HRB funded researchers in Trinity College Dublin have discovered that blocking a particular stress response can significantly reduce the metastasis (or spread) of breast cancer.
The research published today (1 June) in the Journal of Clinical Oncology by Dr Ian Barron, a HRB Postdoctoral Fellow in Pharmacology and Therapeutics* at Trinity College Dublin looked at women diagnosed with breast cancer in Ireland between 2000 and 2007. Using data from the National Cancer Registry, and the HSE Primary Care Reimbursement Services, they found that those taking drugs that blocked a particular hormone related stress pathway had a much lower risk of dying from their cancer.
According to Dr Barron, “For patients with cancer, higher levels of stress are associated with more frequent disease recurrence, faster disease progression and higher rates of death from cancer. Some lab based studies have suggested how stress hormones such as adrenaline and noradrenaline, could play a role in this process. Ours is the first study in humans to show that blocking this stress response significantly reduces the risk of cancer spreading or metastasising. Because the majority of all cancer deaths are due to the growth of tumour metastases, this research could have significant implications for clinical practice.”
http://www.tcd.ie/Communications/news/pressreleases/pressRelease.php?headerID=1860&vs_date=2011-06-01
Thursday, June 2, 2011
New Masters in Public History and Digital Humanities Launched by Minister for Arts, Heritage and Gaeltacht Affairs
The Minister for Arts, Heritage and Gaeltacht Affairs, Jimmy Deenihan, launched two new postgraduate Masters programmes, in ‘Public History and Cultural Heritage’ and ‘Digital Humanities and Culture’ at Trinity College Dublin on May 31st last that will add a new dynamic to the development of Ireland’s Cultural Heritage.
The programmes have been developed under the umbrella of Trinity’s Creative Arts, Technologies and Culture initiative and are an outcome of the new partnership between the university and some of Ireland’s leading cultural institutions located in close proximity at the centre of Dublin. The National Library of Ireland, the National Museum of Ireland, the National Archives of Ireland, Dublin City Gallery Hugh Lane, Dublin City Public Library and Archive Services and the Chester Beatty Library among others will collaborate with Trinity in the development of these new programmes.
Students will pursue courses in Trinity in established research areas such as History, English, Languages and Cultural Studies, and Computer Science while undertaking internships in the cultural institutions and gaining practical experience of working in the cultural heritage industry.
In the digital area, Trinity is working closely with some of the major IT companies, IBM, Intel and Microsoft. On completion of the Digital Humanities and Culture course, students will have highly specialised IT skills in relation to text, images, audio, and video.
The graduates of these new programmes, highly skilled and rigorously trained, will represent an important pool of expertise for the creative industries and cultural sector especially in the current economic climate.
Commenting on the significance of the new Masters Programmes, Minister Deenihan said: “Cultural Heritage is a major industry for Ireland. The Book of Kells in Trinity, for example, is the second most popular tourist attraction attracting 600,000 visitors per annum. These Masters Programmes will feed directly into this all-important industry. They will promote job creation in areas as diverse as curation, cataloguing, digital archiving and data-mining. The skill sets needed to engage in these disciplines are rare, and Ireland now has the potential to become a world leader in this area.”
On the occasion of the launch, Minister Deenihan also announced a series of bursaries financed by his Department to be awarded by the National Library of Ireland for students taking the Masters Programmes. The students who receive these bursaries will hold their internships at the National Library. “The National Library of Ireland is putting in place six bursaries in cooperation with the Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht. These bursaries, three for each course, reflect the close working relationship between Trinity and the NLI since the joint appointment of a Cultural Co-ordinator. The total value of the bursaries is €20,000,” concluded Minister Deenihan.
Describing the new courses, Trinity’s Professor of Modern History, David Dickson, the academic leader of the ‘MPhil in Public History and Cultural Heritage’ explained: “It will involve the study of cultural memory and the public status of history in modern society. It will examine the political issues surrounding public commemoration and the role of museums, archives, galleries and the media in shaping public perceptions of the past. It will also survey the more concrete questions involved in the conservation, presentation and communication of the physical heritage of past cultures, particularly where interpretation and meaning are contested.”
Senior Lecturer in Digital Humanities at Trinity, Dr Susan Schreibman, the academic leader for the ‘MPhil in Digital Humanities and Culture’ explained that "it is a new and dynamic interdisciplinary field of study at the intersections of humanities and computer science opening up possibilities for research that could only have been dreamed about a generation ago.”
The courses will commence next September, and the deadline for application for the Public History and Cultural Heritage course is 30 June 2011. Late applications are being accepted for the Digital Humanities and Culture course until places are full.
http://www.tcd.ie/Communications/news/pressreleases/pressRelease.php?headerID=1862&vs_date=2011-06-01
The programmes have been developed under the umbrella of Trinity’s Creative Arts, Technologies and Culture initiative and are an outcome of the new partnership between the university and some of Ireland’s leading cultural institutions located in close proximity at the centre of Dublin. The National Library of Ireland, the National Museum of Ireland, the National Archives of Ireland, Dublin City Gallery Hugh Lane, Dublin City Public Library and Archive Services and the Chester Beatty Library among others will collaborate with Trinity in the development of these new programmes.
Students will pursue courses in Trinity in established research areas such as History, English, Languages and Cultural Studies, and Computer Science while undertaking internships in the cultural institutions and gaining practical experience of working in the cultural heritage industry.
In the digital area, Trinity is working closely with some of the major IT companies, IBM, Intel and Microsoft. On completion of the Digital Humanities and Culture course, students will have highly specialised IT skills in relation to text, images, audio, and video.
The graduates of these new programmes, highly skilled and rigorously trained, will represent an important pool of expertise for the creative industries and cultural sector especially in the current economic climate.
Commenting on the significance of the new Masters Programmes, Minister Deenihan said: “Cultural Heritage is a major industry for Ireland. The Book of Kells in Trinity, for example, is the second most popular tourist attraction attracting 600,000 visitors per annum. These Masters Programmes will feed directly into this all-important industry. They will promote job creation in areas as diverse as curation, cataloguing, digital archiving and data-mining. The skill sets needed to engage in these disciplines are rare, and Ireland now has the potential to become a world leader in this area.”
On the occasion of the launch, Minister Deenihan also announced a series of bursaries financed by his Department to be awarded by the National Library of Ireland for students taking the Masters Programmes. The students who receive these bursaries will hold their internships at the National Library. “The National Library of Ireland is putting in place six bursaries in cooperation with the Department of Arts, Heritage and the Gaeltacht. These bursaries, three for each course, reflect the close working relationship between Trinity and the NLI since the joint appointment of a Cultural Co-ordinator. The total value of the bursaries is €20,000,” concluded Minister Deenihan.
Describing the new courses, Trinity’s Professor of Modern History, David Dickson, the academic leader of the ‘MPhil in Public History and Cultural Heritage’ explained: “It will involve the study of cultural memory and the public status of history in modern society. It will examine the political issues surrounding public commemoration and the role of museums, archives, galleries and the media in shaping public perceptions of the past. It will also survey the more concrete questions involved in the conservation, presentation and communication of the physical heritage of past cultures, particularly where interpretation and meaning are contested.”
Senior Lecturer in Digital Humanities at Trinity, Dr Susan Schreibman, the academic leader for the ‘MPhil in Digital Humanities and Culture’ explained that "it is a new and dynamic interdisciplinary field of study at the intersections of humanities and computer science opening up possibilities for research that could only have been dreamed about a generation ago.”
The courses will commence next September, and the deadline for application for the Public History and Cultural Heritage course is 30 June 2011. Late applications are being accepted for the Digital Humanities and Culture course until places are full.
http://www.tcd.ie/Communications/news/pressreleases/pressRelease.php?headerID=1862&vs_date=2011-06-01
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
How to succeed with grant applications - Zoë Corbyn
Interesting article in Nature News on "How to succeed with grant applications" by Zoë Corbyn - Look at the respondent views underneath for more insight
Read the article here: http://ht.ly/4RmVj
Read the article here: http://ht.ly/4RmVj
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
An Intellectual Property System for the Internet Age, James Boyle
Excellent review of copyright issues being reviewed in the UK currently.
An Intellectual Property System for the Internet Age, James Boyle
In November 2010, the Prime Minister commissioned a review of the Britain’s intellectual property laws and their effect on economic growth, quoting the founders of Google that “they could never have started their company in Britain” because of a lack of flexibility in British copyright.. Mr. Cameron wanted to see if we could have UK intellectual property laws “fit for the Internet age.” Today the Review will be published. Its conclusion? “Could it be true that laws designed more than three centuries ago with the express purpose of creating economic incentives for innovation by protecting creators’ rights are today obstructing innovation and economic growth? The short answer is: yes.” Those words are from Professor Ian Hargreaves, head of the Review. (Full disclosure: I was on the Review’s panel of expert advisors.)
The Review makes 10 specific recommendations covering patent, copyright and the policy-making process. Some examples: Patent law needs reform to prevent the formation of “thickets” that actually impede innovation, while patents should never be extended to non-technical software inventions or business methods. We found that while patents are working well for standalone innovations, such as a particular drug developed to treat a particular disease, there are problems in technical fields marked by “sequential innovation” such as information technology.
Read the full article here: http://www.thepublicdomain.org/2011/05/18/the-hargreaves-review-is-published/
An Intellectual Property System for the Internet Age, James Boyle
In November 2010, the Prime Minister commissioned a review of the Britain’s intellectual property laws and their effect on economic growth, quoting the founders of Google that “they could never have started their company in Britain” because of a lack of flexibility in British copyright.. Mr. Cameron wanted to see if we could have UK intellectual property laws “fit for the Internet age.” Today the Review will be published. Its conclusion? “Could it be true that laws designed more than three centuries ago with the express purpose of creating economic incentives for innovation by protecting creators’ rights are today obstructing innovation and economic growth? The short answer is: yes.” Those words are from Professor Ian Hargreaves, head of the Review. (Full disclosure: I was on the Review’s panel of expert advisors.)
The Review makes 10 specific recommendations covering patent, copyright and the policy-making process. Some examples: Patent law needs reform to prevent the formation of “thickets” that actually impede innovation, while patents should never be extended to non-technical software inventions or business methods. We found that while patents are working well for standalone innovations, such as a particular drug developed to treat a particular disease, there are problems in technical fields marked by “sequential innovation” such as information technology.
Read the full article here: http://www.thepublicdomain.org/2011/05/18/the-hargreaves-review-is-published/
The Value of Libraries to Research and Researchers
RLUK/ RIN Report 'The Value of Libraries to Research and Researchers'. Press Release and key points at http://bit.ly/mPz3R1
Guide for Researchers on Using Social Media for Research
Excellent Guide for Researchers on Using Social Media for Research by the Research Information Network
http://www.rin.ac.uk/system/files/attachments/social_media_guide_for_screen.pdf
http://www.rin.ac.uk/system/files/attachments/social_media_guide_for_screen.pdf
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
New Guide to Web 2.0/Social Media for Arts and Humanities
Chances are, if you are reading this post, then you are already familiar with Web 2.0 tools that can facilitate you in your research. But if not, you might like to check out Web 2.0 for arts and humanities researchers which is a resource created by Newcastle University Library to show academic researchers (particularly in arts and humanities) how web 2.0 (or 'social media') can help at all stages of the research process. The site contains brief web tutorials illustrated with real-life examples. Worth a look!
Friday, October 15, 2010
NUIG's Library Research Week timed to coincide with International Open Access Week
October 18-22 will be the first Library Research Week at National University of Ireland, Galway. There will be a series of talks and seminars throughout the week, both in the Library and in research centres to promote library services and collections supporting researchers. The event has been timed to coincide with International Open Access Week, so there will be talks covering open access publishing, including our own institutional repository, ARAN. There will also be an exhibition of material from the Archives and Special Collections. For the full programme please see http://www.library.nuigalway.ie/support/supportforresearchers/researchweek/
To check out the other events being organised internationally to celebrate International Open Access Week have a look at http://www.openaccessweek.org/
Gwen Ryan
Research Support Librarian for Arts, Humanities & Social Sciences
National University of Ireland, Galway
To check out the other events being organised internationally to celebrate International Open Access Week have a look at http://www.openaccessweek.org/
Gwen Ryan
Research Support Librarian for Arts, Humanities & Social Sciences
National University of Ireland, Galway
Friday, July 9, 2010
Impact and Value of International University Rankings
From this week's THE:
Measured, and found wanting more
International comparisons of universities still have their detractors, but the appetite for them continues to grow. Phil Baty traces their roots and looks at how they are increasing in number and quality, while Ellen Hazelkorn considers their impact and value
Ellen's original article is available at http://arrow.dit.ie/cserart/2
Hazelkorn, E. (2009) 'Rankings and the Battle for World-Class Excellence: Institutional Strategies and Policy Choices', Higher Education Management and Policy, 21 (1)
Measured, and found wanting more
International comparisons of universities still have their detractors, but the appetite for them continues to grow. Phil Baty traces their roots and looks at how they are increasing in number and quality, while Ellen Hazelkorn considers their impact and value
Ellen's original article is available at http://arrow.dit.ie/cserart/2
Hazelkorn, E. (2009) 'Rankings and the Battle for World-Class Excellence: Institutional Strategies and Policy Choices', Higher Education Management and Policy, 21 (1)
Wednesday, May 12, 2010
They’re Here! E-Mail Alerts for Google Scholar Now Available Direct from Google
Until now, Google Scholar users had to use a variety of methods to create alerts to notify them of new content in Google Scholar. Well, the wait is over and as of this weekend, Google Scholar E-Mail Alerts are now available. It’s Google, of course they’re free.
NOTE: This post was update at 10 P.M. on Tuesday, May 11, 2010 after ResourceShelf chatted with Anurag Acharya, the founding engineer of Google Scholar.
Creating Alerts
1. For a “simple” alert, just run a Google Scholar search, click the search button, and get your results.
2. Click the “Envelope” icon (top left side of the page). Here, you can make changes, if needed, click “update” button and a sample of results using 2010 results with the modified search query appear below. When you’re set after deciding the amount you want returned, click “Create Alert.” You’re then taken to your page of “Google Scholar” Alert page. If you want to modify the alert at this point, you’ll need to click the cancel button and begin again.
3. Alerts appear to work with all three content options:
A) “Traditional” Google Scholar Content (with patents or without patents)
B) Legal Documents and Journals
4. For advanced Google searchers, most advanced syntax should also work in Google Scholar. The same goes for legal materials and patents. However, date limits do not work. We’re still trying to figure out a search limiting to only patent applications or awarded patents.
However, if you or those you’re working with aren’t syntax users or just want to try something different, Google Scholar alerts created by using a more complex query can also be created using the advanced search interface.
Because alerts are to find new material (independent of publication date) that has just “entered” the database, the date range limits do not work.
You can’t create an alert for only a source (at least at this time. For example, only send alerts for new entries from “The Journal of X” a no go. Anurag Acharya told us that part of the challenge in offering this feature is that Google is that a “large portion” of the Google Scholar database is built by crawling the open web and, “automated identification of articles and extraction of metadata.” Of course, others have written about major issues they have with metadata and automated identification particularly when it comes to using Google Scholar as a tool for citation counts.
5) Alerts limited by an authors name or part of a name and prebuilt “collections” (look for them on the advanced search page) appear to work correctly. Btw, Google Scholar names (with or without an alert) do not have to be inverted and as an example, these are all variants of the same name: “m cutts’” or “matt cutts” or “matthew cutts.” However, if you do get a significant number of false drops due to name issues, it’s probably time to build a new query.
6) One of the great Google info blogs is Google Operating System. There we read that Google Scholar alerts will do automatic query modification.
Google Scholar’s email alerts feature is special because Google changes your to get better results (for example, [statistical speech recognition] has been changed to [statistical intitle:"speech recognition"])
Read the full discussion here: http://www.resourceshelf.com/2010/05/10/there-here-e-mail-alerts-for-google-scholar-now-available-direct-from-google/
Sources: Google, Garrett Eastman, Google Operating System, and A Computer Scientist in a Business School
NOTE: This post was update at 10 P.M. on Tuesday, May 11, 2010 after ResourceShelf chatted with Anurag Acharya, the founding engineer of Google Scholar.
Creating Alerts
1. For a “simple” alert, just run a Google Scholar search, click the search button, and get your results.
2. Click the “Envelope” icon (top left side of the page). Here, you can make changes, if needed, click “update” button and a sample of results using 2010 results with the modified search query appear below. When you’re set after deciding the amount you want returned, click “Create Alert.” You’re then taken to your page of “Google Scholar” Alert page. If you want to modify the alert at this point, you’ll need to click the cancel button and begin again.
3. Alerts appear to work with all three content options:
A) “Traditional” Google Scholar Content (with patents or without patents)
B) Legal Documents and Journals
4. For advanced Google searchers, most advanced syntax should also work in Google Scholar. The same goes for legal materials and patents. However, date limits do not work. We’re still trying to figure out a search limiting to only patent applications or awarded patents.
However, if you or those you’re working with aren’t syntax users or just want to try something different, Google Scholar alerts created by using a more complex query can also be created using the advanced search interface.
Because alerts are to find new material (independent of publication date) that has just “entered” the database, the date range limits do not work.
You can’t create an alert for only a source (at least at this time. For example, only send alerts for new entries from “The Journal of X” a no go. Anurag Acharya told us that part of the challenge in offering this feature is that Google is that a “large portion” of the Google Scholar database is built by crawling the open web and, “automated identification of articles and extraction of metadata.” Of course, others have written about major issues they have with metadata and automated identification particularly when it comes to using Google Scholar as a tool for citation counts.
5) Alerts limited by an authors name or part of a name and prebuilt “collections” (look for them on the advanced search page) appear to work correctly. Btw, Google Scholar names (with or without an alert) do not have to be inverted and as an example, these are all variants of the same name: “m cutts’” or “matt cutts” or “matthew cutts.” However, if you do get a significant number of false drops due to name issues, it’s probably time to build a new query.
6) One of the great Google info blogs is Google Operating System. There we read that Google Scholar alerts will do automatic query modification.
Google Scholar’s email alerts feature is special because Google changes your to get better results (for example, [statistical speech recognition] has been changed to [statistical intitle:"speech recognition"])
Read the full discussion here: http://www.resourceshelf.com/2010/05/10/there-here-e-mail-alerts-for-google-scholar-now-available-direct-from-google/
Sources: Google, Garrett Eastman, Google Operating System, and A Computer Scientist in a Business School
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Google Vs Facebook - Clash of the Titans
Interesting article recently in the Business Section of the Sunday Times
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/technology/article7069878.ece
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/technology/article7069878.ece
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
Free and Fabulous:
Below is a list of free resources re-posted from the Librarian in Black website. This list exemplifies the growing number of resources which can be used to support research and used for research without a huge investment.
1. Free Software for Public & Staff Computers
- Operating System (instead of Windows) – Ubuntu
- Email/Calendar (instead of Outlook) – Google Calendar & Gmail
- Web Browser (instead of IE) – Firefox, Google Chrome
- Financial Software (instead of Quicken) – GNU Cash
- Productivity Software (instead of Office) – Open Office
- - word processing (like Word), spreadsheets (like Excel), presentations (like PowerPoint), databases (like Access), desktop publishing (like Publisher), and calculator (like, errr…, a calculator)
- Image Editing (instead of PhotoShop) – GIMP
- Typing Software – GNUTypist or TypeFaster Typing Tutor
- CD writing – Brasero or InfraRecorder
2. Free Security Software Suite
- Antivirus – AVG Antivirus
- Firewall – PC Tools Firewall Plus
- Ad-Busting – AdAware
- Anti-Spyware – SpyBot Search & Destroy, SpywareGuard, SpywareBlaster (use all three; they do different things)
3. Free Staff Scheduling Software
- Droster
- AceShift (limited to <20>
- or even Open Office’s “Calc”
4. Free Team Meeting Tools
- Voice – Skype, Google Voice
- Video – Skype, Sightspeed, Tokbox
- IM – AIM, Windows Live Messenger, Yahoo! Messenger, Google Talk, & others
- Meeting Space/Chat – Today’s Meet
- Meeting Scheduling – When Is Good, Doodle
- Webcasts – Vyew
5. Free Tech Support Tools
- Embedded chat (pop it in your intranet header) – Meebo Me chat widget
- Voice or video chat (another way to contact tech support) – Skype, Ekiga, Sightspeed, or Tokbox
- Screencasts on the fly (for tech support to help you!) – Jing
- Discussion board (create a staff board re: common tech issues) – Google Groups
- Remote Support (tech support folks can log in & control/see your computer) – LogMeIn.com, TightVNC
6. Free Audio & Video Tools
- Voice/Video Chat – Skype or Ekiga
- Audio Recording/Editing – Audacity
- Video Editing – Avidemux, DVDx, Lumiera, Kino
- Video Hosting – YouTube, blip.tv, Vimeo
- Audio Hosting – OurMedia, PodBean
7. Free eLearning Tools
- Screencasting – Screencast-o-matic, Jing, Wink, Camstudio, Screencast.com
- Online Learning Environment – Moodle
- Conference Calls – FreeConferenceCall.com
- Webcasts – Ustream.tv
- Class Websites – WordPress, Blogger, PBworks, Pageflakes
8. Free “Contact Us” Tools to Communicate with Customers
- Email – Gmail, Yahoo Mail
- Instant Messaging – AIM, Windows Live Messenger, Yahoo! Messenger, Google Talk
- Chat Widgets – Meebo Me, Plugoo
- VOIP/audio – Skype
- Video – some IM clients (AIM video chat, Skype)
- Text Messaging – AIM TXT
- Social Networks – Facebook Chat
- Microblogging – Twitter – “ask us a question with @…”
9. Free Social Network & Extended Web Presence Tools
- CheckUsernames.com: check multiple networks
- Open ID and ClaimID: claim and log into multiple networks
- HootSuite, Twitter Counter, Twitalyzer: Twitter stats
- Ping.fm, Hellotxt.com, and AtomKeep: simultaneous updates
- Twitter/Facebook: can use internal settings/apps to update both simultaneously
- Filtrbox and MyBUZZmonitor: what people say
10. Free Website Management Tools
- Website recommender – del.icio.us, Evernote
- ILS – Koha or Evergreen
- Content Management System – Drupal
- Flickr slideshow – Pictobrowser
- RSS Feed and Blog Post Statistics – PostRank
- Tag Clouds – TagCrowd, Wordle
- Web Forms – Google Forms
- CSS-picker – Typetester
- Copyright-Free, Open Source, and CC-licensed Photos – OpenPhoto, Stock.xchng, Image*After, Wikipeda Commons, Flickr Image Search
- Survey Tools -Zoomerang, SurveyMonkey
- Polls – PollDaddy
- Website Statistics – Google Analytics, OneStatFree, StatCounter
- Translation Tool – Google Translate
- Events Calendar – Google Calendar
- Website Hosting – Blogger, WordPress, Bravenet, Google Sites, Bryght.com
11. Free eBooks (need to cut your eBook budget? that’s ok – there are a lot of free eBooks out there.)
- Project Gutenberg
- AudioBooksForFree
- Escholarship
- Google Books
- ManyBooks
- Memoware
- Online Books Page
- Oxford Text Archive
- and hundreds more sites too!
12. Free Articles
- ArticlesBase.com
- FindArticles.com
- + open access e-journals
- + free access through individual publication’s websites
13. Miscellaneous Other Free Stuff
- RSS aggregator – Google Reader
- Book Jackets – Book City Jackets
- File Converters – Zamzar
- Charts – LucidChart, Lovely Charts, Gliffy
- Text to Voice – Text2Speech, Google Voice
- Citation Keeper – Zotero
- Movies Online – Hulu, YouTube
- File Drop Sites – SendUIt, DropBox, YouSendIt
Monday, February 22, 2010
What's Your Name?
The massive growth in adacemic publishing in the last ten years has made it difficult for individual researchers to stand out, especially if you've got a common name; Web of Science lists 613 different J Smiths. You can be creative with your middle initial by being JX Smith, or stand out as the only J Smith in your institution. But what about when you move jobs, or if you change your name with marriage?
Publishers like ThomsonReuters and ProQuest have tried setting up resources like ResearchID, where researchers can establish unique IDs and showcase their work. But they have been held back by the old VHS vs. Betamax problem, with competing standards not being recognised by different publishers.
Now ORCID, the Open Researcher and Contributor ID has been launched, with the backing of all the major publishing companies. Its early days, so you can't create your profile yet, but lets hope that this effort gets traction and is accepted as an international standard.
Read more about it in Nature.
Publishers like ThomsonReuters and ProQuest have tried setting up resources like ResearchID, where researchers can establish unique IDs and showcase their work. But they have been held back by the old VHS vs. Betamax problem, with competing standards not being recognised by different publishers.
Now ORCID, the Open Researcher and Contributor ID has been launched, with the backing of all the major publishing companies. Its early days, so you can't create your profile yet, but lets hope that this effort gets traction and is accepted as an international standard.
Read more about it in Nature.
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Valuing Research as an Intangible Asset - Frank Gannon
Reposted from Frank Gannon's Blog http://frankgannon.wordpress.com/2010/01/19/valuing-research-as-an-intangible-asset/
Once the economy took an overt turn for the worst in 2008, voices that had been mute for almost a decade came forward to question the wisdom of Ireland investing in Research and Development (R&D). As Science Foundation Ireland (SFI) had been established in 2000 as the vehicle to provide the expertise to deliver the funding to “make Ireland a world leader in research” it was inevitable that attention would increasingly focus on its activities and view them as a cost rather than an investment. Various commentators sniffed at the phrase the “Knowledge Economy” and have not been enthusiastic when the Government launched the “Smart Economy” as the way forward for Ireland “after the crisis”. Having had numerous discussions and debates on the topic, where I and other colleagues showed the beneficial consequences of the SFI activities, I cannot say that the debate has yet been won by us. I wrote an extensive blog on the problem of trying to convince ‘non-believers’ that investment in R&D is essential for Ireland’s enterprise http://frankgannon.wordpress.com/2009/08/27/belief-and-science-policy and the concept of belief and faith is perhaps appropriate, as arguing for investment in science with a skeptic must be similar to an ardent Christian arguing their cause with a convinced atheist.
Formal para-official endorsement of the science skeptics came in the report of An Bord Snip Nua (McCarthy report). This report recommended a 15% cut back in the Science Technology and Innovation (STI) budget. There remains a lot of work to get ‘System’ to understand that the academics that SFI funds today are quite different to the caricatures that are presented as the basis of the disbelief in giving money to labs as the best way of under-pinning the Smart Economy. I won’t repeat the litany of facts that support our contention that the SFI programmes are already, and ahead of schedule, providing very positive inputs to the enterprise economy. Suffice to say that the opinion of two external independent reviews support this - a Value for Money Review of Science Foundation Ireland Prepared for Department of Enterprise Trade and Employment By Indecon International Economic Consultants and Science Foundation Ireland – the First Five Years 2000-2005 Prepared by An International Evaluation Panel, both reports are available on the SFI website – www.sfi.ie
Over the plum-pudding days of Christmas the concern for the future of Ireland “after the crisis” came back to disturb me too frequently to ignore. What, I wondered, would not have happened if SFI had not been established? OK, there would be fewer publications and fewer research groups, and maybe the impressive moves up the world ranking by Irish Universities would not have taken place…..but who in the enterprise sphere really cares about that?. Would business expenditure on R&D have doubled? Would 50% of the new deals entered into by the IDA have been in the area of R&D? Would very large numbers (almost 800) of Irish companies have invested in the development of new products to help them become more competitive? Would we be able to dream of developing and attracting a greatly expanded Green/Clean industrial sector with a projection of 80,000 jobs created? I really think the answer to allthose and other practical questions is NO, or at least to do so without the extra highly trained 4th level graduates and the reputation gain from the country by having top-class research groups here would have been extremely difficult and unprecedented world-wide.
Then one day, the pfennig (I was in Germany) dropped. The problem is that SFI and research generally delivers Intangible Assets and those with an antagonistic view are only putting value on Tangible Assets. As I am not an economist, I will not give my version of what the difference between tangible and intangible assets are, although the understanding of the English words is straight-forward. Instead, I add at the bottom of this blog the Wikipedia entry on the topic. I find, in that definition, confirmation of my diagnosis. Both the legal intangibles and the competitive intangibles described there are the primary outcomes from the investments made by SFI. This is what is to be expected and matches the rational for the establishment of SFI. But this is systematically missed by those that see research as a cost rather than an investment. Perhaps they have not reflected on this essential difference. Instead the critical analysts constantly look for tangible assets such as spin-off companies, jobs created and the conversion of the intangible intellectual property to the tangible license cash income. Calls for support only of research that is of direct value to Industry have the same tangible outcome as their basis No wonder there is a miss-match in the discussions. I think it would be good, therefore, to re-engage the debate with this insight in mind.
Time was, when intangible assets had no perceived value. Today, that is completely changed and even the rigours of accounting demand that these are treated and managed like other assets. Many companies invest more in pursuit of Intangible Assets than they do in the more readily measured Tangible Assets. I hope that Irish decision makers and commentators will integrate this into their thinking. Already the SFI budget has drifted away from the multi-annual plan of the Strategy for Science Technology and Innovation (SSTI). Continuation of that trend will certainly make the intangible assets drain away and with that the tangible assets will also be lost.
“Intangible assets are defined as identifiable non-monetary assets that cannot be seen, touched or physically measured, which are created through time and/or effort and that are identifiable as a separate asset. There are two primary forms of intangibles – legal intangibles (such as trade secrets (e.g., customer lists), copyrights, patents, trademarks, and goodwill) and competitive intangibles (such as knowledge activities (know-how, knowledge), collaboration activities, leverage activities, and structural activities). Legal intangibles are known under the generic term intellectual property and generate legal property rights defensible in a court of law. Competitive intangibles, whilst legally non-ownable, directly impact effectiveness, productivity, wastage, and opportunity costs within an organization – and therefore costs, revenues, customer service, satisfaction, market value, and share price. Human capital is the primary source of competitive intangibles for organizations today. Competitive intangibles are the source from which competitive advantage flows, or is destroyed. The area of finance that deals with intangible assets is known as Intangible Asset Finance.”-from Wikipedia 9.1.2010
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Once the economy took an overt turn for the worst in 2008, voices that had been mute for almost a decade came forward to question the wisdom of Ireland investing in Research and Development (R&D). As Science Foundation Ireland (SFI) had been established in 2000 as the vehicle to provide the expertise to deliver the funding to “make Ireland a world leader in research” it was inevitable that attention would increasingly focus on its activities and view them as a cost rather than an investment. Various commentators sniffed at the phrase the “Knowledge Economy” and have not been enthusiastic when the Government launched the “Smart Economy” as the way forward for Ireland “after the crisis”. Having had numerous discussions and debates on the topic, where I and other colleagues showed the beneficial consequences of the SFI activities, I cannot say that the debate has yet been won by us. I wrote an extensive blog on the problem of trying to convince ‘non-believers’ that investment in R&D is essential for Ireland’s enterprise http://frankgannon.wordpress.com/2009/08/27/belief-and-science-policy and the concept of belief and faith is perhaps appropriate, as arguing for investment in science with a skeptic must be similar to an ardent Christian arguing their cause with a convinced atheist.
Formal para-official endorsement of the science skeptics came in the report of An Bord Snip Nua (McCarthy report). This report recommended a 15% cut back in the Science Technology and Innovation (STI) budget. There remains a lot of work to get ‘System’ to understand that the academics that SFI funds today are quite different to the caricatures that are presented as the basis of the disbelief in giving money to labs as the best way of under-pinning the Smart Economy. I won’t repeat the litany of facts that support our contention that the SFI programmes are already, and ahead of schedule, providing very positive inputs to the enterprise economy. Suffice to say that the opinion of two external independent reviews support this - a Value for Money Review of Science Foundation Ireland Prepared for Department of Enterprise Trade and Employment By Indecon International Economic Consultants and Science Foundation Ireland – the First Five Years 2000-2005 Prepared by An International Evaluation Panel, both reports are available on the SFI website – www.sfi.ie
Over the plum-pudding days of Christmas the concern for the future of Ireland “after the crisis” came back to disturb me too frequently to ignore. What, I wondered, would not have happened if SFI had not been established? OK, there would be fewer publications and fewer research groups, and maybe the impressive moves up the world ranking by Irish Universities would not have taken place…..but who in the enterprise sphere really cares about that?. Would business expenditure on R&D have doubled? Would 50% of the new deals entered into by the IDA have been in the area of R&D? Would very large numbers (almost 800) of Irish companies have invested in the development of new products to help them become more competitive? Would we be able to dream of developing and attracting a greatly expanded Green/Clean industrial sector with a projection of 80,000 jobs created? I really think the answer to allthose and other practical questions is NO, or at least to do so without the extra highly trained 4th level graduates and the reputation gain from the country by having top-class research groups here would have been extremely difficult and unprecedented world-wide.
Then one day, the pfennig (I was in Germany) dropped. The problem is that SFI and research generally delivers Intangible Assets and those with an antagonistic view are only putting value on Tangible Assets. As I am not an economist, I will not give my version of what the difference between tangible and intangible assets are, although the understanding of the English words is straight-forward. Instead, I add at the bottom of this blog the Wikipedia entry on the topic. I find, in that definition, confirmation of my diagnosis. Both the legal intangibles and the competitive intangibles described there are the primary outcomes from the investments made by SFI. This is what is to be expected and matches the rational for the establishment of SFI. But this is systematically missed by those that see research as a cost rather than an investment. Perhaps they have not reflected on this essential difference. Instead the critical analysts constantly look for tangible assets such as spin-off companies, jobs created and the conversion of the intangible intellectual property to the tangible license cash income. Calls for support only of research that is of direct value to Industry have the same tangible outcome as their basis No wonder there is a miss-match in the discussions. I think it would be good, therefore, to re-engage the debate with this insight in mind.
Time was, when intangible assets had no perceived value. Today, that is completely changed and even the rigours of accounting demand that these are treated and managed like other assets. Many companies invest more in pursuit of Intangible Assets than they do in the more readily measured Tangible Assets. I hope that Irish decision makers and commentators will integrate this into their thinking. Already the SFI budget has drifted away from the multi-annual plan of the Strategy for Science Technology and Innovation (SSTI). Continuation of that trend will certainly make the intangible assets drain away and with that the tangible assets will also be lost.
“Intangible assets are defined as identifiable non-monetary assets that cannot be seen, touched or physically measured, which are created through time and/or effort and that are identifiable as a separate asset. There are two primary forms of intangibles – legal intangibles (such as trade secrets (e.g., customer lists), copyrights, patents, trademarks, and goodwill) and competitive intangibles (such as knowledge activities (know-how, knowledge), collaboration activities, leverage activities, and structural activities). Legal intangibles are known under the generic term intellectual property and generate legal property rights defensible in a court of law. Competitive intangibles, whilst legally non-ownable, directly impact effectiveness, productivity, wastage, and opportunity costs within an organization – and therefore costs, revenues, customer service, satisfaction, market value, and share price. Human capital is the primary source of competitive intangibles for organizations today. Competitive intangibles are the source from which competitive advantage flows, or is destroyed. The area of finance that deals with intangible assets is known as Intangible Asset Finance.”-from Wikipedia 9.1.2010
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Monday, January 18, 2010
A Review of Research Assessment
Below are two interesting reports which look at the research assessment process and the role the Library can play. Interestingly the pros and cons of a national assessment process can be seen in comparison between the UK and Ireland.
A Comparative Review of Research Assessment Regimes in Five Countries and the Role of Libraries in the Research Assessment Process:
http://www.oclc.org/research/publications/library/2009/2009-09.pdf
Research Assessment and the Role of the Library
A companion report to A Comparative Review of Research Assessment Regimes in Five Countries and the Role of Libraries in the Research Assessment Process
http://www.oclc.org/research/publications/library/2010/2010-01.pdf
A Comparative Review of Research Assessment Regimes in Five Countries and the Role of Libraries in the Research Assessment Process:
http://www.oclc.org/research/publications/library/2009/2009-09.pdf
Research Assessment and the Role of the Library
A companion report to A Comparative Review of Research Assessment Regimes in Five Countries and the Role of Libraries in the Research Assessment Process
http://www.oclc.org/research/publications/library/2010/2010-01.pdf
Sunday, November 8, 2009
One size won’t fit all in information policy and provision
The British Library and the Research Information Network have published a report Patterns of Information Use and Exchange: case studies of researchers in the life sciences.
The key conclusion of the report, “that the policies and strategies of research funders and information service providers must be informed by an understanding of the exigencies and practices of different research communities” is no surprise, but it is worth going to the report to read some of what led to that conclusion.
For example, even within what might be categorised a discipline, there can be marked differences in the patterns of information use and exchange, as evidenced by the seven case studies in the report. An Information Flow map is produced for each of the case studies, each map made up of activities or concepts joined by links. Librarians will be interested in the vast array of information or data sources listed. In the Botanical curation study, for example, scientific papers and monographs are just two of the eighty-two named activities or concepts.
Academic libraries have long worked to understand the needs of their different communities, as is evidenced by the faculty librarian or subject support model in place in most libraries, increasingly complemented today by the role of research support librarian. It is interesting to see in this report, however, the recommendation that researchers should ‘reconnect’ with information professionals. The model that has worked for so long needs to be updated and made stronger.
Academic libraries need to provide more than strong disciplinary support in the provision of and access to information. There is a need for concerted efforts to be made to understand how information is produced within individual disciplines, in order to support and develop new relationships and functions, particularly regarding data curation and information sharing.
Thursday, November 5, 2009
PhDs and Web 2.0 tools
Zoë Corbyn from Times Higher Education has just written that researchers aged between 21 and 27 aren't using Web 2.0 tools like RSS and social bookmarking in their work.
In my work as a research support librarian, I have been promoting Web 2.0 tools to researchers. An increasing number of researchers are using them but its very far from reaching a critical mass - they're far from being an essential part of everyone's work. I believe this is because:
In my work as a research support librarian, I have been promoting Web 2.0 tools to researchers. An increasing number of researchers are using them but its very far from reaching a critical mass - they're far from being an essential part of everyone's work. I believe this is because:
- RSS feeds from databases and journal publishers are difficult to set up. Publishers often expect users to create personal accounts and click through numerous screens before they get to an RSS icon. Every publisher does things differently - some only allow table of contents alerts, some automatically stop your feed after a year.
- Social networking/bookmarking. There's a lot of startup services for researchers and academics - I've come across about ten of them - but no single one has taken off yet. Some of them, like Academia.edu, look great, but they're all stuck in a situation where no one is signing up because none of their friends/colleagues have signed up first.
- None of these services talk to each other. I can set up a Web of Science feed on my Google Reader, but Google can't easily transfer the references to RefWorks and its just an tricky sending them on again from RefWorks to my citeulike account. The future may be with Zotero, which is trying to do all this in one service.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Open Access 101
Open Access 101, from SPARC from Karen Rustad on Vimeo.
To deposit your research in an Institutional Repository in an Irish university (or in DIT, WIT, RCSI or HSE) go to the IREL-Open website and scroll down to find your institution's repository.
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Open Access for the Humanities?
This is International Open Access week (19-23 October 2009) with many events taking place to raise awareness of this mode of scholarly communication. However, to date, Open Access has achieved most success in the science and technology fields where the dissemination of written knowledge has traditionally taken place via journal articles and conference proceedings.
If you are interested in finding out how this model of publishing can be applied to the Humanities, where the monograph is the preferred method of scholarly communication, take a look at the OAPEN project. A new resources page has recently been added covering the latest new in Open Access book publishing.
Friday, October 9, 2009
Problems with Online Research
The act of finding and reading published research has changed so much in the last 10-20 years. Ask any old-timer - anyone over 30 ;) - and they'll tell you how literature searches used to involve looking up abstracts in hardback paper indexes and CD-ROMs; trying to find missing print journal issues from library shelves and waiting weeks for interlibrary loans from the British Library.
Now you can do everything from your desktop in your office or at home. We can search online databases, read tens of thousand of journal online and save papers to our own personal digital libraries in EndNote or RefWorks, which also automate our citing and referencing.
But things are far from perfect. Endnote, RefWorks and many databases arent intuitive and don't work as smoothly as we'd like. Advanced tools like RSS search alerts can be difficult to set up and manage. For even the most organised, technophile researcher its difficult to find all the important papers in your field and still have time for your own work.
A recent paper, Defrosting the Digital Library, offers a good, accesible review of this and looks to a future where our digital libraries will be more personal, sociable, integrated, and accessible places.
Hull, D., Pettifer, S.R. & Kell, D.B., 2008. Defrosting the Digital Library: Bibliographic Tools for the Next Generation Web. PLoS Computational Biology, 4(10).
Now you can do everything from your desktop in your office or at home. We can search online databases, read tens of thousand of journal online and save papers to our own personal digital libraries in EndNote or RefWorks, which also automate our citing and referencing.
But things are far from perfect. Endnote, RefWorks and many databases arent intuitive and don't work as smoothly as we'd like. Advanced tools like RSS search alerts can be difficult to set up and manage. For even the most organised, technophile researcher its difficult to find all the important papers in your field and still have time for your own work.
A recent paper, Defrosting the Digital Library, offers a good, accesible review of this and looks to a future where our digital libraries will be more personal, sociable, integrated, and accessible places.
Hull, D., Pettifer, S.R. & Kell, D.B., 2008. Defrosting the Digital Library: Bibliographic Tools for the Next Generation Web. PLoS Computational Biology, 4(10).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
