Author: International Journal of Digital Curation

I am a recent PhD graduate in the philosophy and history of science, having written a thesis on the relationship between pre-science in Kuhn and Popper and folk physics in developmental psychology. I am interested in the digital history of science, looking at science as a body of text, especially the idea that theories or paradigms can be treated as a form of literary subgenre within the genre of scientific writing.

Report: Frictionless Data – Making Research Data Quality Visible

About the report:

There is significant friction in the acquisition, sharing, and reuse of research data. It is estimated that eighty percent of data analysis is invested in the cleaning and mapping of data (Dasu and Johnson,2003). This friction hampers researchers not well versed in data preparation techniques from reusing an ever-increasing amount of data available within research data repositories. Frictionless Data is an ongoing project at Open Knowledge International focused on removing this friction. We are doing this by developing a set of tools, specifications, and best practices for describing, publishing, and validating data. The heart of this project is the “Data Package”, a containerization format for data based on existing practices for publishing open source software. This paper will report on current progress toward that goal.

Read the full report here.

Editors’ Choice: Are Historians Still Ambivalent About Getting Published Online?

As earlier reports on historians’ use of technology demonstrated, most historians are gathering materials, analyzing their findings, and writing their scholarship in digital form. Curiously, however, a national survey in fall 2015 found that much of the profession remains skeptical about the value of disseminating their scholarship electronically (aside from digital versions of their print publications).  As of 2015, 26% of historians had reportedly published their work online (which was up substantially from the 20% among respondents in a similar 2010 survey), but the share with publications was less than half the share (58%) of historians who reported they had considered publishing their work online. (The latter was essentially the same share as in 2010.) Among those who had not published something online, this ambivalence appeared to arise from two principal sources—personal doubts about the value of this form of work, and a larger sense that there is little professional appreciation or credit for this form of work.

Read the full post here.