Étiquette : scientific practices

Publié le

More than data repositories: perceived information needs for the development of social sciences and humanities research infrastructures

Authors : Anna Sendra, Elina Late, Sanna Kumpulainen

Introduction

The digitalization of social sciences and humanities research necessitates research infrastructures. However, this transformation is still incipient, highlighting the need to better understand how to successfully support data-intensive research.

Method

Starting from a case study of building a national infrastructure for conducting data-intensive research, this study aims to understand the information needs of digital researchers regarding the facility and explore the importance of evaluation in its development.

Analysis

Thirteen semi-structured interviews with social sciences and humanities scholars and computer and data scientists processed through a thematic analysis revealed three themes (developing a research infrastructure, needs and expectations of the research infrastructure, and an approach to user feedback and user interactions).

Results

Findings reveal that developing an infrastructure for conducting data-intensive research is a complicated task influenced by contrasting information needs between social sciences and humanities scholars and computer and data scientists, such as the demand for increased support of the former. Findings also highlight the limited role of evaluation in its creation.

Conclusions

The development of infrastructures for conducting data-intensive research requires further discussion that particularly considers the disciplinary differences between social sciences and humanities scholars and computer and data scientists. Suggestions on how to better design this kind of facilities are also raised.

URL : More than data repositories: perceived information needs for the development of social sciences and humanities research infrastructures

DOI : https://doi.org/10.47989/ir284598

Publié le

Judging Journals: How Impact Factor and Other Metrics Differ across Disciplines

Authors : Quinn Galbraith, Alexandra Carlile Butterfield, Chase Cardon

Given academia’s frequent use of publication metrics and the inconsistencies in metrics across disciplines, this study examines how various disciplines are treated differently by metric systems. We seek to offer academic librarians, university rank and tenure committees, and other interested individuals guidelines for distinguishing general differences between journal bibliometrics in various disciplines.

This study addresses the following questions: How well represented are different disciplines in the indexing of each metrics system (Eigenfactor, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar)? How does each metrics system treat disciplines differently, and how do these differences compare across metrics systems?

For university libraries and academic librarians, this study may increase understanding of the comparative value of various metrics, which hopefully will facilitate more informed decisions regarding the purchase of journal subscriptions and the evaluation of journals and metrics systems.

This study indicates that different metrics systems prioritize different disciplines, and metrics are not always easily compared across disciplines. Consequently, this study indicates that simple reliance on metrics in publishing or purchasing decisions is often flawed.

URL : Judging Journals: How Impact Factor and Other Metrics Differ across Disciplines

DOI : https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.84.6.888

Publié le

Enquête quantitative sur les pratiques et les besoins des chercheurs sur la gestion des données de la recherche, algorithmes et codes sources dans les établissements du site toulousain

Authors : Danielle Brunet, Soraya Demay, Pierre Diaz, Borbala Goncz, Laure Leclerc, Flora Poupinot, Sibilla Michelle

Le Comité de réflexion pour le partage et la valorisation des données de la recherche et la coordination de la Science Ouverte (CéSO) de l’Université de Toulouse a réalisé une enquête quantitative sur la gestion des données de la recherche, algorithmes et codes sources.

Adressée à l’ensemble de la communauté scientifique du site toulousain, son objectif était de produire un état des lieux des pratiques, des connaissances et des besoins des chercheurs en matière de gestion des données de la recherche. Les résultats permettront de préciser l’offre de services proposée sur le site toulousain.

Cette enquête concerne les établissements membres de l’Université de Toulouse ainsi que les organismes de recherche partenaires : Université Toulouse Capitole, Université Toulouse – Jean Jaurès, Université Toulouse III – Paul Sabatier, Institut national polytechnique de Toulouse (Toulouse INP), Institut national des sciences appliquées de Toulouse (INSA Toulouse), Institut supérieur de l’aéronautique et de l’espace (ISAE-SUPAERO), Institut national universitaire Champollion (INU Champollion), École nationale de l’aviation civile (ENAC), École nationale d’ingénieurs de Tarbes (ENIT), École nationale supérieure d’architecture de Toulouse (ENSA Toulouse), École nationale vétérinaire de Toulouse (ENVT), École nationale supérieure de formation de l’enseignement agricole (ENSFEA), Institut catholique d’arts et métiers (ICAM), École nationale supérieure des mines d’Albi-Carmaux (IMT Mines d’Albi), Toulouse Business School (TBS), Centre national d’études spatiales (CNES), Centre national de la recherche scientifique (CNRS), Institut national de recherche pour l’agriculture, l’alimentation et l’environnement (INRAE), Institut national de l’a santé et de la recherche médicale (Inserm), Institut de recherche pour le développement (IRD) ; Office national d’études et de recherche aérospatiales (Onera), Météo-France.

URL : Enquête quantitative sur les pratiques et les besoins des chercheurs sur la gestion des données de la recherche, algorithmes et codes sources dans les établissements du site toulousain

Original location : https://ut3-toulouseinp.hal.science/hal-04262708v1/

Publié le

L’utilisation de HAL par les laboratoires de recherche : Une étude quantitative

Auteur.ice.s/Authors : Joachim Schöpfel, Florence Thiault, Hélène Prost, Bernard Jacquemin, Éric Kergosien

L’article présente les résultats d’une étude menée dans le cadre du projet HAL/LO, sur un échantillon de 1 246 laboratoires (=1 035 612 dépôts) rattachés aux dix grandes universités de recherche et membres de l’association Udice.

L’objectif est une description plus détaillée des pratiques sur HAL. 99 % des laboratoires sont présents sur HAL, avec une distribution du type « longue traîne ». 52 % des publications sont des articles, 23 % des communications. Le degré d’ouverture moyen est 32 % (dépôts avec documents). 50 % des laboratoires ont créé une collection sur HAL.

La discussion porte sur trois aspects : le rôle des laboratoires par rapport à HAL, avec une description plus détaillée de plusieurs situations types ; l’impact des disciplines par rapport au nombre des dépôts, à la création d’une collection, au dépôt de certains types de documents ou à l’auto-archivage des documents en texte intégral ; l’évolution du dispositif HAL vers un outil pour recenser la production scientifique, ce qui pose plusieurs questions notamment sur la provenance et la qualité des métadonnées.

URL : L’utilisation de HAL par les laboratoires de recherche : Une étude quantitative

DOI : https://dx.doi.org/10.35562/balisages.1166

Publié le

Scientific Excellence and Publication Patterns: The Winning Applicants of the Bolyai János Research Scholarship in Hungary in 2021

Authors : Péter Sasvári, Tamás Kaiser, Krisztián Várföldi, Csaba Fási

The following paper examines some of the publishing habits observed among the winning applicants of the Bolyai János Research Scholarship. As an academic support programme, the Bolyai Research Scholarship forms a bridge between scholars with the title of doctor of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (HAS) and the young generation of researchers with an academic degree. The winning applicants in 2021 were researchers under the age of 45, cooperating with international co-authors, having highly cited publications and showing a continuous publication history of 15 years on average.

The scholarship holders come primarily from research centres and universities. The paper argues that the achievements of scholarship holders follow the international patterns of academic excellence and publication as well as the requirements for international cooperation and publishing mainly in open access journals.

In doing so, they prefer journals under the umbrella of Elsevier for performing their publication activities; however, there has been a significant increase in those publishing in MDPI journals, recently. The results show that one-third of the applicants had published before and a fifth of them had published in one of the journals of MDPI two months after announcing the list of the winning applicants.

At the same time, differences in publication traditions and award systems reveal marked differences in publication strategies and evaluation criteria across fields of science. Based on this, the descriptive statistics presented in this paper contribute to our understanding of the conscious career planning of young scholars in line with international standards.

URL : Scientific Excellence and Publication Patterns: The Winning Applicants of the Bolyai János Research Scholarship in Hungary in 2021

DOI : https://doi.org/10.3390/publications11030043

Publié le

Analytical code sharing practices in biomedical research

Authors : Nitesh Kumar Sharma, Ram Ayyala, Dhrithi Deshpande et al.

Data-driven computational analysis is becoming increasingly important in biomedical research, as the amount of data being generated continues to grow. However, the lack of practices of sharing research outputs, such as data, source code and methods, affects transparency and reproducibility of studies, which are critical to the advancement of science. Many published studies are not reproducible due to insufficient documentation, code, and data being shared.

We conducted a comprehensive analysis of 453 manuscripts published between 2016-2021 and found that 50.1% of them fail to share the analytical code. Even among those that did disclose their code, a vast majority failed to offer additional research outputs, such as data. Furthermore, only one in ten papers organized their code in a structured and reproducible manner. We discovered a significant association between the presence of code availability statements and increased code availability (p=2.71×10−9).

Additionally, a greater proportion of studies conducting secondary analyses were inclined to share their code compared to those conducting primary analyses (p=1.15*10−07). In light of our findings, we propose raising awareness of code sharing practices and taking immediate steps to enhance code availability to improve reproducibility in biomedical research.

By increasing transparency and reproducibility, we can promote scientific rigor, encourage collaboration, and accelerate scientific discoveries. We must prioritize open science practices, including sharing code, data, and other research products, to ensure that biomedical research can be replicated and built upon by others in the scientific community.

URL : Analytical code sharing practices in biomedical research

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1101/2023.07.31.551384

Publié le

Reflecting on motivations: How reasons to publish affect research behaviour in astronomy

Author : Julia Heuritsch

Recent research in the field of reflexive metrics, which analyses the effects of the use of performance indicators on scientific conduct, has studied the emergence and consequences of evaluation gaps in science.

The concept of evaluation gaps captures potential discrepancies between what researchers value about their research, in particular research quality, and what metrics measure. In the language of rational choice theory, an evaluation gap persists if motivational factors arising out of the internal component of an actor’s situation are incongruent with those arising out of the external components.

The aim of this research is therefore to study and compare autonomous and controlled motivations to become an astronomer, to do research in astronomy and to publish scientific papers. This study is based on a comprehensive quantitative survey of academic and non-academic astronomers worldwide with 3509 responses.

By employing verified instruments to measure perceived publication pressure, distributive & procedural justice, overcommitment to work and observation of scientific misconduct, this paper also investigates how these different motivational factors affect research output and behaviour.

I find evidence for an evaluation gap and that controlled motivational factors arising from evaluation procedures based on publication record drives up publication pressure, which, in turn, was found to increase the likelihood of perceived frequency of misbehaviour.

URL : Reflecting on motivations: How reasons to publish affect research behaviour in astronomy

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0281613