Comments on: On Politics of Citations, Acknowledgements and Co-Authorships http://ekarine.org/2009/03/citations/ A little bit about information and society Wed, 16 May 2012 22:47:04 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: PB http://ekarine.org/2009/03/citations/comment-page-1/#comment-3242 PB Wed, 27 May 2009 06:09:51 +0000 http://ekarine.org/?p=345#comment-3242 My first thoughts were - yes people would prefer to work with people they cite, because they probably work on things that interest them. But this is why I thought the figure about Rob Kling publications and co-authorship is so interesting. It basically shows that in this case, first you work with someone due to proximity, and only then you cite and not vice versa. My first thoughts were - yes people would prefer to work with people they cite, because they probably work on things that interest them. But this is why I thought the figure about Rob Kling publications and co-authorship is so interesting. It basically shows that in this case, first you work with someone due to proximity, and only then you cite and not vice versa.

]]> By: Karine Barzilai-Nahon http://ekarine.org/2009/03/citations/comment-page-1/#comment-129 Karine Barzilai-Nahon Mon, 16 Mar 2009 05:04:37 +0000 http://ekarine.org/?p=345#comment-129 Hey Lee - Unfortunately, I agree with your pessimistic assessment :) Hey Lee -
Unfortunately, I agree with your pessimistic assessment :)

]]> By: Dima http://ekarine.org/2009/03/citations/comment-page-1/#comment-109 Dima Mon, 09 Mar 2009 12:16:07 +0000 http://ekarine.org/?p=345#comment-109 Thank you, Karine! It is definitely thought provoking. I agree with you that the political economy of academic publishing is an interesting domain in itself. You may want to take a look at <a href="http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/" rel="nofollow">this blog</a>. One of my colleagues, who is studying academic publishing, is writing there. Thank you, Karine! It is definitely thought provoking. I agree with you that the political economy of academic publishing is an interesting domain in itself. You may want to take a look at this blog. One of my colleagues, who is studying academic publishing, is writing there.

]]> By: הפוליטיקה של ציטוטים, תודות, ושיתוף בפרסומים | שומרת סף http://ekarine.org/2009/03/citations/comment-page-1/#comment-106 הפוליטיקה של ציטוטים, תודות, ושיתוף בפרסומים | שומרת סף Mon, 09 Mar 2009 07:12:04 +0000 http://ekarine.org/?p=345#comment-106 [...] [כתבתי את הפוסט הזה במקור באנגלית והוא הביא לכמה וכמה תגובות - כדי לראות את התגובות באנגלית לחצו כאן] [...] [...] [כתבתי את הפוסט הזה במקור באנגלית והוא הביא לכמה וכמה תגובות - כדי לראות את התגובות באנגלית לחצו כאן] [...]

]]> By: הפוליטיקה של ציטוטים, תודות, ושיתוף בפרסומים | שומרת סף http://ekarine.org/2009/03/citations/comment-page-1/#comment-107 הפוליטיקה של ציטוטים, תודות, ושיתוף בפרסומים | שומרת סף Mon, 09 Mar 2009 07:12:04 +0000 http://ekarine.org/?p=345#comment-107 [...] [כתבתי את הפוסט הזה במקור באנגלית והוא הביא לכמה וכמה תגובות - כדי לראות את התגובות באנגלית לחצו כאן] [...] [...] [כתבתי את הפוסט הזה במקור באנגלית והוא הביא לכמה וכמה תגובות - כדי לראות את התגובות באנגלית לחצו כאן] [...]

]]> By: Lee Dirks http://ekarine.org/2009/03/citations/comment-page-1/#comment-103 Lee Dirks Sun, 08 Mar 2009 13:15:24 +0000 http://ekarine.org/?p=345#comment-103 Fascinating! As Jeff Hemsley astutely points out (above), technology is greatly facilitating the ability of disparate collaborators to work together on scientific projects/endeavors like never before...and it isn't unusual to see 100+ author papers. At the end of the day, however, we know only a small handful of those actually authored the text, while the vast majority compiled the data or assisted in the analysis. Crucial contributions, yes – but legitimate co-authors? I’m skeptical. But, until scholarly communication methods are able to appropriately accommodate recognizing and rewarding these contributors in some meaningful way – shared authorship is the only way to acknowledge their work. Since all academic/scientific domains are still grappling with how best to reward and incent the authors. As alluded to above, with the arrival of the internet and social networking, the fields of bibliometrics and citation tracking has been reset almost to zero…and impact factors need to be rethought. (The best work I’ve seen to this effect is the MESUR project: http://www.mesur.org/MESUR.html - by Johan Bollen & Herbert Van de Sompel.) However, in my estimation – it will be a very LONG time before acknowledgments and contributors (as opposed to authors) will ever be accommodated or recognized in any material way. Fascinating! As Jeff Hemsley astutely points out (above), technology is greatly facilitating the ability of disparate collaborators to work together on scientific projects/endeavors like never before...and it isn't unusual to see 100+ author papers. At the end of the day, however, we know only a small handful of those actually authored the text, while the vast majority compiled the data or assisted in the analysis. Crucial contributions, yes – but legitimate co-authors? I’m skeptical. But, until scholarly communication methods are able to appropriately accommodate recognizing and rewarding these contributors in some meaningful way – shared authorship is the only way to acknowledge their work. Since all academic/scientific domains are still grappling with how best to reward and incent the authors. As alluded to above, with the arrival of the internet and social networking, the fields of bibliometrics and citation tracking has been reset almost to zero…and impact factors need to be rethought. (The best work I’ve seen to this effect is the MESUR project: http://www.mesur.org/MESUR.html - by Johan Bollen & Herbert Van de Sompel.) However, in my estimation – it will be a very LONG time before acknowledgments and contributors (as opposed to authors) will ever be accommodated or recognized in any material way.

]]> By: Sheryl A. Day http://ekarine.org/2009/03/citations/comment-page-1/#comment-95 Sheryl A. Day Sat, 07 Mar 2009 18:55:48 +0000 http://ekarine.org/?p=345#comment-95 A very timely and political topic considering the power and uprecedented capability we have with the web to search and aggregrate text in just about any manner one can conceive of. Acknowledgments in collaborative science are often seen as courtesies to those whose contributions were significant but that did not warrant the status of authorship - a way of maintaining the goodwill of those whose contributions to future work would likely be necessary. As Blaise pointed out during his lecture, if all who contributed to a research project in any way, large or small, were to be considered authors, the list of authors would be incredibly long - perhaps longer than the paper itself. So, in this sense, acknowledgements play an important role. But, acknowledgements are also important when considering the career tracks of those peripheral contributors. Many valuable individuals are just not progressing towards becoming PIs or towards authoring papers. For them, a system of acknowledging contributions similar to citations is much more than a gesture of goodwill or a pat on the back - it becomes critical to their career growth. I am looking forward to seeing more of Blaise's work in this area, and I'm sure that many others will be, too. A very timely and political topic considering the power and uprecedented capability we have with the web to search and aggregrate text in just about any manner one can conceive of. Acknowledgments in collaborative science are often seen as courtesies to those whose contributions were significant but that did not warrant the status of authorship - a way of maintaining the goodwill of those whose contributions to future work would likely be necessary.

As Blaise pointed out during his lecture, if all who contributed to a research project in any way, large or small, were to be considered authors, the list of authors would be incredibly long - perhaps longer than the paper itself. So, in this sense, acknowledgements play an important role.

But, acknowledgements are also important when considering the career tracks of those peripheral contributors. Many valuable individuals are just not progressing towards becoming PIs or towards authoring papers. For them, a system of acknowledging contributions similar to citations is much more than a gesture of goodwill or a pat on the back - it becomes critical to their career growth.

I am looking forward to seeing more of Blaise's work in this area, and I'm sure that many others will be, too.

]]> By: Gad Barzilai http://ekarine.org/2009/03/citations/comment-page-1/#comment-87 Gad Barzilai Fri, 06 Mar 2009 18:16:28 +0000 http://ekarine.org/?p=345#comment-87 Highly provocative and stimulating. Obviously, one possible interpretation is to look more at the capitalization of science that spurs more cooperation among and between teams of scholars, especially in life sciences where getting the funds is unfortunately more important than doing a good research. Blaise's findings point to our need to comprehend better the politics of science and mainly how human knowledge is reproducing itself. Professor Gad Barzilai University of Washington Highly provocative and stimulating. Obviously, one possible interpretation is to look more at the capitalization of science that spurs more cooperation among and between teams of scholars, especially in life sciences where getting the funds is unfortunately more important than doing a good research. Blaise's findings point to our need to comprehend better the politics of science and mainly how human knowledge is reproducing itself.

Professor Gad Barzilai
University of Washington

]]> By: BobM http://ekarine.org/2009/03/citations/comment-page-1/#comment-84 BobM Fri, 06 Mar 2009 06:55:23 +0000 http://ekarine.org/?p=345#comment-84 Interesting summary of Blaise's presentation and provocative questions. What <em>does</em> the new capabilities for social networking provide in the way of answers for scholars? Would scholars be as happy with acknowledgments as citations? Does a pointer on Facebook to a provocative blog carry as much academic weight as a citation? Certainly not now, but I can imagine it growing in importance--after all, it's about reputation, and Facebook can spread the word much faster than a journal. Yes, a journal is 'archival,' but how significant is it to archive information and knowledge that may be functionally or even conceptually obsolete in 50 years...or even 10 years? Interesting summary of Blaise's presentation and provocative questions. What does the new capabilities for social networking provide in the way of answers for scholars? Would scholars be as happy with acknowledgments as citations? Does a pointer on Facebook to a provocative blog carry as much academic weight as a citation? Certainly not now, but I can imagine it growing in importance--after all, it's about reputation, and Facebook can spread the word much faster than a journal. Yes, a journal is 'archival,' but how significant is it to archive information and knowledge that may be functionally or even conceptually obsolete in 50 years...or even 10 years?

]]> By: karineb http://ekarine.org/2009/03/citations/comment-page-1/#comment-83 karineb Fri, 06 Mar 2009 01:44:27 +0000 http://ekarine.org/?p=345#comment-83 My first thoughts were - yes people would prefer to work with people they cite, because they probably work on things that interest them. But this is why I thought the figure about Rob Kling publications and co-authorship is so interesting. It basically shows that in this case, first you work with someone due to proximity, and only then you cite and not vice versa. My first thoughts were - yes people would prefer to work with people they cite, because they probably work on things that interest them. But this is why I thought the figure about Rob Kling publications and co-authorship is so interesting. It basically shows that in this case, first you work with someone due to proximity, and only then you cite and not vice versa.

]]>