpretation of data, copyright and IP issues, and the lack of recognition and reward (RIN 2008).
A number of our reports have highlighted the growing use and reliance of e-journals and online databases One area our report on the us of web 2.0 tools and resources did not examine in detail was the use of these resources as research tools Google Flu - estimate current flu activity around the world in near real-time E-epidemiology - adapting epidemiological data collection to the 21st century Linguistic analysis of myspace and facebook pages Ordnance survey maps Cyberpsychology Asd What is becoming clear is the distinction between the researcher as a producer and as a user of knowledge is becoming blurred.
These initiatives can have a profound effect on researcher behaviour as well as scholarly communications development But as you can see many of these policy initiatives conflict, or more importantly are perceived to conflict, in the eyes of researchers e.g. research assessment and open access/data sharing
To support these policy and technological development we are seeing a number of changes to the scholarly communications landscape This just gives an over view of some of the changes that are occurring As I mentioned previously, the development of new and innovative publishing and searching platform, tools and services being launched by commercial players as well as arising from the research communities, information service providers and knowledge intermediaries such as publishers and conference organizers There is also a move to publish research data, linking information within publications to existing data bases, and enhanced annotation of research outputs Commenting, moderating and rating are also being introduced as new ways of undertaking peer review
Whole research cycle is affect by policy, technology (including) social media and I already mentioned some changes that are happening within the publishing community and touched on peer review, but you can see that there area number of implications for the future of peer review Boundaries are starting to become blurred and there is less of a distinction between producer and user of knowledge
- Disciplinary differences – these used to be much more defined – humanities vs sciences but now we are seeing areas such digital humanities