Recent Submissions

  • Journal Article

    DINI-Zertifikat für Open-Access-Publikationsdienste 2019 

    Müller, Uwe; Scholze, Frank; Vierkant, Paul; Arning, Ursula; Beucke, Daniel; Blumtritt, Ute; Bove, Karolin; Braun, Kim; Deppe, Arvid Sönke; Deinzer, Gernot; et al.
    Fenner, MartinKlotz-Berendes, BrunoMeinecke, IsabellaPampel, HeinzSchirrwagen, JochenSeveriens, ThomasSummann, FriedrichSteinke, TobiasTullney, MarcoVoigt, MichaelaWalger, WalgerWeimar, AlexanderWolf, Stefan
    DINI Schriften 3-de; Version 6.0
    Deutsche initiative für netzwerkinformation e. V., 2019
    Das Publikationswesen ist ein wesentlicher Stützpfeiler des wissenschaftlichen Erkenntnisfortschritts und der Wissenschaft insgesamt. Zu seinen Kennzeichen gehören a. die Organisation einer effektiven Kommunikation zwischen Forschenden (zwischen Autor*innen und allen potenziellen Rezipient*innen, d. h. die Sicherstellung einer adäquaten Verbreitung), b. ein hohes Maß an Vertrauenswürdigkeit, das den Nutzenden des Publikationswesens (d.h. den Forschenden) vermittelt wird (z.B. in Bezug auf das Prioritätsrecht, die Wahrung des Urheberrechts sowie die Authentizität und die inhaltliche Qualität wissenschaftlicher Arbeiten), sowie c. Nachhaltigkeit und Nachprüfbarkeit (dauerhafte Zitierbarkeit und langfristige Verfügbarkeit, Nachvollziehbarkeit von einzelnen Schritten auf dem Weg zur Veröffentlichung). Mit dem vorliegenden Kriterienkatalog werden diese allgemeinen Erwartungen an das wissenschaftliche Publizieren in konkrete Mindestanforderungen übersetzt, die an Open-Access-Publikationsdienste zu stellen sind.
    View Document Abstract
  • Journal Article

    Attitudes and beliefs of academic librarians in Germany and the USA 

    Kramer, Stefan; Horstmann, Wolfram
    The purpose of this study is to understand, compare, and contrast professional experiences, attitudes, and beliefs among personnel in academic libraries in the USA and in Germany. Notable findings include differences in: respondents’ professional backgrounds; services offered by, and perceived adequacy and support of, respondents’ libraries; and views of the library profession and its future. Future studies could extend these comparisons to librarians in other countries, beyond Germany and the USA.
    View Document Abstract
  • Journal Article

    Enabling A Conversation Across Scholarly Monographs through Open Annotation 

    Bertino, Andrea C.; Staines, Heather
    Publications 2019; 7(2): Art. 41
    The digital format opens up new possibilities for interaction with monographic publications. In particular, annotation tools make it possible to broaden the discussion on the content of a book, to suggest new ideas, to report errors or inaccuracies, and to conduct open peer reviews. However, this requires the support of the users who might not yet be familiar with the annotation of digital documents. This paper will give concrete examples and recommendations for exploiting the potential of annotation in academic research and teaching. After presenting the annotation tool of Hypothesis, the article focuses on its use in the context of HIRMEOS (High Integration of Research Monographs in the European Open Science Infrastructure), a project aimed to improve the Open Access digital monograph. The general line and the aims of a post-peer review experiment with the annotation tool, as well as its usage in didactic activities concerning monographic publications are presented and proposed as potential best practices for similar annotation activities.
    View Document Abstract
  • Journal Article

    Three camps, one destination: the intersections of research data management, FAIR and Open 

    Higman, Rosie; Bangert, Daniel; Jones, Sarah
    Insights 2019; 32(1)
    Open data, FAIR (findable, accessible, interoperable and reusable) and research data management (RDM) are three overlapping but distinct concepts, each emphasizing different aspects of handling and sharing research data. They have different strengths in terms of informing and influencing how research data is treated, and there is much scope for enrichment of data if they are applied collectively. This paper explores the boundaries of each concept and where they intersect and overlap. As well as providing greater definitional clarity, this will help researchers to manage and share their data, and those supporting researchers, such as librarians and data stewards, to understand how these concepts can best be used in an advocacy setting. FAIR and open both focus on data sharing, ensuring content is made available in ways that promote access and reuse. Data management by contrast is about the stewardship of data from the point of conception onwards. It makes no assumptions about access, but is essential if data are to be meaningful to others. The concepts of FAIR and open are more noble aspirations and are, this paper argues, a useful way to engage researchers and encourage good data practices from the outset.
    View Document Abstract
  • Journal Article

    Weltorganisation in New York 

    Müller, Katharina
    2018
    View Document
  • Journal Article

    Rechtliche Rahmenbedingungen der Digitalisierung kulturellen Erbes 

    Ernst, Michael
    Bibliotheksdienst 2018; 52(9) p.687-697
    Die Digitalisierung bietet ein enormes Potenzial für Wissenschaft, Lehre und Forschung. Doch sind die derzeit geltenden rechtlichen Rahmenbedingungen geeignet, dieses Potenzial auszuschöpfen und gewinnbringend für alle nutzbar zu machen? Nicht nur die aufwändige Recherche nach Rechteinhabern, sondern auch die fehlenden Möglichkeiten, Digitalisate von urheberrechtlich geschützten Werken unter freien Lizenzen nachnutzbar zu machen, erschweren die praktische Umsetzung der gesellschaftlich gewünschten und vielfach auch gesetzlich geforderten digitalen Zugänglichmachung von Sammlungsgegenständen durch Kulturerbeeinrichtungen.
    View Document Abstract
  • Journal Article

    Natürliche Sprachverarbeitung für das Expertensystem ScienceAtlas 

    Funk, Stefan E.
    Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, 2004
    View Document
  • Journal Article

    FID-Lizenzen sichtbar und suchbar machen: Der Zentrale Nachweis für FID-Lizenzen – Konzept, Umsetzung und Datenmanagement 

    Glaab-Kühn, Friederike; Kittelmann, Maike
    ABI Technik 2018; 38(3) p.234-244
    Mit der wachsenden Zahl an zugänglichen FID-Lizenzen wurde es immer wichtiger, die FIDLizenzen zentral nachzuweisen. Zu diesem Zweck hat das Kompetenzzentrum für Lizenzierung elektronischer Ressourcen im DFG-geförderten System der „Fachinformationsdienste für die Wissenschaft“ einen Zentralen Nachweis mit Informationen zu allen verfügbaren FID-Lizenzen aufgebaut. Der Artikel präsentiert die damit verbundenen konzeptionellen Überlegungen sowie die Festlegungen zur Umsetzung. Anhand von Workflows, Dokumentation und Qualitätsmanagement wird veranschaulicht, wie das Datenmanagement für den Zentralen Nachweis umgesetzt wurde.
    View Document Abstract
  • Journal Article

    JazzCats: Navigating an RDF triplestore of integrated performance metadata 

    Bangert, Daniel; Nurmikko-Fuller, Terhi; Downie, J. Stephen; Hao, Yun
    ACM Press: New York, New York, USA, 2018
    Applying Linked Data techniques to musical metadata can facilitate new paths of musicological inquiry. JazzCats: Jazz Collection of Aggregated Triples is a prototype project interlinking four discrete jazz performance datasets and external sources as references. Tabular, relational, and graph legacy datasets have necessitated different RDF production and ingestion workflows to support scholarly study of performance traditions. This paper highlights critical processes of data curation for digital libraries, including quality assessment of the ingested datasets. In addition, we describe research questions enabled by JazzCats, raise musicological implications, and offer suggestions to overcome current limitations.
    View Document Abstract
  • Journal Article

    Ten considerations for open peer review 

    Schmidt, Birgit; Ross-Hellauer, Tony; van Edig, Xenia; Moylan, Elizabeth C.
    F1000Research 2018; 7: Art. 969
    Open peer review (OPR), as with other elements of open science and open research, is on the rise. It aims to bring greater transparency and participation to formal and informal peer review processes. But what is meant by `open peer review', and what advantages and disadvantages does it have over standard forms of review? How do authors or reviewers approach OPR? And what pitfalls and opportunities should you look out for? Here, we propose ten considerations for OPR, drawing on discussions with authors, reviewers, editors, publishers and librarians, and provide a pragmatic, hands-on introduction to these issues. We cover basic principles and summarise best practices, indicating how to use OPR to achieve best value and mutual benefits for all stakeholders and the wider research community.
    View Document Abstract
  • Journal Article

    Altmetrics für LIS-Professionals 

    Beucke, Daniel
    View Document
  • Journal Article

    Building Prototypes Aggregating Musicological Datasets on the Semantic Web 

    Nurmikko-Fuller, Terhi; Bangert, Daniel; Dix, Alan; Weigl, David; Page, Kevin
    Bibliothek Forschung und Praxis 2018; 42(2) p.206-221
    Semantic Web technologies such as RDF, OWL, and SPARQL can be successfully used to bridge complementary musicological information. In this paper, we describe, compare, and evaluate the datasets and workflows used to create two such aggregator projects: In Collaboration with In Concert, and JazzCats, both of which bring together a cluster of smaller projects containing concert and performance metadata.
    View Document Abstract
  • Journal Article

    Open Science Support as a Portfolio of Services and Projects: From Awareness to Engagement 

    Schmidt, Birgit; Bertino, Andrea; Beucke, Daniel; Brinken, Helene; Jahn, Najko; Matthias, Lisa; Mimkes, Julika; Müller, Katharina; Orth, Astrid; Bargheer, Margo
    Publications 2018; 6(2): Art. 27
    Together with many other universities worldwide, the University of Göttingen has aimed to unlock the full potential of networked digital scientific communication by strengthening open access as early as the late 1990s. Open science policies at the institutional level consequently followed and have been with us for over a decade. However, for several reasons, their adoption often is still far from complete when it comes to the practices of researchers or research groups. To improve this situation at our university, there is dedicated support at the infrastructural level: the university library collaborates with several campus units in developing and running services, activities and projects in support of open access and open science. This article outlines our main activity areas and aligns them with the overall rationale to reach higher uptake and acceptance of open science practice at the university. The mentioned examples of our activities highlight how we seek to advance open science along the needs and perspectives of diverse audiences and by running it as a multi-stakeholder endeavor. Therefore, our activities involve library colleagues with diverse backgrounds, faculty and early career researchers, research managers, as well as project and infrastructure staff. We conclude with a summary of achievements and challenges to be faced.
    View Document Abstract
  • Journal Article

    Dendrochronologically dated pine stumps document phase-wise bog expansion at a northwest German site between ca. 6700 and ca. 3400 BC 

    Achterberg, Inke Elisabeth Maike; Eckstein, Jan; Birkholz, Bernhard; Bauerochse, Andreas; Leuschner, Hanns Hubert
    Climate of the Past 2018; 14(1) p.85-100
    The investigated northwest German mire site at "Totes Moor" is densely covered with subfossil pine stumps (Pinus sylvestris L.) from the fen–bog transition. This facilitates the spatio-temporal reconstruction of mire development, which is based on 212 in situ tree stumps in the case study presented here. Six dendrochronologically dated site chronologies together cover 2345 years between 6703 and 3403 BC. The gaps in between are 6 to 550 years long. Additionally, a floating chronology of 309 years, containing 30 trees, was radiocarbon-dated to the beginning of the 7th millennium cal BC. Peat-stratigraphical survey was carried out additionally, and elevations a.s.l. were determined at several locations. Tree dying-off phases, which indicate water level rise at the site, mostly in context of the local fen–bog transition, are evident for ca. 6600–6450, ca. 6350–5750, ca. 5300–4900, ca. 4700–4550, ca. 3900–3850, ca. 3700–3600, ca. 3500–3450 and ca. 3400 BC. The spatial distribution of the dated in situ trees illustrates the phase-wise expansion of raised bog over fen peat at the site. The documented bog expansion pulses likely correspond to climatic wet sifts.
    View Document Abstract
  • Journal Article

    An der Schwelle zur Transformation: „alte“ und „neue“ Lizenzmodelle im Überblick 

    Hillenkötter, Kristine
    Bibliothek Forschung und Praxis 2018; 42(1) p.42-56
    Due to the global initiative for the transition of academic research publishing to open access, licensing of electronic resources is undergoing major changes. This turning point is taken as an occasion to explore the fundamental conditions of licensing in Germany as well as the underlying parameters for developing new licensing models, and to provide an analysis of both long-established and recently created licensing models. Eventually, the opportunities and limitations of the conventional ways of modelling are discussed on the basis of the newest model, the ‘open access transition agreement’.
    View Document Abstract
  • Journal Article

    Survey on open peer review: Attitudes and experience amongst editors, authors and reviewers 

    Ross-Hellauer, Tony; Deppe, Arvid; Schmidt, Birgit
    PLOS ONE 2017; 12(12): Art. e0189311
    Open peer review (OPR) is a cornerstone of the emergent Open Science agenda. Yet to date no large-scale survey of attitudes towards OPR amongst academic editors, authors, reviewers and publishers has been undertaken. This paper presents the findings of an online survey, conducted for the OpenAIRE2020 project during September and October 2016, that sought to bridge this information gap in order to aid the development of appropriate OPR approaches by providing evidence about attitudes towards and levels of experience with OPR. The results of this cross-disciplinary survey, which received 3,062 full responses, show the majority (60.3%) of respondents to be believe that OPR as a general concept should be mainstream scholarly practice (although attitudes to individual traits varied, and open identities peer review was not generally favoured). Respondents were also in favour of other areas of Open Science, like Open Access (88.2%) and Open Data (80.3%). Among respondents we observed high levels of experience with OPR, with three out of four (76.2%) reporting having taken part in an OPR process as author, reviewer or editor. There were also high levels of support for most of the traits of OPR, particularly open interaction, open reports and final-version commenting. Respondents were against opening reviewer identities to authors, however, with more than half believing it would make peer review worse. Overall satisfaction with the peer review system used by scholarly journals seems to strongly vary across disciplines. Taken together, these findings are very encouraging for OPR's prospects for moving mainstream but indicate that due care must be taken to avoid a "one-size fits all" solution and to tailor such systems to differing (especially disciplinary) contexts. OPR is an evolving phenomenon and hence future studies are to be encouraged, especially to further explore differences between disciplines and monitor the evolution of attitudes.
    View Document Abstract
  • Journal Article

    Kompetenzzentrum für Lizenzierung im FID-Kontext: Es geht weiter! 

    Hillenkötter, Kristine; Behrens, Kathrin; Glaab-Kühn, Friederike; Schäffler, Hildegard
    Zeitschrift für Bibliothekswesen und Bibliographie 2017; 64(5) p.249-260
    Das inzwischen etablierte Kompetenzzentrum für Lizenzierung im FID-Kontext (KfL) wird von der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) für drei weitere Jahre gefördert, um seine Serviceangebote, die Betriebsorganisation und die technische Infrastruktur weiter zu entwickeln und zu optimieren. Zur Wahrnehmung seiner Aufgaben hat sich das KfL ab 2017 neu aufgestellt und verteilt sich nun auf drei miteinander kooperierende Standorte an der Niedersächsischen Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek Göttingen, der Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin und der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek in München, technisch unterstützt durch die Verbundzentrale des GBV in Göttingen. Zentrale Arbeitsbereiche für das KfL sind die Felder »Verhandlung«, »Modellbildung« und »Erschließung«. Diese drei Schlüsselthemen sollen im Folgenden herausgegriffen und genauer beleuchtet werden, umrahmt von einer Gesamtverortung des Projekts und einem Blick in die Zukunft.
    View Document Abstract
  • Anthology Article

    Tuotilo 

    Schaab, Rupert
    Monasterium Sancti Galli; 8
    Verlag am Klosterhof: St. Gallen, 2017
    View Document
  • Anthology Article

    New Toolkits on the Block: Peer Review Alternatives in Scholarly Communication 

    Schmidt, Birgit; Görögh, Edit
    Proceedings of the 21th International Conference on Electronic Publishing
    IOS Press, 2017
    Peer review continues to play a central role in scholarly communication processes, however, over the last decade the concept has branched out in terms of methods, platforms and stakeholders involved. The paper demonstrates how alternative peer review tools and methods are instrumental in further shaping the communication of scholarly results towards Open Science. The analysis is based on the examination of various review methods (peer commentary, post-publication peer review, decoupled review, portable or cascading review) and review tools and services (publishing platforms, repository-based, and independent reviews). Besides the differences in operation and functionality, these new workflows and services combine common features of network-based solutions and collaborative research applications with varying degrees of openness (e.g. regarding participation, identities and/or reports). They, therefore, represent good examples of Open Science, in terms of transparency and networking among researchers.
    View Document Abstract
  • Anthology Article

    From collecting to connecting – the role of libraries in Open Access 

    Horstmann, Wolfram
    de Gruyter, 2017
    View Document

View more