1 / 13

RDA-WDS Publishing Data IG Data Bibliometrics Working Group

RDA-WDS Publishing Data IG Data Bibliometrics Working Group. Why do we need Data Bibliometrics ?. Essentially, we need to understand the impact and value of the data being shared and distributed, much like we gather and capture the value of traditional article or journal publishing.

eboyer
Download Presentation

RDA-WDS Publishing Data IG Data Bibliometrics Working Group

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. RDA-WDS Publishing Data IG Data BibliometricsWorking Group

  2. Why do we need Data Bibliometrics? • Essentially, we need to understand the impact and value of the data being shared and distributed, much like we gather and capture the value of traditional article or journal publishing. • Assessment is something that every domain, every researcher, every funder, and every administration is interested in. • The lack of a framework for assessment is a barrier to greater data sharing. There is no answer to the question: “What is in it for me to share my data?”

  3. The Goal of the Data Bibliometrics WG • The overall objective of this working group is to conceptualize data metrics and corresponding services that are suitable for overcoming existing barriers. • These new metrics and services are thus likely to: • Initiate a cultural change among scientists, • Encouraging more and better data citations, • Augmenting the overall availability and quality of research data, • Increasing data discoverability and reuse, • Facilitating the reproducibility of research results.

  4. About the Working Group • Chair(s): Sarah Callaghan, Todd Carpenter, John Kratz, Kerstin Lehnert • Working group members: 63 from more than 20 countries. • Conducted a survey, other data gathering, description of the landscape, and identification of key areas for focus

  5. Summary of Survey of current status/opinions on data bibliometrics What do you currently use to evaluate the impact of data? What is currently missing and/or needs to be created for bibliometrics for data to become widely used? (n-92) 1) Standards 2) Data Citation 3) Consistent use of PIDs/DOIs 4) Culture change/“A belief that they are valid”

  6. Types of metrics

  7. Who these metrics impact?

  8. Comparison of related metrics usage

  9. Endorsements/Adopters • National Information Standards Organization (NISO) • Draft recommendations for new assessment forms • Definitions and use cases document • Assessment for non-traditional outputs, such as research data, software • Data Collection Code of Practice • Group C Draft released on Feb 25, 2016, • Group A Draft due by March 4, 2016 • Group B draft due by March 17, 2016 • Seeking Public comment and reaction to these drafts. • One of the core needs identified by Bibliometric WG survey was the needs for standards in this space.

  10. Endorsements/Adopters • California Digital Library Making Data Count (NSF funded) • Partners: California Digital Library, PLOS, DataONEProject page:mdc.lagotto.ioData-level metrics prototype:dlm.datacite.orgSoftware:github.com/lagotto/lagotto • JISC Giving Researchers Credit for their Data • the early stages of its inception and Phase 1 steps, GRCD relied on evidence produced by the WGs to prove the need for the service • Successful in raising funds for further Phase. • This will enable them to go live in reality, to extend their engagement efforts, and investigate potential to develop the app into a service in its own right

  11. Endorsements/Adopters • CASRAI Dataset Level Metrics Group • Initiating efforts to deliver outputs that support database- and vendor-neutral interoperability of information about research data between repositories, publishers, academic administrators, funding agencies and researchers • Coordinating with NISO Altmetrics B Working group • re3data.org schema Includes properties, at the data repository level, about citationReference, metrics, and citationGuidelineURL

  12. How You Can Endorse • Publishers, data centers, researchers and administrators all need assessment metrics • Most of our outputs are informational resources, but there are some adoptions and implementations. • Contact those specific projects to get engaged

  13. Next Steps and Contact Information • Evolution on the topic of assessment is continuing to evolve and will continue to develop over time. • You can always join and participate in the Data Publishing IG, where the ongoing discussion will continue • For more information: • Kerstin Lehnert - lehnert@ldeo.columbia.edu • John Kratz- johnkratzcdl@gmail.com • Todd Carpenter – tcarpenter@niso.org • Sarah Callaghan - sarah.callaghan@stfc.ac.uk

More Related