Skip to main content

For Attribution Developing Data Attribution and Citation Practices and Standards: Summary of an International Workshop (2012) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:

12- Issues of Time, Credit, and Peer Review
Pages 81-94

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 81...
... 4 Interview protocols covered a variety of broad questions: Tenure and promotion, making a name; Criteria for disseminating research at various stages (publication practices, new publication outlets, new genres) ; Sharing (what, with whom, when, why or why not?
Read the entire page →
From page 82...
... Although the institutional peerreview process allows flexibility for differences of discipline and scholarly product, a stellar record of high-impact peer reviewed publications continues to be the most important criterion for judging a successful scholar in tenure and promotion decisions. The formal process of converting research findings into academic discourse through publishing is the concrete way in which research enters into scholarly canons that record progress in a field.
Read the entire page →
From page 83...
... We would argue that, given this background, and an exceptionally heavy reliance on peer review publications to aid the tenure and promotion committees, it comes as no surprise, that competitive scholars divert much of their energies and activities toward the development and production of archival publications and the circulation of the ideas contained within them rather than focusing, for example, on curating and citing data sets. Variation in how different scholarly outputs are weighed Lest you think the way in which scholarship is credited in tenure and promotion decisions in research universities is binary, it is important to note that teaching, service, and the creation of non-peer reviewed scholarship such as data bases or tools, are most certainly credited, but they do not receive as much emphasis as peer reviewed articles or books published in prestigious outlets.
Read the entire page →
From page 84...
... In astrophysics (and despite the reliance on arXiv for circulation of early drafts, data, and so on) , developing astronomical instrumentation, software, posting announcements, and database creation are considered support roles and are usually ascribed a lower value in advancement decisions than peer reviewed publications.
Read the entire page →
From page 85...
... , which recently announced their decisions to cease the publication of supplementary data because reviewers cannot realistically spend the time necessary to review that material closely, and critical information on data or methods needed by readers can be lost in a giant, time-consuming "data dump." An editorial in the Journal of Experimental Medicine, titled "Enough is Enough"7 makes the case: Complaints about the overabundance of supplementary information in primary research articles have increased in decibel and frequency in the past several years and are now at cacophonous levels. Reviewers and editors warn that they do not have time to scrutinize it.
Read the entire page →
From page 86...
... curating or peer reviewing data, when that same time can be applied to garnering support for the next research project and/or publishing and peer reviewing books and articles. While data sharing may be facilitated by development of new tools and instruments that ensure standardization (such as in gene sequencing)
Read the entire page →
From page 87...
... ISSUES OF TIME, CREDIT, AND PEER REVIEW 87 Science (2011) Special Online Collection: Dealing with Data.
Read the entire page →
From page 89...
... MR. UHLIR: From 1996, there was a coalition of internet service providers, the universities, the libraries, and the academics opposed to the database protection bills.
Read the entire page →
From page 90...
... I spent too much of my life working on a big international project called the "International Polar Year," and it had what I think was a landmark data policy pushing for not only open data but also timely release of data. This caused quite a bit of controversy in a lot of different disciplines.
Read the entire page →
From page 91...
... This has not been done. Once we get to that stage, the community minded people would adhere to these policies, especially in the sciences where community data resources are a very powerful tool for people doing individual science.
Read the entire page →
From page 92...
... I think we should keep in mind that data publication and data citation are both metaphors taken from the journal publication system, and I think metaphors are tricky. The danger with any metaphor is to say that it is exactly the same.
Read the entire page →

Key Terms

  • data citation
  • data sharing
  • sharing data
  • data creation
  • promotion decisions

  • career advancement
  • national data
  • data resources
  • peer reviewing
  • motivating scholars

  • reviewed publications
  • traditional publications
  • archival publications
  • promotion committees
  • political science

  • publication outlets
  • australian national
  • pay attention
  • experimental medicine
  • reviewing data

  • supplementary data
  • data openly
  • data citations
  • data practices
  • landmark data

  • textual data
  • reputable data
  • data usage
  • data service
  • including data


    • 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.