What are Researchers Doing? Michael Jubb Research Information Network 3 rd Bloomsbury E-Publishing Conference 26 June 2009.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
April 2010 MRC Data Sharing Policy Peter Dukes Policy Lead – Data Sharing & Preservation.
Advertisements

Scholarly Communications in Flux Michael Jubb Director, Research Information Network Bloomsbury Conference on E-Publishing and E-Publications 29 June 2007.
To share or not to share: how researchers handle data Michael Jubb RIN Fourth Bloomsbury Conference: Valued Resources 24 June 2010.
Assessing Excellence with Impact Ian Diamond ESRC.
The Research Information Landscape: Challenges for Researchers and Service Providers Michael Jubb Director Research Information Network UK Data Archive.
ESDS Qualidata and QUADS Coordination Louise Corti Online Resources Day 15 November 2005, London.
Openness and Impact in Academia Using Social Media Jane Tinkler, LSE Public Policy Group London School of Economics Critical Perspectives on Open-ness.
E.g Act as a positive role model for innovation Question the status quo Keep the focus of contribution on delivering and improving.
A researcher perspective: what they want and how to pay for it Michael Jubb RIN 12 th Fiesole Retreat Leuven 9 April 2010.
6-7 November 03 RELCONF Our Knowledge Sharing Objectives.
ESRC/DfID Poverty Alleviation Conference 9/9/14
Sharing research data: expectations of research funders Nature Publishing Group meeting 14 November 2014 Dave Carr Wellcome Trust
A ‘how to’ guide to measuring your own academic and external impacts Patrick Dunleavy and Jane Tinkler LSE Public Policy Group Investigating Academic Impacts.
Teaching/Learning Strategies to Support Evidence-Based Practice Asoc. prof. Vida Staniuliene Klaipeda State College Dean of Faculty of Health Sciences.
School of Town and Regional Planning Professor Jenny Dixon Presentation to The Geddes Institute PhD Seminar Series 3 November 2005 GETTING PUBLISHED.
December 2008 MRC Data Support Services (DSS) Chris Morris 13 th February 2009 Sharing Research Data: Pioneers, Policies and Protocols The seventh cat.
Analysing university-firm interaction in the SADC countries: An initial overview Glenda Kruss SARUA workshop October 2008.
Getting research into health care practice: General lessons and the case of genetics Sue Dopson Saïd Business School Templeton College.
1 CCLI Proposal Writing Strategies Tim Fossum Program Director Division of Undergraduate Education National Science Foundation Vermont.
Research Methods for Business Students
The meaning of data “publication” Stéphane Goldstein Head of Programmes, RIN Research Data Management Workshop University of Oxford 13 June 2008.
©2007 Prentice Hall Organizational Behavior: An Introduction to Your Life in Organizations Chapter 19 OB is for Life.
Knowledge Management C S R PRABHU BY Deputy Director General
Writing a Research Proposal
1 Beyond the Library: i-Skills for University Administration © Netskills, Quality Internet Training, Newcastle University Partly.
Matching the Communication Needs of Rural Learners to Web 2.0 Tools and Services Sally Reynolds.
Impact, measurement and funding Jane Tinkler RENU RESEARCH EXCELLENCE AND FUNDING 28 APRIL 2015.
Impact assessment framework
1 Behavioural Additionality in Strategic Basic Research ‘New Frontiers in Evaluation’ Vienna, 24 April 2006 Jan Larosse, EC-DG RTD Paul Schreurs, IWT Flanders.
Feasibility Study of a Wiki Collaboration Platform for Systematic Review Eileen Erinoff AHRQ Annual Meeting September 15, 2009.
Research Data Management Services Katherine McNeill Social Sciences Librarians Boot Camp June 1, 2012.
David Carr The Wellcome Trust Data Matters: Wellcome Trust perspective Dryad-UK Meeting 28 April 2010.
Leading Change. THE ROLE OF POLICY IN CHANGE Leading Change – The Role of Policy Drift to Quantitative Compliance- Behavior will focus on whatever is.
Enhancing Practice in Work with Offenders: the Role of Evaluation Jean Hine, De Montfort University.
A focus on student outcomes Key influences on enhancing student outcomes System wide lasting and deep change Knowledge and understanding Capacity and.
Policy development and research behaviour: a funder’s perspective Translation in Healthcare Conference 25 June 2015 Katherine Littler.
Zoe G. Davies Centre for Evidence-Based Conservation University of Birmingham, UK Systematic Review Methodology: a brief summary.
Communications Update J. Odhong’ Communication Specialist, Africa RISING ESA and WA projects Accra, Ghana, 24 – 25 March, 2015.
Scholarly communications Discussion group Linked Data Workshop May 2010.
Integrating Knowledge Translation and Exchange into a grant Maureen Dobbins, RN, PhD SON, January 14, 2013.
What are Researchers Doing? Michael Jubb Research Information Network 3 rd Bloomsbury E-Publishing Conference 26 June 2009.
Student volunteers and the volunteer- involving community organisations vinspiredstudents research.
UKPopNet Workshop 1 Undertaking a Systematic Review Andrew S. Pullin Centre for Evidence-Based Conservation University of Birmingham, UK.
Graduates for the 21 st Century - Perspective from Research Ian Diamond RCUK.
Graduate studies - Master of Pharmacy (MPharm) 1 st and 2 nd cycle integrated, 5 yrs, 10 semesters, 300 ECTS-credits 1 Integrated master's degrees qualifications.
3 rd and 4 th. Learning Outcomes Students should be able to identify, describe and summarize the steps in the research process.
1 Click to edit Master text styles Second level Third level Fourth level Fifth level Administrative Support for Large- Scale Funding Applications – Session.
HEFCE/Higher Education Academy/JISC cc-by-sa (uk2.5) Image source – flickr (cc-by) OER and the Open Agenda Malcolm Read, Executive Secretary, JISC.
Chapter Fourteen Communicating the Research Results and Managing Marketing Research Chapter Fourteen.
Copyright © Allyn & Bacon 2008 Intelligent Consumer Chapter 14 This multimedia product and its contents are protected under copyright law. The following.
Teaching in teams: lessons from systematic review training NCRM Training the Trainers Event 4 th June 2007 Angela Harden and Karen Bird MRS Node EPPI Centre,
Research Information Management: Continuity, Change and Impact Michael Jubb Research Information Network UUK Workshop 5 December 2007.
It’s the data that makes a paper Joerg Heber Executive Editor Nature Communications.
WISER: Teaching Information literacy This session will give an overview of the key concepts and models of information literacy as an important transferable.
1 The project is financed from the European Union funds within the framework of Erasmus+, Key Action 2: Cooperation for innovation and the exchange of.
OA Challenges and expectations: th Sell Meeting, May 22-23rd Florence.
Shaping the Future: A Vision for Learning Disability Nursing United Kingdom Learning Disability Consultant Nurse Network.
ILM Level 3 Award or Certificate in Leadership and Management
To Share or not to Share? Michael Jubb, Director, RIN Dryad Workshop 27 April 2010.
Introduction to Personal Research Strategy and Planning.
Scientists and public communication: A survey of popular science publishing across 15 countries EMA Thematic Conference, Bordeaux March 29-30, 2010 Peter.
The Impact of the Social Sciences Jane
MEASURING RESEARCHERS: FROM RESEARCH PUBLICATIONS AND COMMUNICATION TO RESEARCH EVALUATION Lucie Vavříková 1.
Research and Education in the Digital Age: Background & Theory.
Open Access : Challenging the norm in Academia
The Use of Social Media in Nursing: Pitfalls and Opportunities
Changing Practices… Changing Values
Towards Excellence in Research: Achievements and Visions of
OPEN ACCESS POLICY Larshan Naicker Rhodes University Library
Research in Medical Education
Presentation transcript:

What are Researchers Doing? Michael Jubb Research Information Network 3 rd Bloomsbury E-Publishing Conference 26 June 2009

The Role of Information in Research: a crude model defining a set of research questions, issues or problems identifying relevant existing knowledge accessing, analysing, and evaluating existing knowledge and data designing a methodology for generating new knowledge applying the methodology and discovering new knowledge combining old and new knowledge to answer research questions and to enhance understanding disseminating the outcomes of research in a form that is both sustainable and retrievable

Information in the Research Process gather evaluate create analyse manage transform present and communicate

The Research Process: Animal Genetics

The Research Process: Transgenesis and Embryology

The Research Process: Epidemiology

The Research Process: Neuroscience

The Research Process differs even in apparently similar areas of work, and also between teams………

Composition of Research Groups big science vs small science small teams typical in life sciences amorphous and overlapping associations with other teams “primary research engagements tend to be local” divisions of expertise, labour and knowledge exchange PI/leader, senior researchers/lecturers, associates, computational specialists, postdocs, PhDs, technicians……… dangers of surveys that look at individual responses divorced from context

Different roles and activities: who or where is your information coming from?

Information Access: some generalisations Google lack of concern about limitations range of other sites and databases limited awareness of what is available limited time and “learning costs” find a service you like, and stick with it importance of (very) domain-specific and (highly) specialist services “informal discussion” a key source of information and advice relatively little use of blogs, wikis etc some concerns about barriers to access to full text resistance to requirement to pay multiple platforms an inhibiter to take-up and use even Grid users want to work simply on the desktop

Different roles and activities: types of information being created

Creating information: some points about data a language problem: what do we mean by data and information? most researchers spend much of their time searching for, gathering, organising, and analysing data but producing – and sharing - data is not the primary objective general assumption that data do not have intrinsic meaning until analysed, interpreted, described……. ownership and protection control over knowledge and information data curation/stewardship/management important to researchers only (at best) intermittently belief that only researchers themselves can have the knowledge necessary to curate their data data management plans required by funders, but not much sign of adoption role of publishers?

Data Sharing: Motivations and Constraints evidence of benefits citation esteem and good evaluation explicit rewards altruism reciprocity enhanced visibility cultural/peer pressures opportunities for collaboration, co-authorship easy-to-do no clear benefits/incentives competition; desire to extract maximum value desire for/fear of commercial exploitation access restrictions desired or imposed legal, ethical problems lack of time, funds, expertise sheer size of datasets nowhere to put it

Different roles and activities: who or where will information be shared with and how?

Sharing and disseminating information local altruism and reciprocity sharp distinctions between sharing internally and externally formal and informal sharing/dissemination personal relationships and trust

Where, when and how to publish? key motivation is recognition by peers peer review critically important recognition measured by citation career advancement secondary motivation is maximising dissemination tension between targeting best audience and highest quality journal increasing collaboration more co-authorship significant rise in proportion of multi-authored works between 2003 and 2008 research assessment affects choices signs of increase in productivity small rise in no. of articles per author

Productivity?

Publications by type

Importance of types of output

Importance of professional journals

Importance of monographs

Importance of book chapters

Importance of conference presentations

Citation behaviours

Citation behaviours UK

Interim findings?

Web 2.0?

Futures?

Some tentative conclusions researchers vary by discipline by role discovery and access still present challenges attitudes towards research data are not what funders, employers (and publishers?) think they should be we need to know more about citation behaviour researchers’ views of the importance of different types of output do not always correlate with what and how they publish Web 2.0 and related developments are small scale as yet, but have the potential to take off

Questions? Thanks Michael Jubb