Improving The Future of Research Communications and e-Scholarship (Dagstuhl Perspectives Workshop 11331)

Research and scholarship lead to the generation of new knowledge. The dissemination of this knowledge has a fundamental impact on the ways in which society develops and progresses, and at the same time it feeds back to improve subsequent research and scholarship. Here, as in so many other areas of human activity, the internet is changing the way things work: it opens up opportunities for new processes that can accelerate the growth of knowledge, including the creation of new means of communicating that knowledge among researchers and within the wider community. Two decades of emergent and increasingly pervasive information technology have demonstrated the potential for far more effective scholarly communication. However, the use of this technology remains limited; research processes and the dissemination of research results have yet to fully assimilate the capabilities of the web and other digital media. Producers and consumers remain wedded to formats developed in the era of print publication, and the reward systems for researchers remain tied to those delivery mechanisms. Force11 (the Future of Research Communication and e-Scholarship) is a community of scholars, librarians, archivists, publishers and research funders that has arisen organically to help facilitate the change toward improved knowledge creation and sharing. Individually and collectively, we aim to bring about a change in scholarly communication through the effective use of information technology. Force11 has grown from a small group of like-minded individuals into an open movement with clearly identified stakeholders associated with emerging technologies, policies, funding mechanisms and business models. While not disputing the expressive power of the written word to communicate complex ideas, our foundational assumption is that scholarly communication by means of semantically-enhanced media-rich digital publishing is likely to have a greater impact than communication in traditional print media or electronic facsimiles of printed works. However, to date, online versions of ‘scholarly outputs’ have tended to replicate print forms, rather than exploit the additional functionalities afforded by the digital terrain. We believe that digital publishing of enhanced papers will enable more effective scholarly communication, which will also broaden to include, for example, better links to data, the publication of software tools, mathematical models, protocols and workflows, and research communication by means of social media channels. This document, also known as the Force 11 Manifesto, highlights the findings of the Force11 workshop on the Future of Research Communication and e-Scholarship held at Schloss Dagstuhl, Germany, in August 2011: it summarizes a number of key problems facing scholarly publishing today, and presents a vision that addresses these problems, proposing concrete steps that key stakeholders can take to improve the state of scholarly publishing. More about Force11 can be found at http://www.force11.org. This White Paper is a collaborative effort that reflects the input of all Force11 attendees at the Dagstuhl Workshop 1, and is very much a living document 2 . We see it as a starting point that will grow and be updated and augmented by individual and collective efforts by the participants and others. We invite you to join and contribute to this enterprise.

[1]  Mercè Crosas,et al.  The Dataverse Network®: An Open-Source Application for Sharing, Discovering and Preserving Data , 2011, D Lib Mag..

[2]  D. Kell,et al.  Calling International Rescue: knowledge lost in literature and data landslide! , 2009, The Biochemical journal.

[3]  Carole A. Goble,et al.  Why Linked Data is Not Enough for Scientists , 2010, 2010 IEEE Sixth International Conference on e-Science.

[4]  Steven A Greenberg,et al.  How citation distortions create unfounded authority: analysis of a citation network , 2009, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[5]  David M. Shotton,et al.  Semantic publishing: the coming revolution in scientific journal publishing , 2009, Learn. Publ..

[6]  E. Wenger Communities of Practice and Social Learning Systems , 2000 .

[7]  David M. Shotton The Five Stars of Online Journal Articles – an article evaluation framework , 2011 .

[8]  Victoria A. Reich,et al.  Archiving Supplemental Materials , 2010 .

[9]  Carole Goble,et al.  Lessons from myExperiment: Research Objects for Data Intensive Research , 2009 .

[10]  David Charles De Roure,et al.  myExperiment: social networking for workflow-using e-scientists , 2007, WORKS '07.

[11]  Susan Leigh Star,et al.  Institutional Ecology, `Translations' and Boundary Objects: Amateurs and Professionals in Berkeley's Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, 1907-39 , 1989 .

[12]  Leyla Jael García Castro,et al.  An open annotation ontology for science on web 3.0 , 2011, J. Biomed. Semant..

[13]  Hollie White,et al.  The Dryad Data Repository: A Singapore Framework Metadata Architecture in a DSpace Environment , 2008, Dublin Core Conference.

[14]  Carole A. Goble,et al.  The design and realisation of the myExperiment Virtual Research Environment for social sharing of workflows , 2009, Future Gener. Comput. Syst..

[15]  L. Grivell,et al.  Text mining for biology - the way forward: opinions from leading scientists , 2008, Genome Biology.

[16]  Ian Hargreaves,et al.  Digital opportunity: a review of intellectual property and growth: an independent report , 2011 .

[17]  Simon Buckingham Shum,et al.  Hypotheses, evidence and relationships: The HypER approach for representing scientific knowledge claims , 2009, ISWC 2009.

[18]  B. Kirsop,et al.  Towards Open and Equitable Access to Research and Knowledge for Development , 2011, PLoS medicine.

[19]  Sean Bechhofer,et al.  Research Objects: Towards Exchange and Reuse of Digital Knowledge , 2010 .

[20]  Brian Vickery,et al.  A century of scientific and technical information , 1999, J. Documentation.

[21]  P ? ? ? ? ? ? ? % ? ? ? ? , 1991 .

[22]  Gary King,et al.  An Introduction to the Dataverse Network as an Infrastructure for Data Sharing , 2007 .

[23]  Micah Altman,et al.  A Proposed Standard for the Scholarly Citation of Quantitative Data , 2008 .

[24]  Philip E. Bourne,et al.  What Do I Want from the Publisher of the Future? , 2010, PLoS Comput. Biol..

[25]  Jan Brase,et al.  DataCite - A Global Registration Agency for Research Data , 2009, 2009 Fourth International Conference on Cooperation and Promotion of Information Resources in Science and Technology.

[26]  Yrjö Engeström,et al.  Communication, discourse and activity , 1999 .

[27]  Yves Pigneur,et al.  Business Model Generation: A handbook for visionaries, game changers and challengers , 2010 .

[28]  Jane Greenberg Theoretical Considerations of Lifecycle Modeling: An Analysis of the Dryad Repository Demonstrating Automatic Metadata Propagation, Inheritance, and Value System Adoption , 2009 .

[29]  Anita de Waard From Proteins to Fairytales: Directions in Semantic Publishing , 2010, IEEE Intelligent Systems.

[30]  Gavin J. D. Smith,et al.  Origins and evolutionary genomics of the 2009 swine-origin H1N1 influenza A epidemic , 2009, Nature.