Goldsmiths Research Online

Open access online archive of Goldsmiths research output

Launch September 2008

System EPrints

Content Citation only: Details of articles, books, book sections, conference items, creative outputFull text, images, video, sound4,650 items of which 1,500 are full text

Method Self-deposit

Goldsmiths Research Online (GRO)

Facilitates OA green option

Promotes research and supports scholarly communication

Provides research support- Author’s rights- OA journals- Dissemination of research - Citation management (recording, tracking, optimising)- Advice about OA, copyright, publishers and funders policies, self-archiving

Integration with other college systems: REF, staff pages, VLE

Goldsmiths Research Online (GRO)

Goldsmiths Research Online (GRO)

Over 160,000 visitors (Top 10: UK, US, Canada, Australia, Germany, Netherlands, India, Italy, Sweden, France) and 120,000 downloads

Most visited pages -Negus, Keith R.. 2011. Producing Pop: Culture and Conflict in the Popular Music Industry. London: out of print. http://eprints.gold.ac.uk/5453/

-Cassidy, Rebecca. 2009. Zoosex and other relationships with animals. In: Hastings Donnan and Fiona Magowan, eds. Transgressive Sex: subversion and control in erotic encounters. Oxford and New York: Berghahn, pp. 91-112.

Most downloaded texts Bond, Frank W., Hayes, Steven C., Baer, Ruth A., Carpenter, Ken C., Guenole, Nigel, Orcutt, Holly K., Waltz, Tom and Zettle, Robert D.. 2011. Preliminary psychometric properties of the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire – II: A revised measure of psychological flexibility and acceptance. Behavior Therapy, pp. 1-38.

Hill, Elisabeth L.. 2004. Executive dysfunction in autism. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(1), pp. 26-32.

GRO numbers

Measuring Impact under CERIF (Common European Research Information Format

KULTIVATE and KAPTUR

Media Working Group

GRO research projects

Research data worlds

Multispectral imaging combined with remote sensing, Forensic Architecture, Goldsmiths

The importance of looking after research data ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Research councils and fundersRCUK Common Principles on Data Policy:

“The need for a statement on how underlying research material can be accessed iscurrently in place for some, but not all Research Councils. (…) [W]e are extending this policy to all Research Councils.”

Quality of researchThe availability of research data in the public domain allows testing and validation and, hence, ensures and solidifies the quality of research.

Democratising science and the research processProjects such as GalaxyZoo (classification of images of galaxies taken by deep-space telescopes), Old Weather (transcription of Royal Navy ship logs) and Patients Participate (production of lay summaries for PubMed Central papers)

Research data: What we do ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

JISC funded research project on the nature of research data in the arts headed by VADS

SHERPA-LEAP funded project, managed by Goldsmiths, on the description of non-standard deposits in institutional repositories

KAPTURThe nature of research data in arts-based research

White, Laura. 2011. For living, for loving, for loathing... Pollen, France, 4 February - 4 March 2011. [Show/Exhibition]

Walsh, Roxy. 2011. Yellow Girls. Oil and w/c on gesso panel, 250mm x 330mm. In: Second Sex, Galerie Peter Zimmermann, Mannheim, Germany, Jan 14th - Feb 12th 2011. [Show/Exhibition]

Lubna, Arielle Gem and Mabb, David. 2011. Art and Appropriation – when does artistic freedom become copyright infringement?. [Film/Video]

KAPTUR project ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Duration Oct 2011 – Mar 2013

Outcomes| model of best practice for management of research data in the visual arts | research data management policy | pilot system

Project teamVADSGoldsmithsUniversity of the Creative ArtsUniversity of the Arts LondonGlasgow School of Art

Visual arts research data ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Art historian Interviews (sound files and transcripts); notes; collected PDFs of articles; images; printed articles; ephemera; print-outs (e.g. websites)

Fine art researchersNotes; sketches; videos; books; photographs; models; stories; diaries; screen grabs;

DesignerInterviews (sound files and transcripts); notes; photographs; questionnaires; postcards; diaries; stories; emails; videos; workshop notes and data; sketchbooks; workbooks; prototypes; manuals

Cultural probe, Interaction Research Studio, Goldsmiths, 2011.

Provisional findings ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Difficult to distinguish/extract research data from research process

Research data changes shape and form throughout research process

Research data is heterogeneous

Management of research data is situated

Research process encompasses many different practices

Things that could be better ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

“I can’t store my material here because I don't (…) want to have it on the one hard drive on the computer I work at in the office that only works if there’s an accessible server.”

“We want to put a lot of process material on the website (…). What would be nice would be somewhere between the way we are using Dropbox and the way that we use a website so that we can (…) move stuff into a public folder and for that folder to be accessible (…).”

“…how to archive digital material (…) that’s something I don’t really have a strong handle on.”

“We have stacks of flip chart paper with all the different ideas from all the different things, we have email stacks, we have stacks of evidence in bags that people brought, we have about 8 hours of video recording that we are working on gradually.”

STORAGE

INFORMATION

RESOURCES

Defiant Objectsnon-standard research outputs in institutional repositories

Defiant Objects project ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Duration Nov 2011 – Apr 2013

Outcomes| typology of defiant objects| enhanced metadata | decision-making guide| test environment

Project teamTahani NadimBekky Randall

ContributorsULCCIR staff and managersInformation designer (tba)

Felix Gonzalez-Torres, Untitled (public Opinion), 1991, Installation view at the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum, New York. Photo by David Heald

Typology of defiant objects______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

DataFrom researchers, IR staff, IR contents

OutcomesReport, item types

Schedule and disseminationFeb-May 2012; blog; mailing lists

What makes a difficult deposit?

Enhanced metadata ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

DataFrom IR contents, metadata schemas

OutcomesRevised metadata provisions; report

Schedule and disseminationNov 11-Oct 2012; blog; mailing lists

How best to describe defiant objects?

Decision-making guide ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

DataFrom Literature Review, Environmental Assessment,existing guides, designers

OutcomesDecision-making guide

Schedule and disseminationMay 12-Jan 13; blog; mailing lists

How to guide IR staff through deposit?

Test environment______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

DataFrom Literature Review, Environmental Assessment,Analysis & Modelling; Decision-making guide

OutcomesTest environment (Eprints) with revised item types, workflows, metadata fields, controlled vocabularies

Schedule and disseminationOct 12-Jan 13; blog; mailing lists

Embedding in test environ-ment

Provisional findings______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Work/image distinction

Confusion over ‘research output’

Versions & variants

Creator type

Poor metadata guidelines for multimedia items such as software

Descriptive and structural metadata often difficult to distinguish

Libraries and research data ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

“Digital data as the new special collections?” Sayyed Choudhuri, Johns Hopkins University

Research data challenges-Archiving and managing data (curation)-Storage and access-Backup-Preservation-Sharing and re-use-Metadata

What kind of interfaces can combine traditional cataloguing, indexing and organisational skills with the demands of research data management?