Increasing the equitability of data citation in paleontology: capacity building for the big data future

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS
Jansen A. Smith, Nussaïbah B. Raja, Thomas Clements, Danijela Dimitrijević, Elizabeth M. Dowding, Emma M. Dunne, Bryan M. Gee, Pedro L. Godoy, Elizabeth M. Lombardi, Laura P. A. Mulvey, Paulina S. Nätscher, Carl J. Reddin, Bryan Shirley, Rachel C. M. Warnock, Ádám T. Kocsis
{"title":"Increasing the equitability of data citation in paleontology: capacity building for the big data future","authors":"Jansen A. Smith, Nussaïbah B. Raja, Thomas Clements, Danijela Dimitrijević, Elizabeth M. Dowding, Emma M. Dunne, Bryan M. Gee, Pedro L. Godoy, Elizabeth M. Lombardi, Laura P. A. Mulvey, Paulina S. Nätscher, Carl J. Reddin, Bryan Shirley, Rachel C. M. Warnock, Ádám T. Kocsis","doi":"10.1017/pab.2023.33","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Data compilations expand the scope of research; however, data citation practice lags behind advances in data use. It remains uncommon for data users to credit data producers in professionally meaningful ways. In paleontology, databases like the Paleobiology Database (PBDB) enable assessment of patterns and processes spanning millions of years, up to global scale. The status quo for data citation creates an imbalance wherein publications drawing data from the PBDB receive significantly more citations (median: 4.3 ± 3.5 citations/year) than the publications producing the data (1.4 ± 1.3 citations/year). By accounting for data reuse where citations were neglected, the projected citation rate for data-provisioning publications approached parity (4.2 ± 2.2 citations/year) and the impact factor of paleontological journals (<span>n</span> = 55) increased by an average of 13.4% (maximum increase = 57.8%) in 2019. Without rebalancing the distribution of scientific credit, emerging “big data” research in paleontology—and science in general—is at risk of undercutting itself through a systematic devaluation of the work that is foundational to the discipline.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/pab.2023.33","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Data compilations expand the scope of research; however, data citation practice lags behind advances in data use. It remains uncommon for data users to credit data producers in professionally meaningful ways. In paleontology, databases like the Paleobiology Database (PBDB) enable assessment of patterns and processes spanning millions of years, up to global scale. The status quo for data citation creates an imbalance wherein publications drawing data from the PBDB receive significantly more citations (median: 4.3 ± 3.5 citations/year) than the publications producing the data (1.4 ± 1.3 citations/year). By accounting for data reuse where citations were neglected, the projected citation rate for data-provisioning publications approached parity (4.2 ± 2.2 citations/year) and the impact factor of paleontological journals (n = 55) increased by an average of 13.4% (maximum increase = 57.8%) in 2019. Without rebalancing the distribution of scientific credit, emerging “big data” research in paleontology—and science in general—is at risk of undercutting itself through a systematic devaluation of the work that is foundational to the discipline.

提高古生物学数据引用的公平性:面向大数据未来的能力建设
数据汇编扩大了研究范围;然而,数据引用实践却落后于数据使用的进步。数据用户以具有专业意义的方式向数据生产者致谢的情况仍然不多见。在古生物学领域,像古生物学数据库(PBDB)这样的数据库可以对跨越数百万年乃至全球范围的模式和过程进行评估。数据引用的现状造成了一种不平衡,即从 PBDB 中获取数据的出版物所获得的引用次数(中位数:4.3 ± 3.5 次/年)远远高于产生数据的出版物(1.4 ± 1.3 次/年)。通过对被忽视的数据再利用进行核算,预计提供数据的出版物的引用率接近持平(4.2 ± 2.2 次引用/年),2019 年古生物学期刊(n = 55)的影响因子平均增加了 13.4%(最大增幅 = 57.8%)。如果不重新平衡科学信用的分配,古生物学中新兴的 "大数据 "研究--乃至整个科学--就有可能因系统性地贬低作为学科基础的工作而削弱自身的价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信