How Ordinary is the Ordinary (Wo)man on the Street?

Interviews with the ordinary man or woman on the street are omnipresent in television news. These vox pop interviews are used to represent the general public in the news. Several editorial and practical guidelines exist about the characteristics of a “good” vox pop. But what characteristics do journalists search for in vox pops in practice? This study answers this question by looking at visual and contextual characteristics of vox pop interviews as a means to gain a better understanding of which vox pops appear in the news as a representation of the entire population. We conducted a content analysis of 2000 vox pop interviews in Flanders, Belgium’s Dutch-speaking region, supplemented by interviews with television journalists. We find that, despite editorial guidelines to do so, journalists hardly ever contextualize vox pop interviews by clarifying that they are not necessarily a good representation of the entire population. The results show that journalists select vox pops which are representative of age and gender, but not of minority groups such as ethnic-cultural minorities and people with disabilities. In some regards, vox pops thus provide a biased representation of the population and might influence the public to make wrongful generalizations about public opinion.     

How robust are journal rankings based on the impact factor? Evidence from the economic sciences

It is well-known that the distribution of citations to articles in a journal is skewed. We ask whether journal rankings based on the impact factor are robust with respect to this fact. We exclude the most cited paper, the top 5 and 10 cited papers for 100 economics journals and recalculate the impact factor. Afterwards we compare the resulting rankings with the original ones from 2012. Our results show that the rankings are relatively robust. This holds both for the 2-year and the 5-year impact factor.     

How important is choice of the scaling factor in standardizing citations?

Because of the variations in citation behavior across research fields, appropriate standardization must be applied as part of any bibliometric analysis of the productivity of individual scientists and research organizations. Such standardization involves scaling by some factor that characterizes the distribution of the citations of articles from the same year and subject category. In this work we conduct an analysis of the sensitivity of researchers’ productivity rankings to the scaling factor chosen to standardize their citations. To do this we first prepare the productivity rankings for all researchers (more than 30,000) operating in the hard sciences in Italy, over the period 2004–2008. We then measure the shifts in rankings caused by adopting scaling factors other than the particular factor that seems more effective for comparing the impact of publications in different fields: the citation average of the distribution of cited-only publications.     

How to improve the prediction based on citation impact percentiles for years shortly after the publication date?

The findings of Bornmann, Leydesdorff, and Wang (2013b) revealed that the consideration of journal impact improves the prediction of long-term citation impact. This paper further explores the possibility of improving citation impact measurements on the base of a short citation window by the consideration of journal impact and other variables, such as the number of authors, the number of cited references, and the number of pages. The dataset contains 475,391 journal papers published in 1980 and indexed in Web of Science (WoS, Thomson Reuters), and all annual citation counts (from 1980 to 2010) for these papers. As an indicator of citation impact, we used percentiles of citations calculated using the approach of Hazen (1914). Our results show that citation impact measurement can really be improved: If factors generally influencing citation impact are considered in the statistical analysis, the explained variance in the long-term citation impact can be much increased. However, this increase is only visible when using the years shortly after publication but not when using later years.     

Do we measure novelty when we analyze unusual combinations of cited references? A validation study of bibliometric novelty indicators based on F1000Prime data

Lee et al. (2015) – based on Uzzi et al. (2013) – and Wang et al. (2017) proposed scores based on cited references (cited journals) data which can be used to measure the novelty of papers (named as novelty scores U and W in this study). Although previous research has used novelty scores in various empirical analyses, no study has been published up to now – to the best of our knowledge – which quantitatively tested the convergent validity of novelty scores: do these scores measure what they propose to measure? Using novelty assessments by faculty members (FMs) at F1000Prime for comparison, we tested the convergent validity of the two novelty scores (U and W). FMs’ assessments do not only refer to the quality of biomedical papers, but also to their characteristics (by assigning certain tags to the papers): for example, are the presented findings or formulated hypotheses novel (tags “new findings” and “hypothesis”)? We used these and other tags to investigate the convergent validity of both novelty scores. Our study reveals different results for the novelty scores: the results for novelty score U are mostly in agreement with previously formulated expectations. We found, for instance, that for a standard deviation (one unit) increase in novelty score U, the expected number of assignments of the “new finding” tag increase by 7.47%. The results for novelty score W, however, do not reflect convergent validity with the FMs’ assessments: only the results for some tags are in agreement with the expectations. Thus, we propose – based on our results – the use of novelty score U for measuring novelty quantitatively, but question the use of novelty score W.     

What is a “MIVER” and How Does the Library Prepare for It?

ABSTRACT

The Military Installation Voluntary Education Review (MIVER) assesses the quality of selected on-base higher education programs and assists in the improvement of such programs through recommendations to the institutions and the military services. This poster relates the experience of one librarian's participation in such a review of the master's degree program in adult education offered by Kansas State University at Ft. Leavenworth. Topics covered include: the librarian's role in preparing the self-study document; steps taken to gather information; collaboration with responsible administrators/faculty members; pre-visit telephone interview with a site inspector; attending the actual site visit; and recommendations from the site team. Shared highlights and benefits specific to this librarian's experience include: developing a better working relationship with the teaching faculty; implementing a new method of reaching the students; gaining new knowledge of library services needed by this particular group of distance students; exploring opportunities for further activities; and reviewing outcomes and commendations received from the MIVER team.     

Is the drive for reproducible science having a detrimental effect on what is published?

This paper is a critique of the part played by the reproducible research movement within the scientific community. In particular, it raises concerns about the strong influence the movement is having on which papers are published. The primary effect is through changes to the peer review process. These not only require that the data and software used to generate the reported results be part of the review but also that the novelty criterion should be deprecated. This paper questions a central tenet of the movement, the idea of a single, well‐defined, and iterative scientific method. Philosophers, historians of science, and scientists alike have argued extensively against the idea of a single method. Some going as far as to suggest that there are as many methods as scientists. I am convinced that there are broad, high‐level ideas that bind scientists together. Yet, anything more sharply delineated that could reasonably be entitled a scientific method is not logically or historically justified. If this criticism is accepted, then changes to the peer review process are not warranted. Furthermore, I would contend that the influence the reproducible research movement is having on the publishing of papers, and elsewhere, should be considerably curtailed.     

How feasible is creating a natural disaster information management open-access repository (NDIM-OAR) in Iran?

Although creating sustainable information systems is highly important to facilitate information flow in natural disaster information management (NDIM), only a few LIS studies have focused on evaluating the feasibility of related technological solutions. An open access repository (OAR) for NDIM has been assessed by Technical, Economic, Legal, Operational, Scheduling, Cultural, and Behavioral (TELOS-CB) dimensions, using the PSI technique. Five NDIM stakeholder groups participated including governmental, public, and research institutions, NGOs (non-governmental organizations), and LIS specialists. The results indicate that the NDIM-OAR is technically more feasible, while the cultural dimension has been considered the most challenging. NGOs have the largest scoring range and governmental stakeholders have the most coherent scoring. Despite of the wide range and seemingly excessive sensitivity of NDM information in Iran, more in-depth, interpretive, cross-disciplinary studies are required reaching a comprehensive decision for an NDIM-OAR. The research is among the first multi-disaster, multi-stakeholder feasibility analyses in LIS.     

How accurate are gender detection tools in predicting the gender for Chinese names? A study with 20,000 given names in Pinyin format

Objective:We recently showed that the gender detection tools NamSor, Gender API, and Wiki-Gendersort accurately predicted the gender of individuals with Western given names. Here, we aimed to evaluate the performance of these tools with Chinese given names in Pinyin format.Methods:We constructed two datasets for the purpose of the study. File #1 was created by randomly drawing 20,000 names from a gender-labeled database of 52,414 Chinese given names in Pinyin format. File #2, which contained 9,077 names, was created by removing from File #1 all unisex names that we were able to identify (i.e., those that were listed in the database as both male and female names). We recorded for both files the number of correct classifications (correct gender assigned to a name), misclassifications (wrong gender assigned to a name), and nonclassifications (no gender assigned). We then calculated the proportion of misclassifications and nonclassifications (errorCoded).Results:For File #1, errorCoded was 53% for NamSor, 65% for Gender API, and 90% for Wiki-Gendersort. For File #2, errorCoded was 43% for NamSor, 66% for Gender API, and 94% for Wiki-Gendersort.Conclusion:We found that all three gender detection tools inaccurately predicted the gender of individuals with Chinese given names in Pinyin format and therefore should not be used in this population.     

“Not exactly a model of good hygiene”: theorizing an aesthetic of disgust in the Occupy Wall Street movement

This article explores the pathologizing of social protesters by theorizing an aesthetic of disgust in Occupy Wall Street media coverage. By cataloguing the hygienic deviance of the Occupy movement, I aim to illuminate an important countermobilization technique that disciplines and contains the grotesque function of the Occupy encampments. Examining media coverage of the Occupy movement, I show how aesthetic dimensions—including visual and olfactory sensations related to the bodies of the protesters and their encampments—were used to establish a relationship among hygienic deviance, moral impurity, economic failure, and ultimately the disposal of the protesters. I close by connecting an aesthetic of disgust to larger conceptual issues related to the viability of social protest in an era of neoliberal governmentality.     

How Real is Too Real for the Law? Realism versus Right of Publicity in Video Game Design

Realistic elements in video game design can inspire an appropriation claim, trademark dispute, or similar lawsuits, even when the underlying immaterial property from the real world was licensed. Video games can be First Amendment-protected expression, however, as in other media, there’s tension between the speech rights of creators and the personal rights of subjects. Furthermore, there’s disagreement from one jurisdiction to another regarding how much mimicry loses protection and how many dissimilarities are transformative enough to be lawful. Analysis of case law reveals a balancing act between protecting video games as expressive works and protecting individuals’ right of publicity.     

The interdisciplinarity of research data: How widely is shared research data reused in the STEM fields?

The aim of this study was to examine the interdisciplinarity of research data in the science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. The findings revealed that interdisciplinarity was not distributed evenly across journals serving the STEM fields. Based on the diversity of the references as measured by the Gini coefficient index, the mathematical sciences showed the greatest inequality, followed by astronomy/physics, the earth sciences, the biological sciences, and technology. Based on the number of Essential Science Indicator (ESI) fields, the biological sciences showed the greatest variety, followed by the earth sciences, technology, the mathematical sciences, chemistry, and computing, while engineering showed no variety. Lastly, based on the Leydesdorff interdisciplinarity formula outcomes, the earth sciences showed the greatest diversity, but earth sciences articles were cited in articles in fewer fields than biological sciences articles. This study contributes to the study of interdisciplinary data citation for data sharing and reuse in STEM fields with respect to the measurement of the balance, variety, and diversity of research data.     

How and where is artificial intelligence in the public sector going? A literature review and research agenda

To obtain benefits in the provision of public services, managers of public organizations have considerably increased the adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) systems. However, research on AI is still scarce, and the advance of this technology in the public sector, as well as the applications and results of this strategy, need to be systematized. With this goal in mind, this paper examines research related to AI as applied to the public sector. A review of the literature covering articles available in five research databases was completed using the PRISMA protocol for literature reviews. The search process yielded 59 articles within the scope of the study out of a total of 1682 studies. Results show a growing trend of interest in AI in the public sector, with India and the US as the most active countries. General public service, economic affairs, and environmental protection are the functions of government with the most studies related to AI. The Artificial Neural Networks (ANN) technique is the most recurrent in the investigated studies and was pointed out as a technique that provides positive results in several areas of its application. A research framework for AI solutions for the public sector is presented, where it is demonstrated that policies and ethical implications of the use of AI permeate all layers of application of this technology and the solutions can generate value for functions of government. However, for this, a prior debate with society about the use of AI in the public sector is recommended.     

How long is a piece of string? The appropriateness of search time as a measure of ‘burden’ in Access to Information regimes

Access to Information regimes are under unremitting challenge from state actors. This article is the first to directly explore the ‘cost limit’ often included in Access to Information regimes, where requests can be refused by a Public Authority on the basis of an estimate that it would take too long to locate and extract the requested information. The validity of such estimates is particularly important in light of electronic information systems where search times are dependant upon technological expertise. This article presents a qualitative study of decisions made by the United Kingdom's Information Commissioner, where decision notices concerning the ‘cost limit’ are examined to identify technological errors. These technological errors were found to arise from specific practices of the Commissioner in 40% of cases where an estimate of the Public Authority was accepted. The author demonstrates that the concept of estimating the time taken to find information from an electronic information system is an objectively inappropriate means for estimating the burden placed on a Public Authority. Through the use of mathematics, it is demonstrated an estimation regime based on the volume of information requested is more appropriate as an alternative. From a wider regulatory perspective, this article also demonstrates that it would be highly desirable for Access to Information regimes to be regulated alongside data protection concerns, given the strong overlap in respect of the relevant technological issues.     

But is My Resource Included? How to Manage,Develop, and Think about the Content in Your Discovery Tool

Implementing discovery tools and getting them to work with existing library services often leaves very little time for their promotion and for the thoughtful, ongoing evaluation and curation of their content. However, the expectations and experiences that users have about discovery tools are often directly related to the content and the way that content is described. In our efforts to work with vendors to resolve the underlying business issues that prevent us from having all of the metadata for our resources included in our discovery tools, we may have lost sight of our role in curating and evaluating the usefulness of the content that is already included in them.     

Blinded by the Light: How a Focus on Statistical “Significance” May Cause p-Value Misreporting and an Excess of p-Values Just Below .05 in Communication Science

Publication bias promotes papers providing “significant” findings, thus incentivizing researchers to produce such findings. Prior studies suggested that researchers’ focus on “p < .05” yields—intentional or unintentional—p-value misreporting, and excess p-values just below .05. To assess whether similar distortions occur in communication science, we extracted 5,834 test statistics from 693 recent communication science ISI papers, and assessed prevalence of p-values (1) misreported, and (2) just below .05. Results show 8.8% of p-values were misreported (74.5% too low). 1.3% of p-values were critically misreported, stating p < .05 while in fact p > .05 (88.3%) or vice versa (11.7%). Analyzing p-value frequencies just below .05 using a novel method did not unequivocally demonstrate “p-hacking”—excess p-values could be alternatively explained by (severe) publication bias. Results for 19,830 p-values from social psychology were strikingly similar. We conclude that publication bias, publication pressure, and verification bias distort the communication science knowledge base, and suggest solutions to this problem.     

How Do I Get a Campus ID? The Other Role of the Academic Library in Student Retention and Success

Academic libraries have long gathered data at the reference desk to facilitate informed development of services and collections, and have long known that regardless of whether questions are related to doing research, the library is a safe place a student may go to find answers. This article highlights the role of the library and information commons service desks as valuable windows into the student experience. The authors suggest that librarians share with campus stakeholders information about students’ non-research-related questions to aid in the development of programs and services designed to help students adjust to campus life and, ultimately, succeed.