Repository Platforms: A Digital Scholarship Mini-Talk

Slide 1

Slide 1 text

repository platforms Brianna Marshall UW-Madison Libraries | February 24, 2016 a digital scholarship mini-talk :

Slide 2

Slide 2 text

about Brianna Marshall Lead, Research Data Services –  Education + training –  Consultations –  Data management plans (DMPs) researchdata.wisc.edu @UWMadRschSvcs

Slide 3

Slide 3 text

re·pos·i·to·ry rəˈpäzəˌtôrē/ noun a central location in which data is stored and managed. "the metadata will be aggregated in a repository”

Slide 4

Slide 4 text

Image courtesy of Flickr user davelawler (CC BY NC ND)

Slide 5

Slide 5 text

repository competition is fierce Traditional –  Institutional –  Funder –  Discipline/subject Hybrid –  Commercial –  Academic social networks –  Data papers

Slide 6

Slide 6 text

institutional repositories •  Most originally started to store ETDs or other publications •  Variety of hosting / support options •  Transitions to handling new formats

Slide 7

Slide 7 text

funder repositories •  Created and supported to provide access to federally funded research •  OSTP Memo open access requirement for publications + data

Slide 8

Slide 8 text

disciplinary repositories Browse repositories at Re3Data: http://service.re3data.org/browse/by-subject/

Slide 9

Slide 9 text

commercial repositories •  Discipline agnostic •  Some free; others charge per file size •  Journal integrations •  Collaboration functionality •  Emerging enterprise options

Slide 10

Slide 10 text

academic social networks •  Proﬁle sites for sharing research outputs •  Finding collaborators •  Similar in looks + func;onality •  Ongoing debate over their use (#deleteacademiaedu)

Slide 11

Slide 11 text

data papers •  Similar to journals for publica;ons, just with a speciﬁc focus on data •  OEen peer reviewed

Slide 12

Slide 12 text

striking similarities to emerging journals, eh? Image courtesy of Flickr user 97496178@N03

Slide 13

Slide 13 text

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0118053

Slide 14

Slide 14 text

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_research_networking_tools_and_research_profiling_systems#General

Slide 15

Slide 15 text

In an nutshell, diﬀerent: •  Names •  Scopes + focuses •  Business models •  Preservation commitments Yet increasingly similar functionality… Image used courtesy of Flickr user 56781833@N06

Slide 16

Slide 16 text

Image courtesy of Flickr user pwnEd365 (CC BY ND)

Slide 17

Slide 17 text

we need to pay more attention to researcher behavior + incentives.

Slide 18

Slide 18 text

“I just need a place to put stuﬀ.”

Slide 19

Slide 19 text

what else do researchers want?

Slide 20

Slide 20 text

compliance impact legacy ease collaboration Image courtesy of Flickr user randihausken (C

Slide 21

Slide 21 text

compliance

Slide 22

Slide 22 text

ease Image courtesy of Flickr user notionscapital (CC BY)

Slide 23

Slide 23 text

collaboration Open Science Framework: osf.io

Slide 24

Slide 24 text

impact

Slide 25

Slide 25 text

legacy Image courtesy of Flickr user see-through-the-eye-of-g (CC BY)

Slide 26

Slide 26 text

+1 safeguarding university research outputs.

Slide 27

Slide 27 text

it’s about intentionality. Image courtesy of Flickr user mozzarellahead (CC BY)

Slide 28

Slide 28 text

so, repository services that: -  are relevant -  are supported -  are sustainable

Slide 29

Slide 29 text

…requiring institutional: -  agility -  creativity -  commitment

Slide 30

Slide 30 text

the boundaries of library involvement in research are being rewritten.

Slide 31

Slide 31 text

Image courtesy of Flickr user nanagyei (CC BY) the path forward is hazy (at best)

Slide 32

Slide 32 text

Image courtesy of Flickr user chrischabot (CC BY) let’s dig in

Slide 33

Slide 33 text

and while we build our own systems Image courtesy of parksdh (CC BY)

Slide 34

Slide 34 text

Image courtesy of Flickr user firstdown (CC BY NC ND) we can help scholars make sense of an increasingly crowded landscape.

Slide 35

Slide 35 text

Image courtesy of Flickr user pastwa (CC BY)

Slide 36

Slide 36 text

Image courtesy of Flickr user vcalzone (CC BY)

Slide 37

Slide 37 text

build a pipeline? Image courtesy of 73364851@N03 (CC BY)

Slide 38

Slide 38 text

linking repositories

Slide 39

Slide 39 text

things to think about •  Disciplinary differences •  Academic status differences (grad/ECR vs. unaffiliated researcher vs. faculty) •  Relationship between publishing + repositories •  Changing academic incentives, altmetrics •  Duplication across systems •  Digital preservation

Slide 40

Slide 40 text

discussion points •  What is the future of the institutional repository? •  Here at UW, what is the role of MINDS@UW? •  How can librarians learn more about repositories and broader changes in scholarly communication? •  What are good strategies for engaging departments in discussion on these topics?

Slide 41

Slide 41 text

thanks! Brianna Marshall [email protected] Research Data Services researchdata.wisc.edu @UWMadRschSvcs