Making visible the invisible through the analysis of acknowledgements in the humanities

Purpose: Science is subject to a normative structure that includes how the contributions and interactions between scientists are rewarded. Authorship and citations have been the key elements within the reward system of science, whereas acknowledgements, despite being a well-established element in scholarly communication, have not received the same attention. This paper aims to put forward the bearing of acknowledgements in the humanities to bring to the foreground contributions and interactions that, otherwise, would remain invisible through traditional indicators of research performance. Design/methodology/approach: The study provides a comprehensive framework to understanding acknowledgements as part of the reward system with a special focus on its value in the humanities as a reflection of intellectual indebtedness. The distinctive features of research in the humanities are outlined and the role of acknowledgements as a source of contributorship information is reviewed to support these assumptions. Findings: Peer interactive communication is the prevailing support thanked in the acknowledgements of humanities, so the notion of acknowledgements as super-citations can make special sense in this area. Since single-authored papers still predominate as publishing pattern in this domain, the study of acknowledgements might help to understand social interactions and intellectual influences that lie behind a piece of research and are not visible through authorship. Originality/value: Previous works have proposed and explored the prevailing acknowledgement types by domain. This paper focuses on the humanities to show the role of acknowledgements within the reward system and highlight publication patterns and inherent research features which make acknowledgements particularly interesting in the area as reflection of the socio-cognitive structure of research.Comment: 14 page

Acknowledgement Patterns in Research Articles: a Bibliometric Study based on Journal of Natural Rubber Research 1986-1997

Analyses the acknowledgements included in the research articles and short communications published in Journal of Natural Rubber Research (1986-1997) in respect of types, frequency of occurrence, individuals acknowledged, etc. Results indicate that 74% items contain acknowledgements; an average acknowledgement per item is 2.2; the most common type of acknowledgments relates to technical support. Peer interactive communication accounts for 44% of the total acknowledgements. The result of the study substantiates the earlier findings that a small number of individuals are highly acknowledged and the rest are acknowledged infrequently

A quantitative perspective on ethics in large team science

The gradual crowding out of singleton and small team science by large team endeavors is challenging key features of research culture. It is therefore important for the future of scientific practice to reflect upon the individual scientist's ethical responsibilities within teams. To facilitate this reflection we show labor force trends in the US revealing a skewed growth in academic ranks and increased levels of competition for promotion within the system; we analyze teaming trends across disciplines and national borders demonstrating why it is becoming difficult to distribute credit and to avoid conflicts of interest; and we use more than a century of Nobel prize data to show how science is outgrowing its old institutions of singleton awards. Of particular concern within the large team environment is the weakening of the mentor-mentee relation, which undermines the cultivation of virtue ethics across scientific generations. These trends and emerging organizational complexities call for a universal set of behavioral norms that transcend team heterogeneity and hierarchy. To this end, our expository analysis provides a survey of ethical issues in team settings to inform science ethics education and science policy.Comment: 13 pages, 5 figures, 1 table. Keywords: team ethics; team management; team evaluation; science of scienc

Looking at a digital research data archive - Visual interfaces to EASY

In this paper we explore visually the structure of the collection of a digital research data archive in terms of metadata for deposited datasets. We look into the distribution of datasets over different scientific fields; the role of main depositors (persons and institutions) in different fields, and main access choices for the deposited datasets. We argue that visual analytics of metadata of collections can be used in multiple ways: to inform the archive about structure and growth of its collection; to foster collections strategies; and to check metadata consistency. We combine visual analytics and visual enhanced browsing introducing a set of web-based, interactive visual interfaces to the archive's collection. We discuss how text based search combined with visual enhanced browsing enhances data access, navigation, and reuse.Comment: Submitted to the TPDL 201

The metric tide: report of the independent review of the role of metrics in research assessment and management

This report presents the findings and recommendations of the Independent Review of the Role of Metrics in Research Assessment and Management. The review was chaired by Professor James Wilsdon, supported by an independent and multidisciplinary group of experts in scientometrics, research funding, research policy, publishing, university management and administration. This review has gone beyond earlier studies to take a deeper look at potential uses and limitations of research metrics and indicators. It has explored the use of metrics across different disciplines, and assessed their potential contribution to the development of research excellence and impact. It has analysed their role in processes of research assessment, including the next cycle of the Research Excellence Framework (REF). It has considered the changing ways in which universities are using quantitative indicators in their management systems, and the growing power of league tables and rankings. And it has considered the negative or unintended effects of metrics on various aspects of research culture. The report starts by tracing the history of metrics in research management and assessment, in the UK and internationally. It looks at the applicability of metrics within different research cultures, compares the peer review system with metric-based alternatives, and considers what balance might be struck between the two. It charts the development of research management systems within institutions, and examines the effects of the growing use of quantitative indicators on different aspects of research culture, including performance management, equality, diversity, interdisciplinarity, and the ‘gaming’ of assessment systems. The review looks at how different funders are using quantitative indicators, and considers their potential role in research and innovation policy. Finally, it examines the role that metrics played in REF2014, and outlines scenarios for their contribution to future exercises

The Concept of Originality and Creativity in the Humanities, the Social Sciences and the Natural Sciences

The study was conducted to determine how 21 experts in the discipline clusters of humanities, the social sciences and the natural sciences defined originality and creativity in terms of how these concepts are understood and realized in the production of works in their respective disciplines, what related copyright issues emerge related to these concepts, and how these two concepts are related. Through thematic qualitative analysis of in-depth interview data, findings suggest that while there may be converging ideas about originality and creativity among the discipline clusters, the way this concept is operationalized by each discipline significantly vary. The study is deemed useful because apart from clarifying vague notions about original works, the study can serve as reference for legislators in amending the Copyright law, and for law practitioners in contextualizing cases involving original and derivative works, plagiarism and other related concepts. In this connection, the study provides the implications for the evaluation of the originality and creativity in works produced from the various discipline clusters

Collaborative yet independent: Information practices in the physical sciences

In many ways, the physical sciences are at the forefront of using digital tools and methods to work with information and data. However, the fields and disciplines that make up the physical sciences are by no means uniform, and physical scientists find, use, and disseminate information in a variety of ways. This report examines information practices in the physical sciences across seven cases, and demonstrates the richly varied ways in which physical scientists work, collaborate, and share information and data. This report details seven case studies in the physical sciences. For each case, qualitative interviews and focus groups were used to understand the domain. Quantitative data gathered from a survey of participants highlights different information strategies employed across the cases, and identifies important software used for research. Finally, conclusions from across the cases are drawn, and recommendations are made. This report is the third in a series commissioned by the Research Information Network (RIN), each looking at information practices in a specific domain (life sciences, humanities, and physical sciences). The aim is to understand how researchers within a range of disciplines find and use information, and in particular how that has changed with the introduction of new technologies

Acknowledgement Patterns in Research Articles: a Bibliometric Study based on Journal of Natural Rubber Research 1986-1997

Analyses the acknowledgements included in the research articles and short communications published in Journal of Natural Rubber Research (1986-1997) in respect of types, frequency of occurrence, individuals acknowledged, etc. Results indicate that 74% items contain acknowledgements; an average acknowledgement per item is 2.2; the most common type of acknowledgments relates to technical support. Peer interactive communication accounts for 44% of the total acknowledgements. The result of the study substantiates the earlier findings that a small number of individuals are highly acknowledged and the rest are acknowledged infrequently

Authorship, citations, acknowledgments and visibility in social media : symbolic capital in the multifaceted reward system of science

The reward system of science is undergoing significant changes, as traditional indicators compete with initiatives that offer novel means of disseminating and assessing scholarly impact. This paper considers a number of aspects of this reward system, including authorship, citations, acknowledgements, and the growing use of social media platforms by academics, with an eye towards identifying contemporary issues relating to scholarly communication practices, as understood through the perspectives of Bourdieu’s symbolic capital and Merton’s recognition paradigms. This paper posits that, while scientific capital remains the foundation upon which the reward system of science is built, this system is revealing itself to be more and more multifaceted, extremely complex, and facing increasing tension between its traditional means of evaluation and the potential of new indicators in the digital era. The paper presents an extended literature review, as well as recommendations for further considerations and empirical research. A better understanding of the perceptions of academics would be necessary to properly assess the effects of these new indicators on scholarly communication practices and the reward system of science