Moving the repository upstream

a centre of expertise in data curation and preservation

Funded by:This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 2.5 UK: Scotland License. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/scotland/ ; or, (b) send a letter to Creative Commons, 543 Howard Street, 5th Floor, San Francisco, California, 94105, USA.

Moving the Repository upstream

Chris Rusbridge

ARROW Repositories day

14 October 2008


ARROW Repositories Day• 2

Contents• The resistant scholar• Researcher work flow• On negative clicks…• Can the repository help rather than hinder?• Towards a Research Repository System?



The resistant scholar• Edinburgh Research Archive has 1100+

(publicly accessible) items• Edinburgh scholarly output?

• Wet finger in the air: annual output ~ number of academics? (RAE every 4 years wants 4 papers)

• Ie ~2500 papers per year!

• So after 4 years we have <10% of output• A common story everywhere!



Why is this so?• Uncertainty, risk?

• About copyright• About Ingelfinger rule

• Change• Too busy• Doesn’t fit in the way they do things now• Not well motivated by advantages to others• Little in it for them!



Researcher work flow?• Many projects/tasks in parallel• All different stages• Teaching (several), research (several), writing

up research, writing grant proposals, reviewing papers, administrative tasks, University governance, etc



Researcher work flow?• Think up research idea• Write grant proposal with colleagues• Submit, wait, refine/revise, resubmit• Hire/assign staff, plan project• Gather data, analyse data, refine hypothesis• Refine methods, more data etc• Write draft paper with colleagues• Refine, revise submit paper, repeat until successful• New directions, more data, new paper• Conference presentations, discussion, new research

ideas…



Who are you working with?• Your group• Your department• Other departments in your university• Colleagues elsewhere worldwide

• Often more of the latter than the former!• Wide variety of IT environments



Write paper work flow?• PI and co-PIs outline structure• PI assign sections to colleagues• Gather sections, edit, circulate• Identify weaknesses, gather more data• Select & organise citations, images, tables, graphs,

supplementary data• Comment, revise, circulate, repeat until deadline• Submit, wait • Revise following review, circulate, resubmit

• By now working on other research!

• It’s published! Add to bibliography…



When do you submit to repository?

• There’s no obvious point• It’s always extra work• Any doubt, uncertainty, distraction enough to

put it off• “The library” wants you to do it? Sure, RSN

• The repository doesn’t help, it hinders



On negative clicks• Research in Glasgow for Effective Records

Management project (JISC-funded)• Currall, Johnson, Johnston, Moss, Richmond

• “How many extra clicks are you willing to make to ensure preservation of the records you are creating?”• Answer: zero

• Design goal follows: reduce work for clerks (fewer clicks) AND ensure preservation



How could a repository help?• Support the research• Support the researchers• Support the writing• Support the publishing• Be a natural part of the work flow…

• How could we do that?



Negative click repository?• Could a repository reduce the workload of

researchers?• Perhaps not on its own…

• What would be needed to make things easier?• Maybe a system and services with the repository

embedded?• Research Repository System



Some known research issues• Extended teams across institutions, even legal jurisdictions

• Varying technology: Windows/Mac/Linux versions, MS Office, OpenOffice, LaTeX, EndNote, BibTeX, etc

• Localised, segregated identity management • Informal extranets

• Distrust of anyone who (ever!) adds complexity or difficulty, even apparent• University, IT dept, Library, School…

• Individualist local IT management• Backup, version control, security, patching• Data quantity, quality, provenance, metadata, version, sharing• Analytic software version• Lab notebooks…



How could “we” help?• Who are “we”?

• Repository managers• In/with the Library• And IT Services• Backed by the administration



Maybe we could…• Help with publisher liaison• Support multiple authoring across several institutions

• More permissive identity management/extranet

• Support multiple versions• Fine-grained access control• Checkpointing

• Support supplementary data• Provide basic data management capability• Provide simple, cross-platform, persistent storage• Provide some longevity• Provide additional benefits





Exposure• Digital Curation Blog posts

• Comments and feedback

• JISC Repository Ideascale discussions• Comments, feedback, voting

• Blue Ribbon Task Force Ideascale discussions• voting





Some comments…• Need to be careful of doing this as if it complicates the workflow, it just

won't happen• I think the RRS you envisage sounds fantastic and would be a 'good

thing', what worries me is the 'function creep' taking us a few miles on from some of the more basic, simpler 'few keystrokes' approach…

• The RRS sounds to have many features of a Virtual Research Environment, albeit perhaps a less data centric VRE

• The availability of research via Open Access would increase if the same systems that provide Open Access also provided, or were integrated with, tools which support the authoring process

• My experience is, that feature requests of this sort [authoring support] are exactly the ones which end up in the "users didn't know what they wanted bin" (I'm a developer).

• A system to help streamline the editorial/publication process is fine (if we can persuade academics to use it)



CRIS• Several spotted that Current Research

Information Systems can provide “fill the blanks” metadata• Reduces workload• Provides context• Supports research disclosure• Needs administration support



Is there something useful here?

• DISCUSS!



Thank you

[email protected]

Technology

Moving the repository upstream