Alternativ till DiVA? Elisabeth Uhlemann, 2016 10 13

Forskare efterlyser alternativ till DiVA DiVa är obligatoriskt DiVA är relativt otympligt att fylla i för många forskare Bilbioteket lägger ner en del tid på att rätta felaktiga poster i DiVA IDT har ett system för att lägga in publikationer (och projekt, samarbetspartner, exjobb, doktorander, biografier, osv) som sedan används för att exportera data till DiVa (och alltså används ändå DiVA som sig bör) Biblioteket har en del problem med IDTs system Forskarna på IDT gillar sitt system väldigt mycket Går det att åtgärda de problem som Biblioteket har, så kanske det vore aktuellt att införa systemet på hela MdH…

Bibliotekets önskelista på IDTs system Uppgift om tillhörighet till forskningsinriktning (Organisation) i DiVA förs ej över till därför avsett fält i DiVA. Endast uppgift om Akademitillhörighet förs över till detta fält. Uppgift om Forskningsinriktning förs istället över till ett fritextfält i DiVA. En nackdel med detta är att den utsökning på IS respektive IPR som görs för medelsfördelningen försvåras. Följande kategorier är valbara i DiVA: Refereegranskat Övrigt vetenskapligt Övrig (populärvetenskap, debatt, mm) Vid import från MRTC läggs samtliga konferensbidrag och artiklar i tidskrifter per default i kategorin Refereegranskat. Detta är inte alltid korrekt.

Bibliotekets önskelista på IDTs system Underkategorier till publikationer (exempelvis underkategorin: ”Editorial material” för tidskriftsartiklar) kommer ej med vid import till DiVA. Nedstående nationella ämneskategori läggs på samtliga publikationer: ”Teknik och teknologier; Engineering and Technology”. Enligt de direktiv som gått ut för export till SwePub från DiVA, och som vi måste följa, skall denna anges på minst en nivån längre ner i hierarkin.

IDTs svar… Fixing these problems in the database is doable. When it comes to filling in “strange fields” like bullet 3 and 4; it is highly unlikely that the researchers will do that in a good way. (i.e. we can fix the database to store this, but the quality of the data will likely remain the same). These fields are “strange” in the sense that most of our researchers have no idea what they mean and how to use them. And filling in administrative stuff that you don’t know what it is causes trouble Maybe employ an administrator that takes care of this? Entering stuff into databases is not core-business for researchers and is probably better done by someone who knows what they are doing. Employing a person will also make the cost of such administrative overhead clearly visible…

IDTs svar… Enabling MDH-wide access to the database is probably doable. We are currently considering different options for the long term management/support/upgrades to the database. Some of these options include evolving the database to that it easily usable to other environments. A few years ago we introduced a library checking system in our db, where library persons could go in and review the input from the researchers. In that library checking system they could then fix everything they need in our system, and then once they are satisfied with certain publications they could export them to DiVA. The issue at the time was that they didnt have time to work on several systems. 

Alternativ till (att fylla i) DiVA? By enabling the MDH-wide access to our publications db, the library can be in charge of those fields researchers are not interested in. The researchers should in that case just add the publications to the db, and library would continue to monitor the data availability of the publication and move the publication to DiVA when ready. This way we could have system tailored according to both researchers and the library. Export to DiVA will still be required, as it handles the long-term archiving of the publications.

IDT system vs DiVA The major difference is that we can tailor our system as we want, while we cant influence DiVA in such way Information hiding relates to hiding the strange fields from the researchers and putting the responsibility to the administrative staff (library?). Researcher workload relates to the effort the researchers need to invest to input the publication into the system. Customizability relates to how much influence can we have the development/design/improvement of the system. Long-term archiving relates to the connection to the national library (http://www.kb.se/isbn-centralen/urnnbn/) and issuing urn:nbn identifiers, which means the publication is ensured to be available on the link connected to the unique identifier. Library workload would be lower with DiVA as researchers do most of the work, but with introduction of our system the workload would be shared between the library and researchers.   Information hiding Researcher workload Customizabile Long-term archiving Library workload Only DiVA: no high yes low IDT system*: moderate medium * IDT system means (at the moment) the IDT system and DiVA in combination. For the IDT system to fully replace DiVA so that we no longer require DiVA services, the IDT system would need to implement the long-term archiving feature. The current work process still requires researchers to sometimes input into DiVA and also library to work on DiVA. This could be updated with small adaptations so that both work only on IDT System. Still, library would import ready publications into DiVA for long-term archiving.