Tuesday, August 5, 2014

CDL and CrossRef agreement to benefit EZID’s library publisher clients

Today, August 5, 2014, California Digital Library and CrossRef announced an agreement that opens a route for the library publishers served by CDL’s EZID service (ezid.cdlib.org) to participate in the scholarly communications hub created by CrossRef. EZID’s non-profit publishing clients will be able to submit CrossRef metadata via EZID and then take advantage of CrossRef’s services, including search and discovery, persistent linking, tracking of funding and licensing information, text and data mining, and more. Read the full press release here: http://www.crossref.org/01company/pr/news080514.html

Wednesday, June 4, 2014

DMPToolv2 released: online tool for effective data management plans

Data Management Planning Tool More Responsive to Researchers’ Needs

The University of California and several partners have released a new version of a free tool that helps researchers and their institutions create effective data management plans required by the federal government. 

The DMPTool v2 aids researchers with this critical component of research practice required by agencies such as the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and National Science Foundation (NSF). Under the 2013 Office of Science and Technology Policy directive, this requirement will expand to nearly all federal agencies within the next year.

With funding from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation and the Institute of Museum and Library Services, DMPTool project partners built a tool that guides researchers in creating plans that meet an array of funder requirements and provides embedded assistance and suggestions for successfully completing the plan. Partners creating the second version of the tool include the California Digital Library’s UC Curation Center (UC3), the University of Virginia Library, the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Library, Purdue Libraries, the Smithsonian Institution and DataONE.

“This innovative technology was created by a talented group of colleagues working together,” said Patricia Cruse, Director of UC3. “This highlights the importance of collaboration in the success of complex projects such as this.”

DMPTool v2 was built in response to users’ requests for an array of new features, including increased functionality for plan creators and administrators. Plan creators can now collaborate with colleagues, get institution-specific help and easily share their plans publicly or within their institution. Institutional administrators can easily customize their plans with local branding, templates and assistance tailored to the institutions.

“I'm looking forward to the increased functionality of the latest version of the DMPTool, which will help researchers at my university win more grants,” said Stephanie Wright, data services coordinator for the University of Washington Libraries.  “I’ll also use it to strengthen the relationship with our university’s Office of Sponsored Programs, and advance our conversations on institutional data management policies.”

Use of the DMPTool has grown to 115 institutions that have configured their campus single sign-on or customized the technology for their users. Participating organizations are located across 40 states and the District of Columbia, with California leading nationally with 20 participating organizations.

This press release was issued by UC’s Press Room, June 3, 2014:

Friday, May 30, 2014

Metrics, Identifiers, & Profiles - UC Office of Scholarly Communications

"How should scholarly communications be evaluated? Because scholars’ work varies so widely, it’s impossible to find quantitative measurements that work equally well for everyone, but more and more tools are being developed to provide a broader picture of a work’s relevance and importance in its field and beyond."


"Scholars have long been evaluated based on how many publications they have, and which journals or presses they publish with. Sometimes these journals are ranked or scored with systems like Impact Factors, Eigenfactors, and other journal ranking systems."

Data Citation Formats - online guide


Helpful information on basic data citation, citing dynamic data, deep data citation, and various discipline specific citation.

Prepared by John Krause, UC Curation Center, California Digital Library,University of California 

Article: Data publication consensus and controversies - 2014

Kratz J and Strasser C (2014) Data publication consensus and controversies [v1; ref status: approved with reservations 1, http://f1000r.es/3ag] F1000Research 2014, 3:94 (doi: 10.12688/f1000research.4264)


The movement to bring datasets into the scholarly record as first class research products (validated, preserved, cited, and credited) has been inching forward for some time, but now the pace is quickening. As data publication venues proliferate, significant debate continues over formats, processes, and terminology. Here, we present an overview of data publication initiatives underway and the current conversation, highlighting points of consensus and issues still in contention. Data publication implementations differ in a variety of factors, including the kind of documentation, the location of the documentation relative to the data, and how the data is validated. Publishers may present the data as supplemental material to a journal article, with a descriptive “data paper,” or independently. Complicating the situation, different initiatives and communities use the same terms to refer distinct but overlapping concepts. For instance, the term “published” means that the data is publicly available and citable to virtually everyone, but it may or may not imply that the data has been peer-reviewed. In turn, what is meant by data peer review is far from defined; standards and processes encompass the full range employed in reviewing the literature, plus some novel variations. Basic data citation is a point of consensus, but the general agreement on the core elements of a dataset citation frays if the data is dynamic or part of a larger set. Even as data publication is being defined, some are looking past publication to other metaphors, notably “data as software,” for solutions to the more stubborn problems.

Thursday, May 29, 2014

New OA journal 'Scientific Data' from Nature

Scientific Data

"Scientific Data is an open-access, online-only publication for descriptions of scientifically valuable datasets, and exists to help you publish, discover and reuse research data.

Scientific Data’s main article-type is the Data Descriptor: peer-reviewed, scientific publications that provide an in-depth look at research datasets.

Data Descriptors are a combination of traditional scientific publication content and structured information curated in-house, and are designed to maximize reuse and enable searching, linking and data mining.

Each is peer-reviewed under the supervision of our Editorial Board.

Data Descriptors include detailed descriptions of the methods used to collect the data and technical analyses supporting the quality of the measurements, but do not contain tests of new scientific hypotheses, extensive analyses aimed at providing new scientific insights, or descriptions of fundamentally new scientific methods.

Hosted on nature.com — the home of over 80 journals published by Nature Publishing Group and the destination for millions of scientists globally every month — Data Descriptors are disseminated to the widest possible audience through a programme of continuous online publication.

All accepted Data Descriptors will be published, under an open-access licence selected by the authors, on payment of an article-processing charge (APC) that also includes the data-record curation process."

Scientific Data 1, Article number: 140010 ​doi:10.1038/sdata.2014.10

Tuesday, May 27, 2014

Beyond Bibliometrics - new book from MIT Press

Harnessing Multidimensional Indicators of Scholarly Impact

Beyond Bibliometrics

Harnessing Multidimensional Indicators of Scholarly Impact


Bibliometrics has moved well beyond the mere tracking of bibliographic citations. The web enables new ways to measure scholarly productivity and impact, making available tools and data that can reveal patterns of intellectual activity and impact that were previously invisible: mentions, acknowledgments, endorsements, downloads, recommendations, blog posts, tweets. This book describes recent theoretical and practical advances in metrics-based research, examining a variety of alternative metrics—or “altmetrics"—while also considering the ethical and cultural consequences of relying on metrics to assess the quality of scholarship.
Once the domain of information scientists and mathematicians, bibliometrics is now a fast-growing, multidisciplinary field that ranges from webometrics to scientometrics to influmetrics. The contributors to Beyond Bibliometrics discuss the changing environment of scholarly publishing, the effects of open access and Web 2.0 on genres of discourse, novel analytic methods, and the emergence of next-generation metrics in a performance-conscious age.
Mayur Amin, Judit Bar-Ilan, Johann Bauer, Lutz Bornmann, Benjamin F. Bowman, Kevin W. Boyack, Blaise Cronin, Ronald Day, Nicola De Bellis, Jonathan Furner, Yves Gingras, Stefanie Haustein, Edwin Henneken, Peter A. Hook, Judith Kamalski, Richard Klavans, Kayvan Kousha, Michael Kurtz, Mark Largent, Julia Lane, Vincent Larivière, Loet Leydesdorff, Werner Marx, Katherine W. McCain, Margit Palzenberger, Andrew Plume, Jason Priem, Rebecca Rosen, Hermann Schier, Hadas Shema, Cassidy R. Sugimoto, Mike Thelwall, Daril Vilhena, Jevin West, Paul Wouters

About the Editors

Blaise Cronin is Rudy Professor of Information Science at Indiana University Bloomington. He is the author of The Hand of Science: Academic Writing and Its Rewards.
Cassidy R. Sugimoto is Assistant Professor in the School of Informatics and Computing at Indiana University Bloomington.