For Attribution Developing Data Attribution and Citation Practices and Standards: Summary of an International Workshop (2012) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
27- Data Citation and Attribution: A Funder's Perspective
27- Data Citation and Attribution: A Funder's Perspective
Pages 177-188
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 177... ...
I also believe that making data citations clear and a common practice will help promote the cutting edge interdisciplinary research, which in turn will help people in their career development and make their contributions to science and to the public good more visible and appreciated. The fact that the National Science Board is actually engaged in the issues of data policy, data citation, and data access gives us a big incentive as well.
|
From page 178... ...
A group on digital data at the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy is specifically looking at data policies and data standards. I also want to underscore the role of university and other institutional libraries and repositories, not only in acting as repositories but in actively developing systems for dealing with what everyone recognizes as a major challenge of metadata, including minimum metadata, usage generated metadata systems, software metadata, and the like.
|
From page 179... ...
PARTICIPANT: I will ask a policy question. The NSF's approach with the data management plan is to enforce it via the proposed review process on the front end and then the reporting requirement on the back end.
|
From page 180... ...
I think that the reason for the NSF to go for the review process and to include the community is because communities are part of NSF's highly individualized approach to funding science. Program directors at NSF, except for some, come and go based on the two-year and three-year rotation model.
|
From page 181... ...
I think that part of the reason why it took so long to make the data management plan requirement visible is that there was a lot of concern about the additional effort that it would require not only in review, but also in award oversight. My guess is that in the long run, that will turn out to be part of submitting an annual report and, as we all know, the annual reports and the final reports enable researchers to continue to receive money.
|
From page 182... ...
In the astronomical virtual observatory movement, what we call the International Virtual Observatory Alliance is basically a standards organization that is developing complex standards for characteristics such as at what time was the observation taken, what wavelengths are involved, and the like. It is a description of the observation so that it is machine readable and reusable by some kind of standard software tool.
|
From page 183... ...
The National Science Board has had discussions about using data citations for biosketches and resumés of Principal Investigators. One of the points that Todd Carpenter made was about peer review and I was pleased to hear this point brought up yesterday.
|
From page 184... ...
MR. CARPENTER: The peer review process is community-based and the review criteria for computer science, astrophysics, and biology, for example, are somewhat different.
|
From page 185... ...
We have got the technical peer review, which is done by the data centers, and then we have got the scientific peer review, which is done by the domain experts as part of what we consider the formal scientific journal publication process.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.