Investigating eResearch: Collaboration practices and future challenges

Collaborative and Distributed E-Research: Innovations in Technologies, Strategies and Applications

Volumn , Issue , 2012, Pages 1-33

  Markauskaite, Lina ^a   Kennan, Mary Anne ^b   Richardson, Jim ^a   Aditomo, Anindito ^a,c   Hellmers, Leonie ^d  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SYDNEY   (Australia)

^b CHARLES STURT UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SURABAYA   (Indonesia)

^d Intersect Australia Ltd   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84898311532     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-4666-0125-3.ch001     Document Type: Chapter

References (77)

1. ACLS. (2006). Our cultural commonwealth: The final report of the American council of learned societies commission on cyberinfrastructure for the humanities and social sciences. Washington, DC: American Council of Learned Societies Commission on Cyberinfrastructure for the Humanities and Social Sciences.
2. ARCS. (2011). NeAT projects. Australian Research Collaboration Service. Retrieved February 24, 2011, from http://www.arcs.org.au/index.php/services/research-community-projects/266-research-community-custom-projects-redone.
3. Atkins, D. E., Droegemeier, K. K., Feldman, S. I., Garcia-Molina, H., Klein, M. L., & Messerschmitt, D. G. (2003). Revolutionizing science and engineering through cyberinfrastructure. Report of the National Science Foundation Blue-Ribbon Advisory Panel on Cyberinfrastructure. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
4. Barjak, F., Lane, J., Kertcher, Z., Poschen, M., Proct-er, R., & Robinson, S. (2009). Case studies of e-infra-structure adoption. Social Science Computer Review, 27(4), 583-600. doi:10.1177/0894439309332310
5. Barjak, F., Wiegand, G., Lane, J., Kertcher, Z., Poschen, M., Procter, R., et al. (2007). Accelerating transition to virtual research organization in social science (AVROSS): First results from a survey of e-infrastructure adopters. Paper presented at the Third International Conference on e-Social Science. Ann Arbor, MI. Retrieved February 24, 2011, from http://ess.si.umich.edu/papers/paper141.pdf.
6. Becher, T., & Trowler, P. R. (2001). Academic tribes and territories. Philadelphia, PA: Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.
7. Bishop, L. (2005). Protecting respondents and enabling data sharing: Reply to Parry and Mauthner. Sociology, 39(2), 333-336. doi:10.1177/0038038505050542
8. Borgman, C. L. (2007). Scholarship in the digital age: Information, infrastructure, and the internet. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
9. Bos, N., Zimmerman, A., Olson, J., Yew, J., Yerkie, J., & Dahl, E. (2007). From shared databases to com-munities of practice: A taxonomy of collaboratories. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(2). doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00343.x
10. Brody, T., Harnad, S., & Carr, L. (2006). Earlier web usage statistics as predictors of later cita-tion impact. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 57(8), 1060-1072. doi:10.1002/asi.20373
11. Carlson, S., & Anderson, B. (2007). What are data? The many kinds of data and their implications for data re-use. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(2). doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00342.x
12. Carpenter, J., Wetheridge, N., Smith, N., Good-man, M., & Struijvé, O. (2010). Researchers of tomorrow. London, UK: British Library/JISC.
13. Clarke, S., Harrison, A., & Searle, S. (2009). Scholarly information repository services at Monash University. Paper presented at the International Association of Technical University Libraries (IA-TUL) 30th Annual Conference. Leuven, Belgium.
14. Cragin, M. H., Palmer, C. L., Carlson, J. R., & Witt, M. (2010). Data sharing, small science, and institutional repositories. Philosophical Trans-actions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 368(1926), 4023-4038.
15. David, P.A. (2006). Towards a cyberinfrastructure for enhanced scientific collaboration: Providing its 'soft' foundations may be the hardest part. In Kahin, B., & Foray, D. (Eds.), Advancing Knowl-edge and the Knowledge Economy (pp. 431-454). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
16. De Roure, D., Baker, M. A., Jennings, N. R., & Shadbolt, N. R. (2003). The evolution of the grid. In Berman, F., Fox, G., & Hey, A. J. G. (Eds.), Grid Computing: Making the Global Infrastructure a Reality (pp. 65-100). West Sussex, UK: Wiley.
17. De Roure, D., & Frey, J. (2007). Three perspec-tives on collaborative knowledge acquisition in e-science. Paper presented at the Workshop on Semantic Web for Collaborative Knowledge Acquisition (SWeCKa). Hyderabad, India.
18. DEST. (2006). An Australian e-research strategy and implementation framework: Final report of the e-research coordinating committee. Sydney, Australia: Australian Government.
19. Dutton, W., & Meyer, E. (2009). Experience with new tools and infrastructures of research: An exploratory study of distance from, and attitudes toward, e-research. Prometheus, 27(3), 223-238. doi:10.1080/08109020903127802
20. e-IRG. (2009). E-IRG white paper 2009. Retrieved February 24, 2011, from http://www.e-irg.eu/images/stories/publ/white-papers/e-irg_white_paper_2009_final.pdf.
21. Edwards, P., Farrington, J. H., Mellish, C., Philip, L. J., Chorley, A. H., & Hielkema, F. (2009). E-social science and evidence-based policy assessment: Challenges and solutions. Social Science Computer Review, 27(4), 553-568. doi:10.1177/0894439309332305
22. Feinberg, J. (2009). Wordle. Retrieved February 22, 2011, from http://www.wordle.net.
23. Fink, J. L., Kushch, S., Williams, P. R., & Bourne, P. E. (2008). Biolit: Integrating biological literature with databases. Nucleic acids research, 36(2), W385-W389. Retrieved February 24, 2011, from http://nar.oxfordjournals.org/content/36/suppl_2/W385.full.
24. Foster, N. F., & Gibbons, S. (2005). Understand-ing faculty to improve content recruitment for institutional repositories. D-Lib Magazine, 11(1). Retrieved February 24, 2011, from http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january05/foster/01foster.html.
25. Fry, J. (2006). Coordination and control across scientific fields: Implications for a differentiated e-science. In Hine, C. (Ed.), New Infrastructures for Knowledge Production: Understanding e-Science (pp. 167-188). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-59140-717-1.ch008
26. Greenhow, C., Robelia, B., & Hughes, J. E. (2009). Learning, teaching, and scholar-ship in a digital age: Web 2.0 and classroom research: What path should we take now? Educational Researcher, 38(4), 246-259. doi:10.3102/0013189X09336671
27. Halfpenny, P., Procter, R., Lin, Y.-W., & Voss, A. (2009). Developing the UK-based e-social sci-ence research program. In Jankowski, N. (Ed.), E-research: Transformation in Scholarly Practice (pp. 73-90). New York, NY: Routledge.
28. Haythornthwaite, C., Lunsford, K. J., Bowker, G. C., & Bruce, B. C. (2006). Challenges for research and practice in distributed, interdis-ciplinary collaboration. In Hine, C. (Ed.), New Infrastructures for Knowledge Production: Un-derstanding e-Science (pp. 143-166). Hershey, PA: IGI Global. doi:10.4018/978-1-59140-717-1.ch007
29. Henty, M., Weaver, B., Bradbury, S. J., & Por-ter, S. (2008). Investigating data management practices in Australian universities. Canberra, Australia: Australian Partnership for Sustainable Repositories (APSR).
30. Hey, A. J. G., Tansley, S., & Tolle, K. M. (2009). The fourth paradigm: Data-intensive scientific discovery. Palo Alto, CA: Microsoft Research.
31. Hey, T., & Trefethen, A. (2003). The data deluge: An e-science perspective. In Grid Computing: Making the Global Infrastructure a Reality (pp. 809-824). New York, NY: Wiley.
32. Hey, T., & Trefethen, A. (2008). E-science, cy-berinfrastructure, and scholarly communication. In Olson, G. M., Zimmerman, A., & Bos, N. (Eds.), Scientific Collaboration on the Internet (pp. 15-31). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
33. Houghton, J., & Oppenheim, C. (2010). The economic implications of alternative pub-lishing models. Prometheus, 28(1), 41-54. doi:10.1080/08109021003676359
34. Jirotka, M., Procter, R., Hartswood, M., Slack, R., Simpson, A., & Catelijne, C. (2005). Col-laboration and trust in healthcare innovation: The eDiaMoND case study. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 14(4), 369-398. doi:10.1007/s10606-005-9001-0
35. Jirotka, M., Procter, R., Rodden, T., & Bowker, G. (2006). Special issue: Collaboration in e-research. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 15(4), 251-255. doi:10.1007/s10606-006-9028-x
36. Karasti, H., Baker, K. S., & Halkola, E. (2006). Enriching the notion of data curation in e-science: Data managing and information infrastructuring in the long term ecological research (LTER) network. Computer Supported Cooperative Work: The Jour-nal of Collaborative Computing, 15(4), 321-358. doi:10.1007/s10606-006-9023-2
37. Katz, J. S., & Martin, B. R. (1997). What is re-search collaboration? Research Policy, 26(1), 1-18. doi:10.1016/S0048-7333(96)00917-1
38. Kennan, M. A. (2007). Academic authors, scholarly publishing, and open access in Aus-tralia. Learned Publishing, 20(2), 138-146. doi:10.1087/174148507X185117
39. Kennan, M.A., & Kingsley, D.A. (2009). The state of the nation: A snapshot of Australian institutional repositories. First Monday, 14(2). Retrieved Febru-ary 24, 2011, from http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2282/2092.
40. King, D. W., & Tenopir, C. (2011). Some economic aspects of the scholarly journal system. Annual Review of Information Science & Technology, 45, 295-366.
41. Kling, R., & Callahan, E. (2003). Electronic jour-nals, the internet, and scholarly communication. Annual Review of Information Science & Technol-ogy, 37(1), 127-177. doi:10.1002/aris.1440370105
42. Kling, R., & McKim, G. (1999). Scholarly commu-nication and the continuum of electronic publishing. Journal of the American Society for Information Science American Society for Information Sci-ence, 50(10), 890-906. doi:10.1002/(SICI)1097-4571(1999)50:10<890::AID-ASI6>3.0.CO;2-8
43. Korporaal, G. (2009). AARNet 20 years of the internet in Australia: 1989-2009. Sydney, Australia: AARNet.
44. Kyvik, S., & Smeby, J.-C. (1994). Teaching and research: The relationship between the supervision of graduate students and faculty research performance. Higher Education, 28(2), 227-239. doi:10.1007/BF01383730
45. Laterza, V., Carmichael, P., & Procter, R. (2007). The doubtful guest? A virtual research environment for education. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 16(3), 249-267. doi:10.1080/14759390701614363
46. Lawrence, K. (2006). Walking the tightrope: The balancing acts of a large e-research project. Com-puter Supported Cooperative Work, 15(4), 385-411. doi:10.1007/s10606-006-9025-0
47. Lynch, C. (2009). Jim Gray's fourth paradigm and the construction of the scientific record. In Hey, A. J. G., Tansley, S., & Tolle, K. M. (Eds.), The Fourth Paradigm: Data-Intensive Scientific Discovery. Palo Alto, CA: Microsoft Research.
48. Lynch, C. A., & Lippincott, J. K. (2005). Institu-tional repository deployment in the united states as of early 2005. D-Lib Magazine, 11(9), 1082-9873. doi:10.1045/september2005-lynch
49. Markauskaite, L., Aditomo, A., & Hellmers, L. (2009). Co-developing eresearch infrastructure: Technology-enhanced research practices, attitudes and requirements. Retrieved February 24, 2011, from http://www.intersect.org.au/docs/eResearch%20survey%20full%20reportv1.0_noelene.pdf.
50. Markauskaite, L., Aditomo, A., & Hellmers, L. (2011). Co-developing eresearch infrastructure: Technology-enhanced research practices, attitudes and requirements. Full technical report: Round 2. Syd-ney, Australia: Intersect & the University of Sydney.
51. Markauskaite, L., Hellmers, L., Kennan, M. A., & Richardson, J. (2009). eResearch practices, barriers and needs for support: Preliminary study findings from four NSW universities. Paper presented at the 3rd eResearch Australasia Conference. Retrieved February 24, 2011, from http://www.eresearch.edu.au/docs/2009/era09_submission_55.pdf.
52. Maxwell, T. W., & Smyth, R. (2011). Higher de-gree research supervision: From practice toward theory. Higher Education Research & Develop-ment, 30(2), 219-231. doi:10.1080/07294360.2 010.509762
53. Meadows, A. J. (1998). Communicating research. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
54. Meyer, E. T. (2009). Moving from small science to big science: Social and organizational impedi-ments to large scale data sharing. In Jankowski, N. (Ed.), E-Research: Transformation in Schol-arly Practice (pp. 147-159). New York, NY: Routledge.
55. Miles, S., Groth, P., Branco, M., & Moreau, L. (2007). The requirements of using provenance in e-science experiments. Journal of Grid Comput-ing, 5(1), 1-25. doi:10.1007/s10723-006-9055-3
56. NCRIS. (2011). eResearch infrastructure. Sydney, Australia: National Collaborative Research Infrastructure Strategy. Retrieved February 24, 2011, from https://www.pfc.org.au/bin/view/Main/WebHome.
57. NCRIS Committee. (2008). Review of the national collaborative research infrastructure strategy's roadmap. Sydney, Australia: DEEWR.
58. Olson, G. M., Zimmerman, A., & Bos, N. (2008). Scientific collaboration on the internet. Cam-bridge, MA: The MIT Press.
59. Parry, O., & Mauthner, N. (2005). Back to basics: Who re-uses qualitative data and why? Sociology, 39(2), 337-342. doi:10.1177/0038038505050543
60. Paterson, M., Lindsay, D., Monotti, A., & Chin, A. (2007). DART: A new missile in Australia's e-research strategy. Online Information Review, 31(2), 116-134. doi:10.1108/14684520710747185
61. Payette, S., Blanchi, C., Lagoze, C., & Overly, E. (1999). Interoperability for digital objects and repositories. D-Lib Magazine, 5(5), 1082-9873. doi:10.1045/may99-payette
62. Pearce, N. (2010). A study of technology adoption by researchers. Information Com-munication and Society, 13(8), 1191-1206. doi:10.1080/13691181003663601
63. Prosser, D. C. (2005). Fulfilling the promise of scholarly communication -A comparison between old and new access models. In Die Innovative Bibliothek: Elmar Mittler zum 65 (pp. 95-106). Berlin, Germany: Geburtstag.
64. Ribes, D., & Finholt, T. A. (2009). The long now of infrastructure: Articulating tensions in develop-ment. Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 10(5), 375-398.
65. Ribes, D., & Lee, C. (2010). Sociotechnical studies of cyberinfrastructure and e-research: Current themes and future trajectories. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 19(3), 231-244. doi:10.1007/s10606-010-9120-0
66. Rowlands, I., & Nicholas, D. (2006). The changing scholarly communication landscape: An internation-al survey of senior researchers. Learned Publishing, 19(1), 31-55. doi:10.1087/095315106775122493
67. Seringhaus, M., & Gerstein, M. (2007). Publish-ing perishing? Towards tomorrow's information architecture. BMC Bioinformatics, 8(1). Retrieved February 24, 2011, from http://www.biomedcen-tral.com/content/pdf/1471-2105-8-17.pdf.
68. Smith, M. K., Barton, M., Bass, M., Branschofsky, M., McClellan, G., Stuve, D., et al. (2003). Dspace: An open source dynamic digital repository. D-Lib Magazine, 9(1). Retrieved February 24, 2011, from http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january03/smith/01smith.html.
69. Swan, A. (2010). The open access citation advan-tage: Studies and results to date. Southampton, UK: University of Southampton.
70. Swan, A., & Brown, S. (2005). Open access self-archiving: An author study. Truro, UK: Key Perspectives Limited.
71. Tan, K. L. L., Lambert, P. S., Turner, K. J., Blum, J., Gayle, V., & Jones, S. B. (2009). Enabling quantitative data analysis through e-infrastructure. Social Science Computer Review, 27(4), 539-552. doi:10.1177/0894439309332647
72. Universities Australia. (2010). Australian universi-ties data snapshot 2010. Retrieved February 24, 2011, from http://www.universitiesaustralia.edu.au/resources/389.
73. Van de Sompel, H., Payette, S., Erickson, J., Lagoze, C., & Warner, S. (2004). Rethinking scholarly com-munication. D-Lib Magazine, 10(9), 1082-9873. doi:10.1045/september2004-vandesompel
74. Wilson, A., Rimpilainen, S., Skinner, D., Cassidy, C., Christie, D., & Coutts, N. (2007). Using a virtual research environment to support new models of collaborative and participative research in Scottish education. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 16(3), 289-304. doi:10.1080/14759390701614413
75. Woolgar, S. (2004). Social shaping perspectives on e-science and e-social science: The case for research support. Oxford, UK: University of Oxford.
76. Wouters, P., & Beaulieu, A. (2007). Critical accountability: Dilemmas for interventionist studies of e-science. Journal of Computer-Medi-ated Communication, 12(2). doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00339.x
77. Wu, P. H. J., Heok, A. K. H., & Tamsir, I. P. (2007). Annotating web archives - Structure, provenance, and context through archival cataloguing. New Review of Hypermedia and Multimedia, 13(1), 55-75. doi:10.1080/13614560701423620