oa-od-caspar-0411

Open Access and Open Data

- and Why They Matter for Archaeology

‘Ideas and knowledge derived from publicly-funded research must be made available and accessible for public use, interrogation and scrutiny, as widely, rapidly and effectively as practicable’.

RCUK 2006

The UCL Open Access Mandate

1. UCL Academic Board, in May 2009, agreed two principles to underpin UCL's publication activity and to support its scholarly mission:

That, copyright permissions allowing, a copy of all research outputs should be deposited in the UCL repository in Open Access

That individual UCL academic researchers should be directly responsible for providing and maintaining details of their publications in relevant UCL databases so as to support both Open Access and the requirement for UCL to keep an accurate record of its research outputs

Source: UCL Publications Policy 2010

Open Access

Open Access = more citations

The figure shows the probability that an article is freely available online as a function of the number of citations to the article, and the year of publication of the article. The results are dramatic, showing a clear correlation between the number of times an article is cited and the probability that the article is online.

If we assume that articles published in the same venue are of similar quality, then the analysis by venue suggests that online articles are more highly cited because of their easier availability.

Source: Lawrence, S. 2001 Free online availability substantially increases a paper's impact. Nature 411, 521.

Closed access = academic exclusion

Big publishers cut access to

journals in poor countries

The companies have also taken this step at a time when the not-for-profit open-access movement is gathering pace...

True open access is the long-term answer to access to scientific studies in low-income and middle-income countries...

The Lancet, January 2011

Source: SHERPA-JULIET, 2009, Research funders' open access policies. http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/juliet/

Open Access is also growing quickly

e-publishing is

taking over

Even the little data that we publish in online articles

is often closed - the "data behind the graph"

Source: Erlandson et al, 2010, 10,000 years of human predation and size changes in the owl limpet (Lottia gigantea) on San Miguel Island, California. Journal of Archaeological Science 38(5), doi:10.1016/j.jas.2010.12.009.

Most data is closed

Open data

Researcher

behaviour

is changing

Where do you currently store your research data ?

N = 1254 researchers

Source: Parse.Insight survey 2009

Some important claims can rest on the

validity of the data and its interpretation

http://www.flickr.com/photos/smashingbloke/63630622/

Reuse: giants need broad shoulders

for others to stand on (H. Piwowar)

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ashish_tibrewal/216767410/

Enable new kinds of research

not previously possible

Increase your opportunities for collaboration

http://www.flickr.com/photos/teamparipassu/3693200272/

Be recognised for your contribution

So why make

data open?

increase the pace of research

http://www.flickr.com/photos/samlow/4561658594/

Create more research for less budget

"The greatest difficulties are expected at cash-strapped, middle-ranking universities, where research and teaching are in danger because there is not enough money to replace ageing lab equipment."

The Guardian, Wednesday 11 May 2011 17.07 BST

Deposit it in open repositories

Supplementary files are

usually inadequate

UCL Research Data service

A pilot study was completed in 2010. Service development is now in progress ahead of a planned phase 1 deployment later in 2011. A modular architecture is being developed to manage the research data livecycle from creation to publication.

We are currently engaged in open discussions with researchers to determine the range of user requirements for the service and to prioritise those elements for the phase 1 service this year. A set of pilot users will be engaged with to assist in developing and evaluating the phase 1 service rollout.

These requirements in combination with ongoing analysis of potential solutions are being combined to specify the functionality required for the initial service deployment and the long term service plans.

Repositories:

• curate
• add metadata
• index
• link
• preserve
• identify

How do we make

data open?

"Share-alike" licenses typically impose the condition that some or all derivative products be identically licensed. Such conditions have been known to create significant "license compatibility" problems under existing license schemes that employ them. In the context of data, license compatibility problems will likely create significant barriers for data integration and reuse for both providers and users of data.

Source: Science Commons Database Protocol FAQ

Permanent identifiers

are essential

Use appropriate licences

Cite the data!

Sidlauskas, B. 2007. Data from: Testing for unequal rates of morphological diversification in the absence of a detailed phylogeny: a case study from characiform fishes. Dryad Digital Repository. doi:10.5061/dryad.20

We are different

"Our case studies in the humanities underscore this point – the important information resources and the ways they are used in the humanities are markedly different from those in the life sciences."

RIN, 2011, Reinventing Research?

Information Practices in the humanities

But we need to

change now

"But there is little evidence as yet of their taking full advantage of the possibilities of more advanced tools for text-mining, grid or cloud computing, or the semantic web; and only limited uptake of even simple, freely-available tools for data management and sharing. Rather, they manage and store information on their desktops and laptops, and share it with others via email."

RIN, 2011, Reinventing Research?

Information Practices in the humanities

What about the

humanities?

We need to compete with other fields both

within and without the university that are:

• Publishing more electronically
• Publishing more OA
• Citing texts with dois
• Open archiving and publishing their data
• Citing their data with dois
• Demonstrating greater impact

http://www.flickr.com/photos/yewtree/5167569603/

We need to do all of

these things more

"...from September 2012, it will reduce its 577 different course arrangements to around 160, shutting history, philosophy, Caribbean studies, theatre studies, trade union studies, dance, parts of multimedia and performing arts. Closures to modern languages are under discussion."

The Guardian, Tuesday 3 May 2011

Data

Abstract

Data doi: 10.1234/ads.hv248

Paper doi: 10.2345/joad.8249a1

Author

Remote Sensing Data from Elbonia

Jane Smith

UCL Institute of Archaeology

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Aliquam non risus ac dolor volutpat ultricies sed eu felis. Ut lorem augue, consectetur congue malesuada non, rhoncus in nunc. Sed consectetur ullamcorper dolor non hendrerit. Ut mattis elit nec felis vulputate sollicitudin. In ipsum purus, facilisis quis tincidunt in, pellentesque sed urna. Pellentesque habitant morbi tristique senectus et netus et malesuada fames ac turpis egestas. Etiam egestas vulputate ipsum a ultrices. Suspendisse eu ligula a justo fringilla faucibus quis in est. Aenean vel arcu nulla. Maecenas eu tristique nulla. Donec ac elit turpis, in tristique diam. Suspendisse ornare purus quis massa tempor varius quis eu enim.

Some suggestions for

archaeology

Research students need to start now!

• curate from day 1
• share
• publish
• cite
• have broad shoulders
• be recognized

The future is both competitive and open

e-publications

have benefits

• impact on field
• chances for collaboration
• career progression

...we received evidence to suggest that the measures used in the RAE distorted authors' choice of where to publish. Although RAE panels are supposed to assess the quality of the content of each journal article submitted for assessment, we reported in 2002 that "there is still the suspicion that place of publication was given greater weight than the papers' content".[356] This is certainly how the RAE was perceived to operate by the panel of academics we saw on 21 April. Professor Williams told us that he chose to publish in journals with high impact factors because "that is how I am measured every three years or every five years; RAE or a review, it is the quality of the journals on that list".[357] Similarly Professor Crabbe stated that "the driver is finance. The driver is the Research Assessment Exercise. Impact factors, the half-life of journals are what drives us, I am afraid".[358] In both oral and written evidence, HEFCE denied that journal impact factors formed the basis for an assessment of the quality of articles submitted to the RAE.

Source: Select Committee on Science and Technology, 2004, Tenth Report, §209.

b.hole@ucl.ac.uk

www.brianhole.com

@brian_hole

http://www.flickr.com/photos/stuhorvath/395770359/in/set-1450390/