Cadmore media player playing video MindingTheGapsBibliometricChallengesAtTheMarginsOfTheAcademy
Video Player
Accessibility
Using forms mode, you can utilize keyboard shortcuts to make usability more efficient.
Space bar will play and pause the video. Pressing escape will close all displays and pressing it again will jump to the end of the player.
You can press A to open the Keyboard Shortcut Dialog which also provides an audio description of the player and all of its features.
Language
1x
Play Speed
Adjust Volume
Transcript
Search
Result Count
of
Click to jump to result
Search
Re-center
Segments
Result Count
of
Click to jump to result
Search
Name:
MindingTheGapsBibliometricChallengesAtTheMarginsOfTheAcademy
Description:
MindingTheGapsBibliometricChallengesAtTheMarginsOfTheAcademy
Thumbnail URL:
https://cadmoremediastorage.blob.core.windows.net/0b85a1bf-98ae-446a-a605-fc005ef15d1f/videoscrubberimages/Scrubber_1.jpg
Duration:
T00H34M14S
Embed URL:
https://stream.cadmore.media/player/0b85a1bf-98ae-446a-a605-fc005ef15d1f
Content URL:
https://cadmoreoriginalmedia.blob.core.windows.net/0b85a1bf-98ae-446a-a605-fc005ef15d1f/MindingTheGapsBibliometricChallengesAtTheMarginsOfTheAcademy.mp4?sv=2019-02-02&sr=c&sig=W1ZtLOuNDkR1OyVcaKF7sUeT2eRnkXHL49DuYRFOmMc%3D&st=2024-09-08T22%3A01%3A01Z&se=2024-09-09T00%3A06%3A01Z&sp=r
Upload Date:
2024-03-06T00:00:00.0000000
Transcript:
Language: EN.
Segment:0 .
All right? Yeah thank you for your presence. Your participation is the best Valentine's gift to us. Let me introduce our panelists. While waiting for more people to join us. Simmons she is the librarian for digital communications at the Vanderbilt university, where she is the research support librarian at the Vanderbilt University.
At the start, what you want is the research support librarian at the National Taiwan University. Cliff Anderson is the Director of Digital research at the center of theological inquiry in Princeton, New Jersey. I'm Charlotte Liu, the digital Scholarship special project coordinator and at the Vanderbilt divinity library. OK let's see how. We don't have a lot of attendees.
So I think it's about the same as we're in the presentation. Presentation, so. OK all right. All right. Everyone came over. All right. Our presentation actually was about 50 minutes, so I was set aside 20 to 25 minutes for the discussion. So you can have a break before the next presentation.
Please post your question and comments during the discussion in the chat box or jus feel free to unmute yourself and chime in when the time is right. Oc I don't think we have any posted question during the presentation. Am I right, nettie? Yes, I think you're right. OK I was watching the chat and didn't see any.
OK all right. That's why I think it would be better for me to just, you know, axe all penalties. Some question to avoid the silence. OK we learned from someone's presentation that utilizing our metrics to capture and measured unconventional publications produces more comprehensive and FAIR data collection and analysis outcomes.
Some could you talk more about the opportunities and challenges in the metrics for arts and humanities? Hi, everyone. Can you hear me OK? Yes OK, great. So thank you for the question. As I mentioned in the talk earlier, one of the know, I talked about the publication like briefly, but let's look at it again in more detail from a individuals perspective.
Say, I am a scholar and I'm working on my project, which might take a few years to get published. And then after it is published, others might read views inside my work. However, if someone decides to cite my work because it might again take a few years for them to publish their work, citing lines. I need to wait for years and years to see a citation of my current work.
So from this we know that it means a lot for humanities researchers to capture early reactions and early signs of users of their current and recent works. So yeah, that summarizes my first the first issue I wanted to talk about. So early reactions and early traces is very important. And another opportunity that I wanted to talk about is altmetric and help track a wider range of outputs and a wider range of uses.
So we all in humanities and social sciences, many publications are directed at the general public or specialized constituents, such as practitioners. This is different from all the stem fields, and a wider range of traces can indicate a wider range of engagement and activities around the scholarly works. For instance, readership or use in educational settings or discussion reviews on social media sites, et cetera they can be used by not only scholars but also practitioners, students, even the public.
So it is also very important that altmetric can help track a wider range of uses. The challenges, I would say, is the difficulty of tracking. Tracking the metric traces heavily relies on pids and so far mainly delays impact. So I know now I, Spence and other kids are starting to pick up, which is great.
But overall, the adoption, as we mentioned, as we found in our exploration, it's not very great in the field of humanities. My probably has a lot to say about this based on her experiences collecting the articles for our analysis in the past few years. So tracking is definitely a big theme, a big challenge.
This is my first time to attend the nice class conference and I see the PID has been a lot a theme across many talks today. So I'm really glad to see this issue being talked about, being discussed, being educated. Thank you. Thank you, Salman.
I would like to welcome you to add on if you want to share any thoughts on someone's remarks. OK if not, I'm going to move on to a second question.
Cliff introduced various biometric tools. And aspired to find the most appropriate one for STIs. Cliff Sti decided to use Wikipedia to capture its scholarly outputs. How would it represent that data as a dashboard? Yeah thanks, Charlotte, for the question. And before I answer, I just want to say like it was, this is a wonderful panel to be on because I learned so much myself from Shen meng and you and when she so, you know, I feel like you've given me such a rich set of sources.
Now to think about that. I wish I could do my presentation again, but I guess that's why we do these panels so we learn from each other. But I would say that, you know, this is, I think one of the challenges of using Wikidata right now. The, the primary way that you can query Wikidata and, and collate results and kind of find those linkages between authors and their publications and their journals.
And the networks that are implicitly connecting them is to use a query language called sparkle and that that actually works really well. If you if you know the query language, it's kind of like learning SQL for relational databases, but it's also to some extent a barrier for adoption because I think, you know, many people have tried in the Wikipedia community to make sparkle more accessible, and I think they've done a great job at it.
It's a lot easier to use now through some of the interfaces than it once was. But but, you know, the tools for querying data still are somewhat technical. There is one tool out there that's a kind of a proof of concept, which is called scholar by Daniel meechan, I believe is associated with UV. And that that acts more like how do you please pardon me, how do you spell that?
Scola sc h0lia OK, Thanks. And so, you know, I think that kind of demonstrates that you could build an interface with the kind of APIs that exist in Wikidata. In fact, they've just released a REST API that should make this even easier to do those kind of dashboard like visualizations for you. And I think that's an area that if we get tools that are even more robust, I think intentionally meant as a proof of concept.
And sometimes it's a little bit slow for that reason. But if we get one that's even more robust and kind of builds on that momentum, then I think we're going to fill in an important part of the Scala community, Scala communications ecosystem, beyond just being able to query the data, but being able to visualize it and do benchmarking that you might have with other commercial tools.
Oh, thank you, Simon and merilee for providing the URL for Scalia. I want to share my $0.02. You know, I actually featured several divinity faculties publication on Wikipedia, and after the publications are uploaded, I can bring faculty's attention to Scalia.
And based on my experience working with the Divinity faculty. After I shared the publication data on Scola after their work were collected in wiki data, they may not be satisfied with the number of their publications in represented in Scalia, but they all of them, every single one of them were very pleased with the data visualization offered by Scalia.
So I strongly encourage all of you to give it a try and see how you like their presentation. OK anybody else want to share your thoughts and clubs comments? OK we have a question from Wendy. What so many single authored monographs in the humanities have you made use of AVF and ISB and for personal identifiers?
And what does help much what would it only connect you to easily findable monographs rather than the much harder to find based on my experience book chapters. As in I. I can add a little to that. So I deal with our institutional repository and.
The people in the humanities tend to write books, which means they tend to have LC authorized headings in the Marc records. So those books are generally speaking fairly easy to find. But there are also we have a nice. For a long time. He had a nice standardized form of name and so they aren't using ORCIDs so much, but they do have this other form of name.
But I'm not sure it helps much in any of the analysis you're doing. So I guess that's really what I'm asking is, does this structured name that we've been using so long in the library field actually help you find more of these publications for this type of analysis? Thank you, Wendy, for this quick question.
Based on my wicked data experience, I am pretty sure that we actually count on a live as a identifier when we create a wicked data item for the authors and. I think what actually is crucial for us to identify the author, anybody is anybody. Have anybody. Does anybody have any other feedback?
Maybe Charlotte just to add on to that, that one of the uses of Wikidata. I think it's really important is that it allows you to connect a range of different identifiers which sometimes are pretty overlapping but not always. And so you'll get identifiers from library of congress, but also various national libraries in Europe and elsewhere in the world, as well as, of course by eff, which is doing something similar of course in a different way.
And so given all these identifiers, including to like kind of encyclopedic literature that maybe like the who's who type literature, that's going to be indicating who the scholar is and the provenance of this person in a particular field. All those identifiers, formal and informal, can be collated under wiki data, and that's really helpful in sort of being able to plumb all the different domains in which this person's been active.
And I think that's really a very useful function of Wikidata just to collate all those identifiers. Absolutely thank you, cliff. All right. I'm going to ask you about heard experience on the domain network analysis. Personally, I'm really impressed what various domain network analysis projects that the National Temple University libraries conducted.
I especially appreciate their effort to customize their service for each patron. Oc she. Could you share more details about how your library actually delivers the DNA service? Thank you, sir. Can you hear my voice? Yes OK.
I'm going to help in the business library. And I'm happy to be here to share the experience of the service of our library. And I will give you some details of how to apply for the service in the library and some statistics of our service. Maybe I need to share my screen. If I allow to do that.
Netty, please help. Sorry I was distracted from your shit. Can she shared the screen? Yes, she should be able to. Yes, yes, go ahead. Sorry so I'm going to show my screen. I have some PowerPoint slides. You OK. So we'll see.
Yes OK. So so here is the. So in our library, the DNS service is for the full time faculty right now, which are the limited human resources because we only have four members, including our director.
Since service four to serve more than 2000 cycles in our life and our campus. So we limited the service to the full time faculty. Yes and first step is anyone want to apply our service? They have to fill out online form from Google Docs. And for a third person who wants to discover this domain, we hope to get it by them.
And for colleges or departments. We will conduct an application search for the publication lists for the basis of our analysis. Step we want to clear, clarify the and analyzing the scopes of the scope of the research process by addressing search roots search strategies if needed.
And we always long hope to the faculty to modify the literature state by checking on the list way we set from with the keywords provided to us and to clarify, clarifying the scope of the literature, the set, and we go into the analyzing states.
At this stage, we do a lot of data cleaning like authority, control of authority, authority, controlling of all the keywords. And we may have to obtain 10 the benchmark analysts from colleges or departments if they want to benchmark themselves with other institutes in the world. And final final stage is reporting leverage.
We will deliver the report in the format via the way selected by the applicant, for example, by email or online or physical. And this is a statistic of daily cases which we have conducted from 2018 to 2022 and from beginning at the beginning of the service, I would say these 10 reports there, 10 cases in 2018 was like pilot reports.
And fortunately, we have a constant growth of cases each year because we do some promotion out of our service. And two 2022. We have 158 vinyl records. Let's take a look at the reports by colleagues. So the top three colleagues of 138 reports via resources of agriculture and agriculture products, which occupies 22% of the reports.
And 14, 14, 14% of the reports are from the College of Sciences and also from the College of medicine, and the followed by life science engineer and the social sciences public health. Others like sound research centers and the aesthetes and the liberal arts and management. And if we.
But into the area we can see it. More than 87% of all reports are from science and technology subjects and 12% of them are from humanities and social sciences. The area. Here is the data sources and analyzing them to see.
We use for service. So now we use journal articles and the papers for our types. And the data source it has sources are for collection Scopus insights by the Civil partner I typically explore and highwire citation index. The truth is like a Civil War social Science Network analysis, and that feeds and other tools like Tableau.
Louis and that is full information devices utilizing. Oh, the best. I would like to share the beautiful picture of our library. I was on the staff with him. Well, thank you. Once you.
Thank you for sharing. I again, I have to say that I, I am so impressed. You know, for all the reports I'm talking about 158 reports within four years. And you have very limited staff and you continue to produce. I just hope that, you know, because you mentioned that you'll only offer this kind of service to the full time faculty. I hope that there's no resentment.
You know, I just personally think that, you know, probably more there's more need out there. But unfortunately, we only have very limited resources and time, you know, from staffing and all. So yeah, but it has been very productive for what you have done for now since you, your team embarked on this project.
I also learned a lot from the video sell out and so. Let me tell you, I learned the most because three months ago I didn't know anything about biometrics. I was let me tell you, I'm still is a new kid in town. Just so much for me, to be honest, I neither do I. Of nose the waking side to.
Oh Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah OK. I think I'm going to ask for more questions from the audience. Please feel free to post your question on in the chat box, which is, you know, chime in.
Ideally, we should generate at least one topic, one action plan. Or do you think there's a gap somewhere that a standards project or a recommend or industry recommendation could address? Yeah in your experience or. Maybe some a white paper or an area to further explore. Yeah, that that was what I meant to say.
I think Ideally we should come up with at least one action plan for NASA's involvement after the discussion. But we can. We can wait. Or, in your experience, speakers. Are there areas that you found? Might benefit from a broader understanding across the industry.
Charlotte maybe I can go ahead here, please. I just want to say, I learned from your presentation with Shen meng that. You know, there's some really deep differences that I think are still unexamined between natural social and human humanities, human sciences, and that has to do with the pace of research as well as, I think the kind of institutional setting.
And that leads to this patterns of differences and patterns of co-authorship. And I think both of those are really profound in ways that I don't think we've fully come to terms with yet. You know, I think that it would be very interesting to know, for example, and maybe there have been studies on this. I just don't know them, you know? In scientific literature.
What is sort of the horizon of relevance for the temporal horizon or relevance for literature? So like, does it go like PR people citing literature that's five years old, 10 years old, 15 years old in the humanities. And I know this to a degree because I have a PhD in the humanities. You know, I was regularly citing in my dissertation work not as historical sources. But as contemporary relevant sources, books from the 1940s, thirties, thirties, going back.
These are still important sources that haven't been surpassed. And so in a certain sense, you know, they move slowly. You know, they're collecting reference citations over decades, whereas I would guess that something that in the scientific field hasn't been cited once in like maybe 5 or 10 years is now irrelevant, you know, with exceptions, obviously, but in many cases irrelevant.
I think that needs to really be taken account of. And I think that you're really pointing to this like these traces, these early traces, you know, they indicate something. But we need to kind of give a more explicit framework for how we can sort of indicate that we think this will gather, you know, in importance that will be attested by citations over time. But it may take 10 to 20 years because it really, you know, a scholar needs to make they're increasingly being judged on sort of.
University wide tenure metrics. And if we know that it's going to take a long time for the value of their work to be established in the field, maybe those early indicators become really crucially important. So I feel like this is I don't know, it's a little bit inchoate, but I feel like there's a lot of work to be done here to understand the philosophical differences that underlie these bodies of literature and then how they get expressed in the metrics.
But I'm typing that in cliff. That is a you're right. It's a big one I think in someone's presentation she mentioned about for arts and humanities the. The very unique publication practices that the long publication windows. Let me give you one example.
In Vanderbilt divinity library, we have a special collection called Stephenson cuneiform tablets collection, and we have been collaborating with a faculty and Argentina to have all the tablets transliterated and translated, translated in English and edited. It took her six Plus years to have all the tablets translated.
And recently she published her findings on the tablets on the cuneiform digital library initiative. So that is one example that I can offer. It really shows that for one article, just one simple, one particle. It took her six years to wrap up the project.
And you probably don't see those and, you know, stabbed disciplines. We have a comment from Emily. Choose the entrances in the way. Does customization can also be used to benchmark and serve as potential biases in the more black box repository impact metrics?
interesting. Emily, we probably need your input on the black box quote. Can you give us. Yeah well, I'll try. I'm not going to give you a camera. It's too late at here. Oh, too casual. But I will. I'll be here on audio.
Well, so just thinking in terms of, I don't know, plumb x, I think is, is with Elsevier. And so those are the proprietary ones that are out there. And I do some work with subject headings. So I was really enjoying seeing that. To do some analysis of collection strength for curricula. And I just, I see these dashboards that are out there.
They're coming out from oclc and epsco that are fancy and pretty versions of the same things but can't be customized. And it just really makes me wonder, you know, you can't tell it which fields they're considering and that sort of thing. And so if I see what they're telling me is, you know, account of relevant materials and what I'm getting as a count of relevant materials and what the difference is, is what insights can I get from that, that same logic applied to these specific article level analysis.
Just just comparing what you can do on the raw data to, to what's being done by larger firms who will not give you their business intelligence necessarily. OK thank you. Thank you for the explanation. We have another comment from Merrill. I think this will be the last one. We will take care of because we are running out of time. Oc thank you, Mary.
I think we are really pleased to form the team to tackle the issues on the. The scholarly outputs on humanities and disciplines and. It is where things I know how to use. Thank you. Thank you. I think this is a great comment. All right.
I will say that in the interest of time, we probably need to wrap up our discussion. And I want to thank you all for your intriguing questions and a very insightful presentations. It's such a privilege to have your time and attention. Thank you. Have a nice evening. A good day. Bye bye, Natty.
Segment:0 .
All right? Yeah thank you for your presence. Your participation is the best Valentine's gift to us. Let me introduce our panelists. While waiting for more people to join us. Simmons she is the librarian for digital communications at the Vanderbilt university, where she is the research support librarian at the Vanderbilt University.
At the start, what you want is the research support librarian at the National Taiwan University. Cliff Anderson is the Director of Digital research at the center of theological inquiry in Princeton, New Jersey. I'm Charlotte Liu, the digital Scholarship special project coordinator and at the Vanderbilt divinity library. OK let's see how. We don't have a lot of attendees.
So I think it's about the same as we're in the presentation. Presentation, so. OK all right. All right. Everyone came over. All right. Our presentation actually was about 50 minutes, so I was set aside 20 to 25 minutes for the discussion. So you can have a break before the next presentation.
Please post your question and comments during the discussion in the chat box or jus feel free to unmute yourself and chime in when the time is right. Oc I don't think we have any posted question during the presentation. Am I right, nettie? Yes, I think you're right. OK I was watching the chat and didn't see any.
OK all right. That's why I think it would be better for me to just, you know, axe all penalties. Some question to avoid the silence. OK we learned from someone's presentation that utilizing our metrics to capture and measured unconventional publications produces more comprehensive and FAIR data collection and analysis outcomes.
Some could you talk more about the opportunities and challenges in the metrics for arts and humanities? Hi, everyone. Can you hear me OK? Yes OK, great. So thank you for the question. As I mentioned in the talk earlier, one of the know, I talked about the publication like briefly, but let's look at it again in more detail from a individuals perspective.
Say, I am a scholar and I'm working on my project, which might take a few years to get published. And then after it is published, others might read views inside my work. However, if someone decides to cite my work because it might again take a few years for them to publish their work, citing lines. I need to wait for years and years to see a citation of my current work.
So from this we know that it means a lot for humanities researchers to capture early reactions and early signs of users of their current and recent works. So yeah, that summarizes my first the first issue I wanted to talk about. So early reactions and early traces is very important. And another opportunity that I wanted to talk about is altmetric and help track a wider range of outputs and a wider range of uses.
So we all in humanities and social sciences, many publications are directed at the general public or specialized constituents, such as practitioners. This is different from all the stem fields, and a wider range of traces can indicate a wider range of engagement and activities around the scholarly works. For instance, readership or use in educational settings or discussion reviews on social media sites, et cetera they can be used by not only scholars but also practitioners, students, even the public.
So it is also very important that altmetric can help track a wider range of uses. The challenges, I would say, is the difficulty of tracking. Tracking the metric traces heavily relies on pids and so far mainly delays impact. So I know now I, Spence and other kids are starting to pick up, which is great.
But overall, the adoption, as we mentioned, as we found in our exploration, it's not very great in the field of humanities. My probably has a lot to say about this based on her experiences collecting the articles for our analysis in the past few years. So tracking is definitely a big theme, a big challenge.
This is my first time to attend the nice class conference and I see the PID has been a lot a theme across many talks today. So I'm really glad to see this issue being talked about, being discussed, being educated. Thank you. Thank you, Salman.
I would like to welcome you to add on if you want to share any thoughts on someone's remarks. OK if not, I'm going to move on to a second question.
Cliff introduced various biometric tools. And aspired to find the most appropriate one for STIs. Cliff Sti decided to use Wikipedia to capture its scholarly outputs. How would it represent that data as a dashboard? Yeah thanks, Charlotte, for the question. And before I answer, I just want to say like it was, this is a wonderful panel to be on because I learned so much myself from Shen meng and you and when she so, you know, I feel like you've given me such a rich set of sources.
Now to think about that. I wish I could do my presentation again, but I guess that's why we do these panels so we learn from each other. But I would say that, you know, this is, I think one of the challenges of using Wikidata right now. The, the primary way that you can query Wikidata and, and collate results and kind of find those linkages between authors and their publications and their journals.
And the networks that are implicitly connecting them is to use a query language called sparkle and that that actually works really well. If you if you know the query language, it's kind of like learning SQL for relational databases, but it's also to some extent a barrier for adoption because I think, you know, many people have tried in the Wikipedia community to make sparkle more accessible, and I think they've done a great job at it.
It's a lot easier to use now through some of the interfaces than it once was. But but, you know, the tools for querying data still are somewhat technical. There is one tool out there that's a kind of a proof of concept, which is called scholar by Daniel meechan, I believe is associated with UV. And that that acts more like how do you please pardon me, how do you spell that?
Scola sc h0lia OK, Thanks. And so, you know, I think that kind of demonstrates that you could build an interface with the kind of APIs that exist in Wikidata. In fact, they've just released a REST API that should make this even easier to do those kind of dashboard like visualizations for you. And I think that's an area that if we get tools that are even more robust, I think intentionally meant as a proof of concept.
And sometimes it's a little bit slow for that reason. But if we get one that's even more robust and kind of builds on that momentum, then I think we're going to fill in an important part of the Scala community, Scala communications ecosystem, beyond just being able to query the data, but being able to visualize it and do benchmarking that you might have with other commercial tools.
Oh, thank you, Simon and merilee for providing the URL for Scalia. I want to share my $0.02. You know, I actually featured several divinity faculties publication on Wikipedia, and after the publications are uploaded, I can bring faculty's attention to Scalia.
And based on my experience working with the Divinity faculty. After I shared the publication data on Scola after their work were collected in wiki data, they may not be satisfied with the number of their publications in represented in Scalia, but they all of them, every single one of them were very pleased with the data visualization offered by Scalia.
So I strongly encourage all of you to give it a try and see how you like their presentation. OK anybody else want to share your thoughts and clubs comments? OK we have a question from Wendy. What so many single authored monographs in the humanities have you made use of AVF and ISB and for personal identifiers?
And what does help much what would it only connect you to easily findable monographs rather than the much harder to find based on my experience book chapters. As in I. I can add a little to that. So I deal with our institutional repository and.
The people in the humanities tend to write books, which means they tend to have LC authorized headings in the Marc records. So those books are generally speaking fairly easy to find. But there are also we have a nice. For a long time. He had a nice standardized form of name and so they aren't using ORCIDs so much, but they do have this other form of name.
But I'm not sure it helps much in any of the analysis you're doing. So I guess that's really what I'm asking is, does this structured name that we've been using so long in the library field actually help you find more of these publications for this type of analysis? Thank you, Wendy, for this quick question.
Based on my wicked data experience, I am pretty sure that we actually count on a live as a identifier when we create a wicked data item for the authors and. I think what actually is crucial for us to identify the author, anybody is anybody. Have anybody. Does anybody have any other feedback?
Maybe Charlotte just to add on to that, that one of the uses of Wikidata. I think it's really important is that it allows you to connect a range of different identifiers which sometimes are pretty overlapping but not always. And so you'll get identifiers from library of congress, but also various national libraries in Europe and elsewhere in the world, as well as, of course by eff, which is doing something similar of course in a different way.
And so given all these identifiers, including to like kind of encyclopedic literature that maybe like the who's who type literature, that's going to be indicating who the scholar is and the provenance of this person in a particular field. All those identifiers, formal and informal, can be collated under wiki data, and that's really helpful in sort of being able to plumb all the different domains in which this person's been active.
And I think that's really a very useful function of Wikidata just to collate all those identifiers. Absolutely thank you, cliff. All right. I'm going to ask you about heard experience on the domain network analysis. Personally, I'm really impressed what various domain network analysis projects that the National Temple University libraries conducted.
I especially appreciate their effort to customize their service for each patron. Oc she. Could you share more details about how your library actually delivers the DNA service? Thank you, sir. Can you hear my voice? Yes OK.
I'm going to help in the business library. And I'm happy to be here to share the experience of the service of our library. And I will give you some details of how to apply for the service in the library and some statistics of our service. Maybe I need to share my screen. If I allow to do that.
Netty, please help. Sorry I was distracted from your shit. Can she shared the screen? Yes, she should be able to. Yes, yes, go ahead. Sorry so I'm going to show my screen. I have some PowerPoint slides. You OK. So we'll see.
Yes OK. So so here is the. So in our library, the DNS service is for the full time faculty right now, which are the limited human resources because we only have four members, including our director.
Since service four to serve more than 2000 cycles in our life and our campus. So we limited the service to the full time faculty. Yes and first step is anyone want to apply our service? They have to fill out online form from Google Docs. And for a third person who wants to discover this domain, we hope to get it by them.
And for colleges or departments. We will conduct an application search for the publication lists for the basis of our analysis. Step we want to clear, clarify the and analyzing the scopes of the scope of the research process by addressing search roots search strategies if needed.
And we always long hope to the faculty to modify the literature state by checking on the list way we set from with the keywords provided to us and to clarify, clarifying the scope of the literature, the set, and we go into the analyzing states.
At this stage, we do a lot of data cleaning like authority, control of authority, authority, controlling of all the keywords. And we may have to obtain 10 the benchmark analysts from colleges or departments if they want to benchmark themselves with other institutes in the world. And final final stage is reporting leverage.
We will deliver the report in the format via the way selected by the applicant, for example, by email or online or physical. And this is a statistic of daily cases which we have conducted from 2018 to 2022 and from beginning at the beginning of the service, I would say these 10 reports there, 10 cases in 2018 was like pilot reports.
And fortunately, we have a constant growth of cases each year because we do some promotion out of our service. And two 2022. We have 158 vinyl records. Let's take a look at the reports by colleagues. So the top three colleagues of 138 reports via resources of agriculture and agriculture products, which occupies 22% of the reports.
And 14, 14, 14% of the reports are from the College of Sciences and also from the College of medicine, and the followed by life science engineer and the social sciences public health. Others like sound research centers and the aesthetes and the liberal arts and management. And if we.
But into the area we can see it. More than 87% of all reports are from science and technology subjects and 12% of them are from humanities and social sciences. The area. Here is the data sources and analyzing them to see.
We use for service. So now we use journal articles and the papers for our types. And the data source it has sources are for collection Scopus insights by the Civil partner I typically explore and highwire citation index. The truth is like a Civil War social Science Network analysis, and that feeds and other tools like Tableau.
Louis and that is full information devices utilizing. Oh, the best. I would like to share the beautiful picture of our library. I was on the staff with him. Well, thank you. Once you.
Thank you for sharing. I again, I have to say that I, I am so impressed. You know, for all the reports I'm talking about 158 reports within four years. And you have very limited staff and you continue to produce. I just hope that, you know, because you mentioned that you'll only offer this kind of service to the full time faculty. I hope that there's no resentment.
You know, I just personally think that, you know, probably more there's more need out there. But unfortunately, we only have very limited resources and time, you know, from staffing and all. So yeah, but it has been very productive for what you have done for now since you, your team embarked on this project.
I also learned a lot from the video sell out and so. Let me tell you, I learned the most because three months ago I didn't know anything about biometrics. I was let me tell you, I'm still is a new kid in town. Just so much for me, to be honest, I neither do I. Of nose the waking side to.
Oh Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah OK. I think I'm going to ask for more questions from the audience. Please feel free to post your question on in the chat box, which is, you know, chime in.
Ideally, we should generate at least one topic, one action plan. Or do you think there's a gap somewhere that a standards project or a recommend or industry recommendation could address? Yeah in your experience or. Maybe some a white paper or an area to further explore. Yeah, that that was what I meant to say.
I think Ideally we should come up with at least one action plan for NASA's involvement after the discussion. But we can. We can wait. Or, in your experience, speakers. Are there areas that you found? Might benefit from a broader understanding across the industry.
Charlotte maybe I can go ahead here, please. I just want to say, I learned from your presentation with Shen meng that. You know, there's some really deep differences that I think are still unexamined between natural social and human humanities, human sciences, and that has to do with the pace of research as well as, I think the kind of institutional setting.
And that leads to this patterns of differences and patterns of co-authorship. And I think both of those are really profound in ways that I don't think we've fully come to terms with yet. You know, I think that it would be very interesting to know, for example, and maybe there have been studies on this. I just don't know them, you know? In scientific literature.
What is sort of the horizon of relevance for the temporal horizon or relevance for literature? So like, does it go like PR people citing literature that's five years old, 10 years old, 15 years old in the humanities. And I know this to a degree because I have a PhD in the humanities. You know, I was regularly citing in my dissertation work not as historical sources. But as contemporary relevant sources, books from the 1940s, thirties, thirties, going back.
These are still important sources that haven't been surpassed. And so in a certain sense, you know, they move slowly. You know, they're collecting reference citations over decades, whereas I would guess that something that in the scientific field hasn't been cited once in like maybe 5 or 10 years is now irrelevant, you know, with exceptions, obviously, but in many cases irrelevant.
I think that needs to really be taken account of. And I think that you're really pointing to this like these traces, these early traces, you know, they indicate something. But we need to kind of give a more explicit framework for how we can sort of indicate that we think this will gather, you know, in importance that will be attested by citations over time. But it may take 10 to 20 years because it really, you know, a scholar needs to make they're increasingly being judged on sort of.
University wide tenure metrics. And if we know that it's going to take a long time for the value of their work to be established in the field, maybe those early indicators become really crucially important. So I feel like this is I don't know, it's a little bit inchoate, but I feel like there's a lot of work to be done here to understand the philosophical differences that underlie these bodies of literature and then how they get expressed in the metrics.
But I'm typing that in cliff. That is a you're right. It's a big one I think in someone's presentation she mentioned about for arts and humanities the. The very unique publication practices that the long publication windows. Let me give you one example.
In Vanderbilt divinity library, we have a special collection called Stephenson cuneiform tablets collection, and we have been collaborating with a faculty and Argentina to have all the tablets transliterated and translated, translated in English and edited. It took her six Plus years to have all the tablets translated.
And recently she published her findings on the tablets on the cuneiform digital library initiative. So that is one example that I can offer. It really shows that for one article, just one simple, one particle. It took her six years to wrap up the project.
And you probably don't see those and, you know, stabbed disciplines. We have a comment from Emily. Choose the entrances in the way. Does customization can also be used to benchmark and serve as potential biases in the more black box repository impact metrics?
interesting. Emily, we probably need your input on the black box quote. Can you give us. Yeah well, I'll try. I'm not going to give you a camera. It's too late at here. Oh, too casual. But I will. I'll be here on audio.
Well, so just thinking in terms of, I don't know, plumb x, I think is, is with Elsevier. And so those are the proprietary ones that are out there. And I do some work with subject headings. So I was really enjoying seeing that. To do some analysis of collection strength for curricula. And I just, I see these dashboards that are out there.
They're coming out from oclc and epsco that are fancy and pretty versions of the same things but can't be customized. And it just really makes me wonder, you know, you can't tell it which fields they're considering and that sort of thing. And so if I see what they're telling me is, you know, account of relevant materials and what I'm getting as a count of relevant materials and what the difference is, is what insights can I get from that, that same logic applied to these specific article level analysis.
Just just comparing what you can do on the raw data to, to what's being done by larger firms who will not give you their business intelligence necessarily. OK thank you. Thank you for the explanation. We have another comment from Merrill. I think this will be the last one. We will take care of because we are running out of time. Oc thank you, Mary.
I think we are really pleased to form the team to tackle the issues on the. The scholarly outputs on humanities and disciplines and. It is where things I know how to use. Thank you. Thank you. I think this is a great comment. All right.
I will say that in the interest of time, we probably need to wrap up our discussion. And I want to thank you all for your intriguing questions and a very insightful presentations. It's such a privilege to have your time and attention. Thank you. Have a nice evening. A good day. Bye bye, Natty.
Form Title Download
Transcript
Form Title Bookmark
Entire Media
Segment(s)
Custom Clip
Start At:
End At:
Form Title Share
Entire Media
Segment(s)
Custom Clip
Start At:
End At:
Form Title Accessibility and Keyboard Shortcuts
The cadmore media player is a professional video and audio player experience designed to deliver media as well as relevant transcript, segmentation, and metadata. On the screen is a traditional html video player with buttons such as play, pause, forward, captioning, language and play speed selection and more. Adjacent to the video player are generally tabs, one of which shows a scrolling transcript of the video and the other shows any segmentation of the media, sometimes referred to as chapters. At the top of the video is a menu bar containing an Explore button and Tools button. The Explore button allows you to dig deeper into the video by opening up an explore dialog which contains tabs for a visual navigation of the video using thumbnails, an about tab which contains rich metadata about the media, a segments tab which contains further information about the video, and a related tab which contains links to other media related to this media. The tools button opens a menu with options for sharing the media on social media, creating bookmarking links, creating embed codes for your website, generating citations, and more.
Keyboard Shortcuts
Keyboard shortcuts only work while you are in forms mode. By entering forms mode, you will be able to quickly access portions of the media player with single key commands.
Spacebar: Play/Pause Toggle
I: Info Menu,
O: Tools Menu
T: Transcript Tab,
S: Segments Tab
F: Forward 15,
R: Rewind 15
L: Languages,
P: Playspeed
M: Mute Toggle,
V: Volume Bar
N: Video Only Toggle,
B: Full Screen Toggle
C: Captions Toggle
Escape: Closes dialogs and menus / Exits Player
Z: Next Transcript Chapter
X: Previous Transcript Chapter
Q: Next Transcript Paragraph
W: Previous Transcript Paragraph
Entire Media
Segment(s)
Custom Clip
Start At:
End At:
Embed Size
-
You Size - Responsive
-
We Size - Responsive
-
Picture Overlay Popup
-
400 x 225
-
512 x 288
-
400 x 700
-
768 x 1024
-
1024 x 512
-
1280 x 608
Form Title Cite
No citation provided.
Info
Segments
Related
Thumbnails
Exit Clip Mode
You have requested to see a portion of the video outside of the clip.
Click OK to switch to the full video or click if you would like to stay inside the clip. You can always go back to the clip with Tools and Clip Mode