1,720,990 research outputs found

    Publishing DDI-Related Topics. Current Status and Related Working Group of the DDI Alliance

    No full text
    While publishing articles in all fields of science and research is a common practice, it is less common in the area of metadata and data management, especially in the DDI community. This can be seen as problematic because gained insights tend to disappear after projects are offline and the next similar project has to start from the very beginning – which is a common (and perhaps preferred) practice for most software engineers. But: If one would subsume metadata and data management under science, sustainable research would look different and last but not least the principle “publish or perish” is relevant for many involved experts, too. This presentation will give an overview of the current status of DDI-related publications. Furthermore the ongoing work of a related working group of the DDI Alliance will be described

    Same Same But Different - Documenting Panel Data Using DDI

    No full text
    The key characteristics of panel studies include repeated measures for a more or less stable sample over time. The core challenge in documenting panel studies is the documentation of these repeated measures (usually questions) and the resulting variables because various reasons can require modifications of measures over time – resulting in comparable but not identical data structures. The DDI standard provides not one but multiple options for the documentation of panel data. In this workshop we like to present various options and discuss their feasibility for common use cases. The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP) will provide the primary use case, but participants are also invited to introduce and discuss their own use cases. The workshop starts with a short introduction of both panel studies and the DDI standard. Therefore, no previous knowledge of the DDI standard is required to participate in the workshop. The goal for the workshop is to gain a deeper understanding of possible documentation strategies for panel studies

    Mit Metadaten wird alles besser

    No full text
    Impulsreferat anlässlich des Survey Lifecycle Operators Workshop (SLOW), der vom 9. bis 11. März 2020 am DJI München stattgefunden hat.</p

    Next Time Try Recycling - What Reusable Metadata (Should) Look Like

    Full text link
    One feature of DDI is its focus on metadata reuse. By looking at the current practice regarding this feature the following questions shall be answered: What are suppliers of reusable metadata? In the context of Linked Open Data there is a regular report “State of the LOD cloud” giving an overview of the available data and their sources. Although DDI metadata are not linked an overview over potential sources for reuse should be interesting nevertheless. What kind of metadata are offered? There are perhaps two main scenarios for reusing metadata: aggregate metadata from different sources for indexing and then display a link to the original source (e.g. a search portal which directs its user to a relevant dataset) or reuse for ingesting the retrieved object in a separate life-cycle of another study (e.g. a question bank, which allows to reuse the questions in a new questionnaire). What are the organisational and technical approaches? Relevant for reuse are the findability and the format of exported metadata. Also the possibility to store own metadata and use the system like a registry can be desirable. Of course license issues can be important, too. After exploring the range of available metadata, in a second step some recommendations for a successful distribution of metadata will be suggested. One aim could be to develop criteria for distribution metadata following the FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management and stewardship

    Kollektiver und individueller Studienverlauf an der Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaftlichen Fakultät der Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg

    Full text link
    Im Rahmen dieser Diplomarbeit wird zunächst dargestellt, vor welchem Hintergrund Hochschulforschung stattfindet, welchen Stellenwert dort häufig verwendete Begriffe wie Effizienz und Effektivität haben, was Evaluation bedeutet und welche Forschungsergebnisse bereits an der FAU vorliegen. In einem nächsten Schritt wird ein Auswertungskonzept für die zur Verfügung stehenden Daten des Prüfungsamtes vorgestellt und dann Ergebnisse für die vier klassischen Studiengänge der Fakultät (BWL, Sozialwissenschaften, VWL, Wirtschaftspädagogik) präsentiert. Dem schließt sich ein Kapitel an, in dem sich weitergehende Analysen und Erkenntnisse finden. Hier wird beispielsweise der Einfluss der Studienzeit auf die erreichten Noten diskutiert und eine Methode skizziert, die verwendet werden könnte, wenn neben den Daten des Prüfungsamtes demnächst auch auf Daten der Studentenkanzlei zurückgegriffen werden kann. (Autor

    Buchbesprechung: Fassmann, Heinz: Räumliche Disparitäten im österreichischen Schulsystem

    Full text link
    Buchbesprechung zu: Fassmann, Heinz: Räumliche Disparitäten im österreichischen Schulsystem: Strukturen, Trends und politische Implikationen. Schriftenreihe / Österreichische Raumordnungskonferenz (ÖROK) , Bd. 162. Wien: Geschäftsstelle der Östereich. Raumordnungskonferenz 2002. 3-85186-070-

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Full text link
    The 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

    GitLab at the Socio-Economic Panel – A Roadshow

    No full text
    The Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP) relies heavily on a GitLab server for its data management and documentation needs. GitLab is a web-based Git repository manager that provides version control for source code, project management tools, and automation. At the SOEP, the GitLab server has been configured to provide several key features, including: Version control: GitLab provides a centralised repository for storing and managing source code, making it easier to track changes and collaborate with other team members. The SOEP uses this feature to manage scripts (Stata and R) and metadata. Issue tracking: GitLab's built-in issue tracker allows users to report and track bugs, defects, and other issues. At the SOEP, the issue tracker is used to report problems during data preparation, document issues, and track bug reports from data users. It is also used to manage teams or projects, complex internal processes with multiple stakeholders, and to organise weekly meetings. Service desks: GitLab's service desks feature enables users to create and manage support tickets. This feature can be used to centralise and distribute user requests to the relevant specialists, replacing email battles within the team. Automation: GitLab's pipeline feature allows the SOEP to automate the testing and deployment of metadata stored in CSV files. This feature has also been used to produce almost publication-ready PDF files. Wiki: GitLab's built-in wiki feature allows users to create and edit pages of content within the GitLab interface. The SOEP uses this feature to create internal documentation related to its data management activities. Overall, the GitLab server at the SOEP provides a range of features that support the organisation's research and data management needs. By using GitLab, the SOEP has been able to improve collaboration and streamline workflows
    corecore