1,721,012 research outputs found
Grey literature review code
Get PDFIt is often assumed that grey literature is not peer reviewed or lacks standards of quality and rigour. While this is often incorrect, there is currently no standard way of indicating the kind of review process that has occurred. There are also alternative methods to peer review that are often used to scrutinise grey literature such as review by an expert panel or board, internal review and post publication review.
This set of Review Codes are suggested as a simple way of indicating to readers that a review process that has been undertaken and what that has entailed.
In order to use the Review Code
1. Select the code that is applicable from the list.
2. Add it to the bibliographic information on your document or resource
3. Include a brief explanation of the review process either within the resource or on a separate page with a link provided.
Review Codes
Independent peer review
Pre-publication peer-review conducted with 1 or more independent experts (academics or recognised experts in the field)
Expert panel review
Pre-publication peer-review conducted via expert panel or board which may or may not include members outside of the organisation
Internal review
Pre-publication review conducted internally or with external service including proof reading and editing, fact checking and confirmation of results
Other review process
Some kind of pre-publication review process conducted that does not fit into any of the above.
Post publication peer review
Material able to be reviewed publically on post publication review website
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is an initial concept and feedback is welcome. We are also considering developing some icons that could be used to simplify recognition of the different Review Codes.
Produced as part of the Grey Literature Strategies ARC Linkage project
 
A bridge over grey waters: collecting and preserving public policy research
No full text
This paper looks at the role of Australian Policy Online (APO) as a collection of ‘grey’ public policy research and considers how this fits within the broader context of open access publishing and policy development. The amount of grey literature now being produced presents challenges for APO as well as other collecting agencies and society in general. This paper looks at who is operating in this space in Australia, the issues for collecting and preserving grey literature, and how bibliographic exchange and interoperability help us to manage the flood of new material and reduce the duplicated effort that currently exists. While APO has been a foundational player in this field, it has reached a stage where a new solution is required - a national online collaborative collection of full text digital resources created with a vision for the benefits that the semantic web will bring.
Amanda Lawrence is Managing Editor of Australian Policy Online.
Image: Sidereal / flick
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Get PDFThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Variations on the Author
Get PDF“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Get PDFWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
Dispelling the Myths Behind First-author Citation Counts
Get PDFWe conducted a full-scale evaluative citation analysis study of scholars in the XML research field to explore just how different from each other author rankings resulting from different citation counting methods actually are, and to demonstrate the capability of emerging data and tools on the Web in supporting more realistic citation counting methods. Our results contest some common arguments for the continued
use of first-author citation counts in the evaluation of scholars, such as high correlations between author rankings by first-author citation counts and other citation
counting methods, and high costs of using more realistic citation counting methods that are not well-supported by the ISI databases. It is argued that increasingly available digital full text research papers make it possible for citation analysis studies to go beyond what the ISI databases have directly supported and to employ more
sophisticated methods
koamabayili/VECTRON-author-checklist: VECTRON author checklist
No full textWe have done our best to complete the author checklist relating to the use of animals in the hut study. Note that the objective for the hut study was to evaluate the IRS treatment applications for residual efficacy against Anopheles mosquitoes, including the local An. coluzzii mosquito population. Cows were only used to attract mosquitoes into the huts and no tests were carried out directly on the cows. The author checklist is intended for use with studies where experiments are carried out on animals, which is why we have had such difficulty in completing this for the hut study, as many of the questions do not relate to how the cows were used
Author-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.
No full textAuthor-wise bibliometric analysis based on entropy.</p
- …
