bibliometrics and the ref: what do researchers want or need for the future? tim wales, associate...
TRANSCRIPT
BIBLIOMETRICS AND THE REF:WHAT DO RESEARCHERS WANT OR NEED FOR THE FUTURE?
Tim Wales, Associate Director (E-Strategy)Royal Holloway, University of London
13th November 2009
BRIEF BIOPro A&I
Source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/25552808@N04/2847690523/
University College London
King’s College London(former Pharmacy Library)
Source: http:// http://www.flickr.com/photos/albedo/541536327
Source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/25552808@N04/2847690523/
City University
London Business School
Source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ashishaggarwal/2983190165/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dannybull/4017080101/
Open University
Trinity College, Bridgeford University
Source: http:// www.flickr.com/photos/bathintime/3726752408/
Royal Holloway, University of London
REF (BIBLIOMETRIC) UPDATE
Source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/treacle/66010614/
Red card to bibliometrics?
HEFCE Pilot exercise 2008-09 concluded:“...citation information is not sufficiently robust
to be used formulaically or as a primary indicator of quality, but there is consider scope for it to inform and enhance the process of peer review.”
HEFCE Pilot exercise 2008-09 concluded:“...citation information is not sufficiently robust
to be used formulaically or as a primary indicator of quality, but there is consider scope for it to inform and enhance the process of peer review.”
Source: HEFCE (2009b), p.3
More of a yellow card...
Details of citation data use
• Sub-panels decide in advance
• # of citations for each output provided
• With “appropriate benchmarks”
• To “inform and supplement” review
“Robust” citation data UoAs
Medicine Science Engineering
Arts Humanities “others”
Source: HEFCE (2009b), p.3
...with final warning(s)
1. Clear guidelines on using the data robustly to take account of the known limitations and to avoid bias
2. Panels will not make judgements about quality of outputs solely on the basis of citation information; expert information must be applied
3. All submitted outputs will be treated equally, whether or not citation information available
Source: HEFCE (2009b), p.3
1. Clear guidelines on using the data robustly to take account of the known limitations and to avoid bias
2. Panels will not make judgements about quality of outputs solely on the basis of citation information; expert information must be applied
3. All submitted outputs will be treated equally, whether or not citation information available
REF BIBLIOMETRICS PILOT
Methodology
• Thomson Reuters Web of Science and Elsevier Scopus citation data used
• 22 HEIs took part• 35 UoAs from 2008 RAE used
– (Coverage greater than 40% in citation databases)
• Publications between 2001 and 2006 inclusive + citation data to 2007
• 3 data gathering models tested• Journal articles + review papers only
Bibliometric models
1. Publication data by institutional address2. Publication data by staff, all outputs3. Publication data by staff, selected outputs
Model summary
1. Institutional address– Papers assigned to HEIs on basis of author address in
WoS/Scopus– Also assigned to subject categories based on
destination journal
2. Staff, all outputs– All papers by staff submitted to RAE2008 for the
pilot UoAs
3. Staff, selected outputs– 6 most highly cited outputs of staff in 2.
Too ‘burdensome’
Not individual/UoA specific
4
Data gathering issues
a. There were difficulties for some in drawing together data from disparate sources, some of which were not held electronically.
b. Many institutions also found it difficult to comprehensively identify all published research produced by their staff (especially former staff).
c. ...further issues arose due to the need to disambiguate papers written by different people with the same name (especially for larger institutions)
UoA publishing variations
Tend to publish in
conference proceedings?
Source: HEFCE (2009a), p.154
Coverage variations
Source: HEFCE (2009a), p.158(Education 85% not indexed)
WHAT ABOUT RESEARCHERS?
Source: Communicating knowledge, p.17
Journals dominate
Monographs less so
Source: Communicating knowledge, p.18
RAE distorts behaviour
Source: Communicating knowledge, p.34
UK researchers need TLC
• Many researchers are confused by the mixed messages they are receiving as to how best to communicate their findings....
• Funders, learned societies and publishers may also wish to consider whether they might take more of a lead in helping to devise guidelines on good practice [in attribtion & listing of authors]
• Research timescales need to be carefully considered in any arrangements for the assessment of performance.
Source: Communicating knowledge, pp.6-7
RESEARCHERS NEED E-A&IISB research
Power browsers
Source: Tennopir & King, 2008
Printed TOCs,
indices etc
c.75%
Tennopir & King ISB summary
• US scientists increased number of readings (from libraries) via searching & citations
• Broader range of readings thanks to Library subscriptions to online collections
• 80% of articles >10 years found via online searching or citation (links)
• US scientists read many articles for every one that they cite
• Choosing the best article to cite may be subject to peer pressure in the form of choosing more often to cite those that are cited by others.
• Following citation links in e-journal articles may have proportionately more influence on citation behavior than reading behavior
(3 decade analysis)
Digital ISBs
Horizontal information seeking
Viewers
Power browsers
“60% of e-journal users view no more than 3 pages”
“Average time on e-book or e-journal sites: 4-8 mins”
“Power browse horizontally through titles, contents pages and abstracts going for quick wins”
horizontalbouncing
checking
viewing
promiscuous
diverse volatile
Source: CIBER, 2008
Nicholas et al. study
Source: Nicholas et al., 2007
OK, WHAT’S MY POINT?
Given that...
1. The HEFCE Bibliometric pilot found that HEIs had major difficulties in sourcing and providing accurate publication data efficiently
2. There is still a limited need for citation data for REF3. RAE submission trends and external ISB research
indicate an increase in journal article publishing and use across most disciplines
4. Today’s and tomorrow’s researchers value A&I data from libraries to aid power browsing and identifying articles to cite
It follows that...
HEIs and researchers need a REF compliant system that:• contains all of an HEI’s publication data for current and
former staff• Provides citation and benchmarking data for those
UoAs that will be using it in the REF• Harnesses researchers use of Library A&I databases to
good effect• Interfaces with existing bibliographic and web systems,
e.g. OA repository to help promote individual outputs and raise profiles
RESEARCH INFORMATION SYSTEMS(RIS)
The answer?
Source: http://www.flickr.com/photos/roadsidepictures/244926428/
RIS@RHUL
Web of SciencePubMed
etc
Research Managers
Institutional Repository
Importing of bibliographic data
Researchers
Validation of bibliographic data
Submission of research artefacts
Depositing research artefacts
Research Management
System
Library staff
Querying of research output data
HEFCE
HR ID Mgt CMS
Querying
RHUL Systems
Submission of bibliographic data
WWW
Updating researchers’ websites
Grants
REF
RIS products...
PURE
CONVERIS
(Develop in-house solutions such as at University College Dublin)
Assisted HEFCE REF Pilot
Standard RIS A&I data ingest
PURE ISI Web of Science * Scopus * PubMed ArXiv.org DBLP Google Books Google Scholar British Library OCLC WorldCat * ZETOC *
Symplectic
ISI Web of Science * Scopus * PubMed ArXiv.org DBLP Google Books Google Scholar British Library OCLC WorldCat * ZETOC *
* = Institutional subscription required
EVENTS DEAR BOY, EVENTS(Harold Macmillan 1894-1986)
2009 Merger
Royal Holloway St George’s Medical School
Merge..err?
PURE V3 SCREENSHOTSRIS example
Researcher’s view
Import A&I data
Author matching
Full-text/OA archiving
Bibliometric reporting
Citation analysis
Conclusion – Long live A&I
A&I services have a new and vital role to play in HEI REF/general research administration thanks to the new market for RIS– Reduce manual ingest of bibliographic data– Sometimes are the only means of identifying past
HEI research– Facilitate output benchmarking thanks to
controlled vocabularies and added-value metadata
“...one of the publishers joked that given the evidence showing the key role of abstracts in today’s crowded information environment, maybe they should reverse their business model and give full-text away and charge for abstracts. They were only half joking.”
Final thought
Source: Nicholas et al. (2007)
A&Iresearch
References & ThanksCIBER (2008) Information behaviour of the researcher of the future. Available
from: http://tinyurl.com/c377rkHEFCE (2009a) Report on the pilot exercise to develop bibliometric indicators
for the Research Excellence Framework. Available from: http://tinyurl.com/yhru5so
HEFCE (2009b) The Research Excellence Framework: A brief guide to the proposals. Available from: http://tinyurl.com/yljnw44
Nicholas, D., Huntingdon, P. & Jamali, H.R. (2007) The Use, Users, and Role of Abstracts in the Digital Scholarly Environment. Journal of Academic Librarianship Vol.33(4),pp.446-453.
RIN (2009) Communicating knowledge: how and why researchers publish their findings. Available from: http://tinyurl.com/ydumxyt
Tennopir, C. & King, D. (2008) Electronic Journals and Changes in Scholarly Article Seeking and Reading Patterns. D-Lib Magazine, Vol.14(11/12). Available from: http://tinyurl.com/5sd3td
Thanks to Adrian Joyce (Business Analyst, RHUL) for RIS materialPURE screenshots (c) copyright Atira A/S 2009
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nickbush/450151862/