Do data librarians need soft skills or technical skills? Video clips from Frankfurt book fair

Last year I was lucky enough to attend the Frankfurt book fair, and took part in a panel session for Elsevier. They have produced some lovely little video clips, for those of you who weren’t there. Take a look at the clips, listed below: if you have time for just one, then I recommend that you watch Noelle’s summary (clip no. 6).

01 Dr. Heiner Schnelling on his “Library Dream Team

02 Dr. Heiner Schnelling on traditional library skills in the future

03 Jenny Delasalle & Heiner Schnelling on engaging researchers

04 Jenny Delasalle on skills to manage data

05 Claus Grossmann on Elsevier content solutions

06 Noelle Gracy on whether technical skills trump soft skills

Publish then publicise & monitor. Publication is not the end of the process!

Once your journal article or research output has been accepted and published, there are lots of things that you can do to spread the word about it. This blogpost has my own list of the top four ways you could do this (other than putting it on your CV, of course). I also recommend any biologists or visual thinkers to look at:
Lobet, Guillaume (2014): Science Valorisation. figsharehttp://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1057995
Lobet describes the process as “publish: identify yourself: communicate”, and points out useful tools along the way, including recommending that authors identify themselves in ORCID, ResearchGate, Academia.edu, ImpactStory and LinkedIn. (Such services can create a kind of online, public CV and my favourite for researchers is ORCID.) You may also find that your publisher offers advice on ways to publicise your paper further.

PUBLICISE

1) Talk about it! Share your findings formally at a conference. Mention it in conversations with your peers. Include it in your teaching.

2) Tweet about it! If you’re not on Twitter yourself (or even if you are!) then you could ask a colleague to tweet about it for you. A co-author or the journal editor or publisher might tweet about it, or you could approach a University press officer. If you tweet yourself then you could pin the tweet about your latest paper to your profile on Twitter.

3) Open it up! Add your paper to at least one Open Access repository, such as your institutional repository (they might also tweet about it). This way your paper will be available even to those who don’t subsribe to the journal. You can find an OA repository on ROAR or OpenDOAR. Each repository will have its own community of visitors and ways in which to help people discover your content, so you might choose more than one repository: perhaps one for your paper and one for data or other material associated with it. If you put an object into Figshare, for example, it will be assigned a DOI and that will be really handy for getting Altmetrics measures.

4)Be social! Twitter is one way to do this already, of course. but you could also blog about it, on your own blog or perhaps as a guest post for an existing blog with a large audience already. You could put visual content like slides and infographics into Slideshare, and send out an update via LinkedIn. Choose at least one more social media channel of your choice, for each paper.

MONITOR

  1. Watch download stats for your paper, on your publisher’s website. Measuring the success of casual mentions is difficult, but you can often see a spike in download statistics for a paper, after it has been mentioned at a conference.
  2. Watch Twitter analytics: is your tweet about your paper one of your Top Tweets? You can see how many “engagements” a tweet has, i.e., how many clicks, favourites, re-tweets and replies, etc it accrued. If you use a link shortening service, you should also be able to see how many clicks there have been on your link, and where from. (bit.ly is one of many such shortening services.) This is the measure that I value most. If no-one is clicking to look at your content, then perhaps Twitter is not working for you and you could investigate why not or focus on more efficient channels.
  3. Repositories will often offer you stats about downloads, just like your publisher, and either or both may offer you access to an altmetrics tool. Take a look at these to see more information behind the numbers: who is interested and engaged with your work and how can you use this knowledge? Perhaps it will help you to choose which of the other possible social media channels you might use, as this is where there are others in your discipline who are already engaged with your work.

 

Ultimately, you might be interested in citations rather than engagements on Twitter or even webpage visits or downloads for your paper. It’s hard to draw a definite connection between such online activity and citations for journal papers, but I’m pretty sure that no-one is going to cite your paper if they don’t even know it exists, so if this is important to you, then I would say, shout loud!

Ensuring quality and annotating scientific publications. A summary of a Twitter chat

Screenshot of twitter conversation
Tweet tweet!

Last year (yes, I’m slow to blog!), I had a very productive conversation (or couple of conversations) on Twitter with a former colleague & scientist at the University of Warwick, Andrew Marsh, which are worth documenting here as a way to give them a narrative, and to illustrate how Twitter sometimes works.

Back in November 2015, Andrew tweeted to ask who would sign reviews of manuscripts, when reporting on a presentation by Chief Editor of Nature Chemistry,  Stuart Cantrill. I replied on Twitter by asking whether such openness would make the reviewers take more time over their reviews (thereby slowing peer review down). I wondered whether openness would make reviewers less direct and so therefore possibly less helpful as more open to interpretation. Also, whether such open criticisim would drive authors to engage in even more “pre-submission”, informal peer reviewing.

Andrew tells me that, at the original event “a show of hands and brief discussion in the room revealed that PIs or those who peer reviewed manuscripts regularly, declared themselves happy to reveal their identity whereas PhD students or less experienced researchers felt either unsure or uncomfortable in doing so.”

Our next chat was kick-started when Andrew pointed me to a news article from Nature that highlighted a new tool for annotating web pages, Hypothes.is. In our Twitter chat that ensued we considered:

  1. Are such annotations a kind of post-publication peer review? I think that they can work alongside traditional peer review, but as Andrew pointed out, they lack structure so they’re certainly no substitute.
  2. Attribution of such comments is important so that readers would know whose comments they are reading, and also possibly enable tracking of such activity, so that the work could be measured. Integration with ORCID would be a good way to attribute comments. (This is already planned, it seems: Dan Whaley picked up on our chat here!)
  3. Andrew wondered whether tracking of such comments could be done for altmetrics. Altmetric.com responded. Comments on Hypothes.is could signal scholarly attention for the work which they comment on, or indeed attract attention themselves. It takes a certain body of work before measuring comments from such a source becomes valuable, but does measuring itself incentivise researchers to comment? I’m really interested in the latter point: motivation cropped up in an earlier blogpost of mine on peer review. I suspect that researchers will say that measurement does not affect them, but I’m also sure that some of those are well aware of, eg their ResearchGate score!
  4. Such a tool offers a function similar to marginalia and scrawls in library books. Some are helpful shortcuts (left by altruists, or just those who wanted to help their future selves?!), some are rubbish (amusing at their best), and sometimes you recognise the handwriting of an individual who makes useful comments, hence the importance of attribution.
  5. There are also some similarities with social bookmarking and other collaboration tools online, where you can also publish reviews or leave comments on documents and publications.

And who thought that you couldn’t have meaningful conversations on Twitter?! You can also read responses on Twitter to eLife‘s tweet about its piece on the need for open peer review.

The best part of this conversation between Andrew and me on Twitter was the ability to bring in others, by incorporating their Twitter handles. We also picked up on what others were saying, like this tweet about journal citation distributions from Stephen Curry. The worst parts were trying to be succinct when making a point (and wanting to develop some points); feeling a need to collate the many points raised and forgetting to flag people sometimes.

Just as well you can also blog about these things, then!

 

12 reasons scholars might cite: citation motivations

I’m sure I read something similar about this once,  and then couldn’t find it again lately… so here is my quick list of reasons why researchers might cite. It includes “good” and “bad” motivations, and might be useful when considering bibliometric indicators. Feel free to comment on this post and suggest more possible motivations. Or indeed any good sources!

  1. Set own work in context
  2. Pay homage to experts
  3. Give credit to peers
  4. Criticise/correct previous work (own or others)
  5. Signposting under noticed work
  6. Provide further background reading
  7. Lend weight to own claims
  8. Self citations to boost own bibliometric scores and/or signpost own work
  9. Boost citations of others as part of an agreement
  10. Gain favour with journal editor or possible peer reviewers by citing their work
  11. Gain favour by citing other papers in the journal of choice for publication
  12. Demonstrate own wide reading/knowledge

6 advantages of a virtual meeting over a face to face one!

I work from home, so that means that I take part in quite a few virtual meetings. Whether you prefer Skype, Google Hangouts or full video conferencing, there are some advantages to virtual online meetings, as opposed to in person or even teleconferencing. Here is my list of six things that I gain from virtual meetings:

  1. No travel time: you can attend from where you are already
  2. No travel costs (although you might want to invest in some tools)
  3. It’s easy to share your desktop with folks, to show what you mean
  4. You can see faces, so it makes you feel more connected than by teleconferencing
  5. You can video record a meeting for others to watch if they could not attend
  6. Nobody will catch your cold, and you will catch no-one else’s!

Of course, if you turn the video off, or teleconference instead then you can attend a meeting in your PJs and no-one will know. And of course, I have found that there are disadvantages too:

  1. Technology needed requires a little time to install & get familiar/comfortable with (and might cost). For freelancers: different clients may prefer to use different technology!
  2. Internet connections & free tools can sometimes let you down: it’s better to be plugged in than rely on wifi if you’re using VoIP.
  3. In virtual meetings, only one of you can talk at a time: this might be an advantage, of course! But you lose the many “mini” interactions that take place around a larger, in-person meeting, eg pairs of attendees around a table chatting whilst waiting for a meeting to start or the person at the end who asks an extra question in private. So the virtual meeting is less personal and less social than meeting in person.
  4. It doesn’t signal your commitment/interest/availability to your client, so you may have to work extra hard with other forms of communication, to compensate. If you really want to impress someone, then it is better to go and see them in the real world!
  5. There is no travel time but you do need to prepare: plug your camera/speaker/microphone in, sign in to the software, put a smart jacket on, tidy your shelves behind you, silence your mobile phone and turn that washing machine off! You may also need to organise a back-up plan, in case your internet connection fails you.

Sometimes a real meeting is what you need but often, a virtual chat is more efficient and if you live miles away from your client or team then it might be your only realistic option.

What tools do you like to use for meetings, and what advantages do they bring you?

Is this research article any good? Clues when crossing disciplines and asking new contacts.

As a reader, you know whether a journal article is good or not by any number of signs. Within your own field of expertise, you know quality research when you see it: you know, because you have done research yourself and you have read & learnt lots about others’ research. But what about when it’s not in your field of expertise?

Perhaps the most reliable marker of quality is, if the article has been recommended to you by an expert in the field. But if you find something intriguing for yourself that is outside of your usual discipline, how do you know if its any good? It’s a good idea to ask someone for advice, and if you know someone already then great, but if not then there’s a lot you can do for yourself, before you reach out for help, to ensure that you strike a good impression on a new contact.

Librarians teach information skills and we might suggest that you look for such clues as:

  1. relevance: skim the article: is it something that meets your need? – WHAT
  2. the author(s): do you know the name: is it someone whose work you value? If not, what can you quickly find out about them, eg other publications in their name or who funds their work: is there a likely bias to watch out for? – WHO & WHY 
  3. the journal title/publisher: do you already know that they usually publish high quality work? Is it peer reviewed and if so, how rigorously? What about the editorial board: any known names here? Does the journal have an impact factor? Where is it indexed: is it in the place(s) that you perform searches yourself? – WHERE 
  4. date of publication: is it something timely to your need? – WHEN
  5. references/citations: follow some: are they accurate and appropriate? When you skim read the item, is work from others properly attributed & referenced? – WHAT
  6. quality of presentation: is it well written/illustrated? Of course, absolute rubbish can be eloquently presented, and quality research badly written up. But if the creators deemed the output of high enough value for a polished effort, then maybe that’s a clue. – HOW
  7. metrics: has it been cited by an expert? Or by many people? Are many reading & downloading it? Have many tweeted or written about it (altmetrics tools can tell you this)? But you don’t always follow the crowd, do you? If you do, then you might miss a real gem, and isn’t your research a unique contribution?! – WHO

I usually quote Rudyard Kipling at this point:

I keep six honest serving-men
(They taught me all I knew);
Their names are What and Why and When
And How and Where and Who.

So far, so Library school 101. But how do you know if the research within is truly of high quality? If most published research findings are false, as John Ioannides describes, then how do you separate the good from the bad research?

An understanding of the discipline would undoubtedly help, and speed up your evaluation. But you can help yourself further, partly in the way you read the paper. There are some great pieces out there about how to read a scientific paper, eg from Natalia Rodriguez.

As I read something for the first time, I look at whether the article sets itself in the context of existing literature and research: Can you track and understand the connections? The second thing I would look at is the methodology/methods: have the right ones been used? Now this may be especially hard to tell if you’re not an expert in the field, so you have to get familiar with the methodology used in the study, and to think about how it applies to the problem being researched. Maybe coming from outside of the discipline will give you a fresh perspective. You could also consider the other methodologies that might have applied (a part of peer review, for many journals). I like the recommendation from Phil Davis in the Scholarly Kitchen that the methodology chosen for the study should be appropriate or persuasive.

If the chosen methodology just doesn’t make sense to you, then this is a good time to seek out someone with expertise in the discipline, for a further explanation. By now you will have an intelligent question to ask such a contact, and you will be able to demonstrate the depth of your own interest. How do you find a new contact in another discipline? I’ll plug Piirus here, whose blog I manage: it is designed to quickly help researchers find collaborators, so you could seek contacts & reading recommendations through Piirus. And just maybe, one day your fresh perspective and their expertise could lead to a really fruitful collaboration!

Slidedeck introducing information ethics

If you’ve ever wondered what a Masters level module on information ethics might cover, well here’s a taster of some adapted slides from our module, which is part of the Masters degree in Digital Curation from Kings College London and Humboldt University. I think it’s a great way to introduce some of the themes that information professionals come across in their working lives, and students can really explore important issues.

 

Who was at the Frankfurt book fair?

Many international publishersI recently wrote about three particularly German things that I spotted at the Frankfurt book fair, but there was so much there so here is another blogpost full of pictures… Here is a quick run-through of who I spotted at the book fair, with photos!

Of course, the Frankfurt book fair is huge: the exhibition space is much bigger than Online Information, or the UKSG conference, which is the closest thing to it that I’ve attended in the past. And it is more properly called the International Frankfurt Book Fair! Some international publishers were to be found in the halls for their country, where you could hear their language being spoken all around, whilst others were scattered in other halls matching their content rather than their nation, like this one in the academic publishing hall.

Specialist book publishers
Specialist book publishers

There was a great deal of variety of types of book represented at the fair, and all things book related. Those seeking something special could find beautiful facsimiles, or antique works, but the section of the fair dedicated to antiquities was guarded by extra security: you had to leave coats and bags behind to go in, so I didn’t: after all, I’m not in a position to invest in or be guardian of such treasures, and there was so much else to see.

Another area of the fair that had extra security was a hall that was apparently new for this year, where literary agents gathered for pre-booked meetings only. I wonder what was going on behind those screens? Agents selling books to publishers and negotiating terms, I imagine. The whole fair has the atmosphere of high-stakes deals, and people going about important business, not just in the exhibition halls but all around the site. There were publishers doing deals with libraries and bookshops, and technology providers with services for the publishers or with products for readers directly. There were education tool providers, and also companies who sell all the extras that you can find in bookshops like stationery and gifts: many of these stalls were making individual item sales at the book fair, too, so you could pick up a present for your loved ones.

Not just books: gift providers, too
Not just books: gift providers, too

I spent most of my time in the hall for scientific and academic publishing, but I did walk through other halls, and spotted many art publishers and stalls for children’s books and comic books which had some highly creative and attractive displays: these were really inspiring and made me feel proud to be a part of this information world, with just a little pang of regret that the academic world is so much less aesthetic and so much more serious looking! Ah well, the academic information world is full of really interesting challenges, and I was really pleased to see that a German Library school was amongst the stalls in the education area, recruiting students to degree programmes in librarianship and information science.

Publishers of children's books
Publishers of children’s books

There was so much to see, across so many different enormous conference halls that it was quite possible to be lost in the indoors world of the exhibition centre, and to forget the world outside… sometimes it seemed as though the whole world was at the Frankfurt book fair!

 

A rare glimpse of the outside world, from within the Exhibition centre at Frankfurt.
A rare glimpse of the outside world, from within the Exhibition centre at Frankfurt.

 

 

Three especially German things at the Frankfurt book fair.

The Gutenberg Press Museum
The Gutenberg Press Museum

October is always the busiest month of the year, somehow… and, as usual, I am catching up now that it’s November. This year I am full of things to write about, most especially from the Frankfurt book fair, where I was lucky enough to be a panellist on a Hot Spot stage. This post is about all things I spotted at the book fair, which I found to be connected to Germany. 1. The Gutenberg press was represented by its museum, and you could see items being printed at the fair itself.

2. Porsche museum. Another museum proudly signposted the best of Germany, in this case its strength in car manufacturing.

Porsche museum
Porsche museum

Porsche not only make cars, but are also publishers and indeed a fashion company, as I found out at the Frankfurt airport shopping mall!

Helpful students who speak good English!
Helpful students who speak good English!

3. BID, the professional society for German Libraries & Libriarians. They are a kind of equivalent to the UK’s CILIP, properly called “BID – Bibliothek & Information Deutschland”. They were represented by two stalls at the fair: one for the main organisation, and one for a group called LIS. At both of these stalls I spoke to students from the Hamburg University of Applied Sciences: they had also attended the morning panel discussion, being students of my fellow panellist, Dr. Petra Düren. They also spoke excellent English and were good advocates for their professional association!

Familiar faces!
Familiar brands!

I know that there was a lot more of Germany there for those who sought it: there was German apple wine to sample at one of the stalls, and plenty of German beer around, but I didn’t quite make it… I was busy being distracted by all the other people who were at the Frankfurt book fair. People like Open Athens, who I had a nice chat to about how students at the universities I worked at in the UK would often rave about all the information they found “on Athens”. What the students really meant, of course, was the resources that the library subscribed to for them, and which they authenticated to, using OpenAthens!

More soon about all the other people I spotted at the Frankfurt book fair, in my next blogpost…

After the Frankfurt book fair: full of inspiration!

Photo of me ready to speak
Is the “Data-Librarian” the Future of Library Science?

Earlier this month I was lucky enough to attend the enormous, international Frankfurt book fair, as I was a panellist for Elsevier’s Hot Spot discussion on the future of library science and the data-librarian.  I highly recommend the opportunity & experience, as the Elsevier staff really looked after their speakers and I got to meet not only my fellow panellists but also some of the audience who came and introduced themselves at the “hot spot cafe” immediately after our discussion.

 

 

Photo of panellists & our moderator
Left to right: Noelle Gracy, Jenny Delasalle, Dr Schnelling, Prof. Dr. Petra Düren, Pascalia Boutsiouci

The session itself was filmed, and there was a professional photographer there (I have permission to use these official pictures), so I’m sure you’ll find out more about it over on Elsevier’s website: watch the LibraryConnect section! Our basic panel structure was that we were asked questions by Elsevier’s Noelle Gracy, which came from the community in advance.

What did we cover?

Well, I didn’t get to take notes as well as to talk(!) so I can tell you what I had prepared to say, and what I remember, one week after the event! Here are some nutshell points:

  • The future of library science encompasses more than just data librarianship, of course!
  • Librarians may find that adding skills with data to their CV opens up more job opportunities in the future.
  • Librarians offer a lot to the data community, not least their professional ethics & knowledge of legal expectations, which of course is covered in the module I teach to KCL/Humboldt University’s MA Digital Curation students.
Photo of me with microphone, discussing with fellow panellists
Getting to hear each other’s opinions

Librarians also have:

  • ability to describe items/create valuable metadata records
  • connections with all disciplines across campus (& library building is often central too)
  • experience of assessing quality and significance for collection management
  • skills in training & informing others
  • It’s certainly not all about technical skills: Dr Schnelling was very clear about that point, as I believe it was his question, about what skills future librarians need. But of course there are some technical skills that will help if you are working with data. Especially when considering preservation needs.
  • One easy way to begin familiarising yourself with data management issues, is to look at data management plans, and what they involve.

If you were there, then maybe you can share some more highlights of the talk by leaving a comment, below. I will also blog here again about some of my other top sights from the fair: after the talk, I went around many of the stalls, looking for things specifically German. Of course, it was an international fair, so I found an awful lot more. I will end here with a final photograph of the audience for our panel session. If you were there, then thanks for coming!

photo of audience looking at the Hot Spot stage
Standing room only!