Crossing the hurdle: the determinants of individual scientific performance

An original cross sectional dataset referring to a medium sized Italian university is implemented in order to analyze the determinants of scientific research production at individual level. The dataset includes 942 permanent researchers of various scientific sectors for a three year time span (2008 - 2010). Three different indicators - based on the number of publications or citations - are considered as response variables. The corresponding distributions are highly skewed and display an excess of zero - valued observations. In this setting, the goodness of fit of several Poisson mixture regression models are explored by assuming an extensive set of explanatory variables. As to the personal observable characteristics of the researchers, the results emphasize the age effect and the gender productivity gap, as previously documented by existing studies. Analogously, the analysis confirm that productivity is strongly affected by the publication and citation practices adopted in different scientific disciplines. The empirical evidence on the connection between teaching and research activities suggests that no univocal substitution or complementarity thesis can be claimed: a major teaching load does not affect the odds to be a non-active researcher and does not significantly reduce the number of publications for active researchers. In addition, new evidence emerges on the effect of researchers administrative tasks, which seem to be negatively related with researcher's productivity, and on the composition of departments. Researchers' productivity is apparently enhanced by operating in department filled with more administrative and technical staff, and it is not significantly affected by the composition of the department in terms of senior or junior researchers.Comment: Revised version accepted for publication by Scientometric

Simple identification tools in FishBase

Simple identification tools for fish species were included in the FishBase information system from its inception. Early tools made use of the relational model and characters like fin ray meristics. Soon pictures and drawings were added as a further help, similar to a field guide. Later came the computerization of existing dichotomous keys, again in combination with pictures and other information, and the ability to restrict possible species by country, area, or taxonomic group. Today, www.FishBase.org offers four different ways to identify species. This paper describes these tools with their advantages and disadvantages, and suggests various options for further development. It explores the possibility of a holistic and integrated computeraided strategy

Planning for the Lifecycle Management and Long-Term Preservation of Research Data: A Federated Approach

Outcomes of the grant are archived here.The “data deluge” is a recent but increasingly well-understood phenomenon of scientific and social inquiry. Large-scale research instruments extend our observational power by many orders of magnitude but at the same time generate massive amounts of data. Researchers work feverishly to document and preserve changing or disappearing habitats, cultures, languages, and artifacts resulting in volumes of media in various formats. New software tools mine a growing universe of historical and modern texts and connect the dots in our semantic environment. Libraries, archives, and museums undertake digitization programs creating broad access to unique cultural heritage resources for research. Global-scale research collaborations with hundreds or thousands of participants, drive the creation of massive amounts of data, most of which cannot be recreated if lost. The University of Kansas (KU) Libraries in collaboration with two partners, the Greater Western Library Alliance (GWLA) and the Great Plains Network (GPN), received an IMLS National Leadership Grant designed to leverage collective strengths and create a proposal for a scalable and federated approach to the lifecycle management of research data based on the needs of GPN and GWLA member institutions.Institute for Museum and Library Services LG-51-12-0695-1