ACN - 101321555 Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)
Search
Generic filters
Exact text matches only
Search into
Filter by Categories
Research integrity
Filter by Categories
Human Research Ethics

Resource Library

Research Ethics MonthlyAbout Us

ResourcesResearch integrity

Australasian Human Research Ethics Consultancy Services Pty Ltd (AHRECS)

Data Management Expert Guide (Guidance: CESSDA | December 2017)0

Posted by Admin in on November 5, 2019
 

This guide is designed by European experts to help social science researchers make their research data Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable (FAIR).

You will be guided by different European experts who are – on a daily basis – busy ensuring long-term access to valuable social science datasets, available for discovery and reuse at one of the CESSDA social science data archives.

Target audience and mission
This guide is written for social science researchers who are in an early stage of practising research data management. With this guide, CESSDA wants to contribute to professionalism in data management and increase the value of research data.

Overview
If you follow the guide, you will travel through the research data lifecycle from planning, organising, documenting, processing, storing and protecting your data to sharing and publishing them. Taking the whole roundtrip will take you approximately 15 hours, however you can also hop on and off at any time.

CESSDA Training Working Group (2017 – 2018). CESSDA Data Management Expert Guide.
Bergen, Norway: CESSDA ERIC. Retrieved from https://www.cessda.eu/DMGuide

Venice ‘time machine’ project suspended amid data row – Nature (Davide Castelvecchi Davide Castelvecchi | October 2019)0

Posted by Admin in on November 2, 2019
 

Disagreements among international partners leave plans to digitize the Italian city’s history in limbo.

Like the city itself, an ambitious effort to digitize ten centuries’ worth of documents that record the history of Venice is at risk of sinking. Two key partners have suspended the Venice Time Machine project after reaching an impasse over issues surrounding open data and methodology. The State Archive of Venice and the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Lausanne (EPFL) say they have had to pause data collection, and the archive’s director has raised questions about the usability of the 8 terabytes of information that have already been collected.

A useful illustration of the value of early discussions about data management and about ensuring that metadata is considered as well.

The project sought to digitize documents that stretch over 80 kilometres of shelves in the state archive. These record the minutiae of the city’s administration — from financial transactions to citizens’ addresses and family connections — during its heyday in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance as a republic that for centuries dominated trade in the eastern Mediterranean. Many are written in Latin or the Venetian dialect, and have never been read by modern historians.
.

The goal was to make this information freely available online to researchers worldwide. The project also aimed to push the state-of-the-art in text-recognition technology for handwritten documents, using machine learning to automatically read millions of pages and tag their contents so that historians could perform quick searches.
.

Read the rest of this discussion piece

Citation Contamination: References to Predatory Journals in the Legitimate Scientific Literature – Scholarly Kitchen (Rick Anderson | October 2019)0

Posted by Admin in on October 31, 2019
 

(This post is based on a presentation given at the 6th annual World Conference on Research Integrity, in Hong Kong, June 2019.)

My objective with this small research project was to get an idea of whether (and, if so, to what extent) articles published in predatory journals are being cited in the legitimate scientific literature.

To that end, I identified seven journals that had revealed their predatory nature when they were exposed by one of four different “sting” operations, each of which had clearly demonstrated that the journal in question will (despite its public claims of peer-reviewed rigor) either publish nonsense in return for payment of article-processing charges, or take on as an editor someone with no qualifications.

I then searched for citations to articles published in these journals in three large aggregators of scientific papers:

  • The Web of Science, a massive index of scholarly journals, books, and proceedings that claims to index over 90 million documents
  • The ScienceDirect database of journals and books published by Elsevier, which claims to include over 15 million publications
  • PLOS ONE, an open-access megajournal that has published roughly 200,000 articles in its history

Read the rest of this discussion piece

Repairing an Institutional Reputation Tarnished by Fraudulent Publishing – Scholarly Kitchen (Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe | September 2019)0

Posted by Admin in on October 28, 2019
 

The prevailing publish or peril model has not changed in any useful way in the last decade and institutional self-interest to encourage any sort of publication regardless of quality remains. The total laissez-faire attitude is dreadful. Research heads should be held accountable for this. How do we rebuild a culture of doing research as its own end rather than simply trying to find a way to publish as the end?  We will shortly post a resource about this to the subscribers’ area.

Earlier this year, a U.S. District Court ruled that publisher and conference organizer Srinubabu Gedela and his companies OMICS, iMedPub, and Conference Series violated the U.S. FTC Act “by making deceptive claims regarding their academic journals and scientific conferences, and by failing to adequately disclose their publishing fees.” The Court imposed a number of requirements as well as a judgment of $50.1 million.
.

Today I’d like to reflect on the implications that this ruling may have for institutions — those that employ researchers and those that fund researchers, especially as this will by no means be the last enforcement action taken against publishers accused of deceptive practices.
.

How might an institution repair a tarnished reputation? And, given the reality of fraudulent publishers and their deceptive practices, will institutions consider more strongly guiding author choice of publishing venue in order to protect institutional reputation?
.

Institutional Interests
Universities and funders often herald the achievements of their researchers in order to garner positive press coverage, bolster their reputations, or recruit new employees. University rankings and memberships many times depend heavily not only on measures of research activity and quality but also on the impression they generate — the brand identity if you will — of their quality.
..

Read the rest of this discussion piece

0