Görögh Edit, Vignoli Michela, Gauch Stephan, Blümel Clemens, Kraker Peter, Hasani-Mavriqi Ilire, Luzi Daniela , Walker Mappet, Toli Eleni, Sifacaki Electra
2017
The growing dissatisfaction with the traditional scholarly communication process and publishing practices as well as increasing usage and acceptance of ICT and Web 2.0 technologies in research have resulted in the proliferation of alternative review, publishing and bibliometric methods. The EU-funded project OpenUP addresses key aspects and challenges of the currently transforming science landscape and aspires to come up with a cohesive framework for the review-disseminate-assess phases of the research life cycle that is fit to support and promote open science. The objective of this paper is to present first results and conclusions of the landscape scan and analysis of alternative peer review, altmetrics and innovative dissemination methods done during the first project year.
Kraker Peter, Enkhbayar Asuraa, Schramm Maxi, Kittel Christopher, Chamberlain Scott, Skaug Mike , Brembs Björn
2017
Görögh Edit, Toli Eleni, Kraker Peter
2017
Peters Isabella, Kraker Peter, Lex Elisabeth, Gumpenberger Christian, Gorraiz, Juan
2015
The study explores the citedness of research data, its distribution over time and how it is related to the availability of a DOI (Digital Object Identifier) in Thomson Reuters' DCI (Data Citation Index). We investigate if cited research data "impact" the (social) web, reflected by altmetrics scores, and if there is any relationship between the number of citations and the sum of altmetrics scores from various social media-platforms. Three tools are used to collect and compare altmetrics scores, i.e. PlumX, ImpactStory, and Altmetric.com. In terms of coverage, PlumX is the most helpful altmetrics tool. While research data remain mostly uncited (about 85%), there has been a growing trend in citing data sets published since 2007. Surprisingly, the percentage of the number of cited research data with a DOI in DCI has decreased in the last years. Only nine repositories account for research data with DOIs and two or more citations. The number of cited research data with altmetrics scores is even lower (4 to 9%) but shows a higher coverage of research data from the last decade. However, no correlation between the number of citations and the total number of altmetrics scores is observable. Certain data types (i.e. survey, aggregate data, and sequence data) are more often cited and receive higher altmetrics scores.
Kraker Peter, Enkhbayar Asuraa, Lex Elisabeth
2015
In a scientific publishing environment that is increasingly moving online,identifiers of scholarly work are gaining in importance. In this paper, weanalysed identifier distribution and coverage of articles from the discipline ofquantitative biology using arXiv, Mendeley and CrossRef as data sources.The results show that when retrieving arXiv articles from Mendeley, we wereable to find more papers using the DOI than the arXiv ID. This indicates thatDOI may be a better identifier with respect to findability. We also find thatcoverage of articles on Mendeley decreases in the most recent years, whereasthe coverage of DOIs does not decrease in the same order of magnitude. Thishints at the fact that there is a certain time lag involved, before articles arecovered in crowd-sourced services on the scholarly web.
Vignoli Michela, Kraker Peter, Sevault A.
2015
Science 2.0 is the current trend towards using Web 2.0 tools in research and practising a more open science. We are currently at the beginning of a transition phase in which traditional structures, processes, value systems, and means of science communication are being put to the proof. New strategies and models under the label of “open” are being explored and partly implemented. This situation implies a number of insecurities for scientists as well as for policy makers and demands a rethinking and overcoming of some habits and conventions persisting since an era before the internet. This paper lists current barriers to practising Open Science from the point of view of researchers and reflects which measures could help overcoming them. The central question is which initiatives should be taken on institutional or political level and which ones on level of the community or the individual scientist to support the transition to Science 2.0.
Kraker Peter, Lex Elisabeth, Gorraiz Juan, Gumpenberger Christian, Peters Isabella
2015
Kraker Peter, Trattner Christoph, Jack Kris, Lindstaedt Stefanie , Schlgl Christian
2013
At the beginning of a scientific study, it is usually quite hardto get an overview of a research field. We aim to addressthis problem of classic literature search using web data. Inthis extended abstract, we present work-in-progress on aninteractive visualization of research fields based on readershipstatistics from the social reference management systemMendeley. To that end, we use library co-occurrences as ameasure of subject similarity. In a first evaluation, we findthat the visualization covers current research areas withineducational technology but presents a view that is biasedby the characteristics of readers. With our presentation, wehope to elicit feedback from the Websci’13 audience on (1)the usefulness of the prototype, and (2) how to overcomethe aforementioned biases using collaborative constructiontechniques.
Kraker Peter, Wagner Claudia, Jeanquartier Fleur, Lindstaedt Stefanie
2011
This paper presents an adaptable system for detecting trends based on the micro-blogging service Twitter, and sets out to explore to what extent such a tool can support researchers. Twitter has high uptake in the scientific community, but there is a need for a means of extracting the most important topics from a Twitter stream. There are too many tweets to read them all, and there is no organized way of keeping up with the backlog. Following the cues of visual analytics, we use visualizations to show both the temporal evolution of topics, and the relations between different topics. The Twitter Trend Detection was evaluated in the domain of Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL). The evaluation results indicate that our prototype supports trend detection but reveals the need for refined preprocessing, and further zooming and filtering facilities.
Lindstaedt Stefanie , Kraker Peter, Höfler Patrick, Fessl Angela
2010
In this paper we present an ecosystem for the lightweight exchangeof publication metadata based on the principles of Web 2.0. At the heart of thisecosystem, semantically enriched RSS feeds are used for dissemination. Thesefeeds are complemented by services for creation and aggregation, as well aswidgets for retrieval and visualization of publication metadata. In twoscenarios, we show how these publication feeds can benefit institutions,researchers, and the TEL community. We then present the formats, services,and widgets developed for the bootstrapping of the ecosystem. We concludewith an outline of the integration of publication feeds with the STELLARNetwork of Excellence1 and an outlook on future developments.