- From the Press Release: “Amsterdam, 2 December 2009 – Elsevier… today announced that Scopus, the largest abstract and citation database of peer-reviewed literature and quality Web sources, will be added to Research4Life… the collective name given to HINARI, AGORA and OARE, the three public-private partnerships that offer health, agriculture and environmental research for free or at very low cost to developing countries.”
Tag Archive for 'elsevier'
Page 2 of 3
The videos of the Belgrade lectures are now loaded on the University of Belgrade Library’s YouTube channel.
The second day’s presentation was the more interesting topic and a better presentation overall, so I am going to highlight it first. A written overview of the highlights, key diagrams, and slides is here and the playlist for the second lecture is embedded below:
The first day’s presentation was titled From Academic Library 2.0 to (Literature) Research 2.0. A written overview of the highlights, key diagrams, and slides is located here and the playlist is embedded below:
I look forward to any feedback you might have on either presentation.
As mentioned in my previous post, my first Belgrade lecture focused on the concept of Research 2.0. The second lecture focused on Scholarly Identity 2.0, which is increasingly important because of the wealth of online identity information created by Research 2.0.
The Scholarly Identity Matrix below is adapted from a general identity matrix concept pioneered by the founders of ClaimID. It is meant to display the different types and components of a researcher’s online identity.

The Scholarly Identity 2.0 Concept Model below displays how the different components from the Matrix fit together.

The black text is content types. The blue are the characteristics of identity these content types best represent. The green is who is responsible for managing this information. The Scholarly Identity 2.0 Concept Model takes the series of concept models one step farther, but with a slightly different twist.
The spectrum is more specific than in past models with one end being entirely user-generated content (UGC) and the other traditional scholarly communication. My hypothesis is that scholarly identity online, or Scholarly Identity 2.0, is a combination of these two information types held together by a unique identifier. For example, the combination verifies not just topical expertise through peer-review of articles, but also personality verified by LinkedIn recommendations.
Please share your thoughts on the accuracy of this model in the comments below or on FriendFeed.
The below presentation covers each quadrant of the Matrix culminating in the Concept Model as a summary.
What does the Web say about your research
(Update: The videos of the lecture are now available here.)
I would like to give special thanks to Adam Sofronijevic, at the University of Belgrade Libraries for all his hard work in arranging the lectures and for his hospitality during my visit.
Scholarly Reputation Management Online: The Challenges and Opportunities of Social Media
Session 6: Wissenschaftskommunikation 2.0
Social Software @ Work
- “AMSTERDAM – September 28, 2009 – Elsevier, a world-leading publisher of scientific, technical and medical information products and services, today announced the launch of SciVal Funding, a comprehensive funding intelligence solution for U.S. research institutions. The platform helps researchers locate the most appropriate grant opportunities in order to maximize their potential to receive funding….”
- Upcoming talk: “Michael Habib (Elsevier B.V.) Scholarly Reputation Management Online: The challenges and opportunities of social media”
- Insightful post on scientific literature. “This got me wondering – why do we consider peer reviewed research to be important? I’d actually suggest that peer review is of secondary importance, so I’ll discuss that later (if I remember). So, why do we need a scientific literature?”
- “The latest in genetic testing from the Consumer Genetics Conference.”
- Promising new medical textbook review site put out by HS. “Medical Textbooks Revealed: The Naked Truth, from the people who brought you Flesh and Bones is a website essentially written by medical students for medical students and aims to take the ‘irk’ out of the sometimes irksome task of choosing the right medical textbooks for you…who better to guide you through this maze than your peers and ensure you spend your precious cash in the very best way?”
This is the second presentation I will be giving to editors since having taken on the role of Product Manager for 2collab. The presentation breaks down into three sections.
First, I present the findings from the Social Media web survey conducted in May 2008 by my predecessors at 2collab. Conducted using Survey Monkey, 40,000 randomly sampled registered users of ScienceDirect were contacted with a 4.6% response rate yeilding 1,824 responses.
This survey demonstrated that early career researchers (25-44 yrs/old, 1-10 articles), are not only using social media heavily, but they are using it more for work than for play. When comparing how this demographic is currently using social media for work, with how the entirety of respondents expect social media to be used in the next two years, one can see gaps in what tools are available and what are desired. A lot of what I am working on as a Collaboration Tools Product Manager will try to fill these and other gaps in a researcher’s workflow.

After showing how early career researchers are currently using social media, I delve into 2collab as an example of one possible tool journal editors can use to engage with this demographic. One of my primary suggestions is suggesting that authors use 2collab to share their articles alongside supplementary content related to their articles. For example, one can use 2collab to share images from a paper, related presentations, and the article itself all in one place. One of the reasons I was motivated to write this post was to practice what I preach. Some screenshots of Flickr, Slideshare, my blog, and 2collab, related to this post are still to be included in the appendix of the presentation as an example.
Last, I open things up for discussion. To do this I prompt editor’s to think about how they can apply available Web 2.0 tools to the tasks of editing, such as promotion of articles. For those of you familiar with my Master’s paper, you will recognize this methodology as 1 part of my Academic 2.0 theory.
When you get a chance, please take a look at the presentation and let me know if you have any suggestions about how journal editor’s or authors can use social media.
Also, please send any examples you know of editors using social media such as blogs or Flickr to interact with authors, editorial boards, or readers. Thanks.


