Keep on top of the literature without endless searching
What is BrowZine?
An alternative to search engines, BrowZine allows you to easily find, read, and monitor scholarly journals available using Edge Hill’s library subscription. You can add your favourite journals to a personalised bookshelf which automatically updates when new content is avilable. From here, directly check the table of contents or link straight through to the article PDF.
What’s the best way to use it?
BrowZine isn’t for systematic literature searching. For this, a tool such as Scopus would be better. Instead, BrowZine takes you straight to your trusted sources, keeping you up to date without the need for repeated searching.
BrowZine’s other major strength is the mobile app. This syncs with the desktop site meaning you can continue reading on the go. Some publishers like EBSCO offer their own apps, restricted to in-house content, but BrowZine spans all publishers including smaller ones who don’t offer such services.
How can I get started?
Start using the desktop version or download the free app for Apple or Google Play. After downloading the app, find Edge Hill University in the list and enter your university username and password.
Come to our ‘Publishers on campus’ event and get a free lunch while you’re at it!
Emerald and IEEE will visit the Tech Hub on Wednesday 26th February to deliver talks on how to publish with them and answer any questions you have about which journal to choose, how peer review works, what editors are looking for, and more.
The first talk by Emerald will focus on the social sciences and humanities, whereas IEEE will approach the topic from a STEM context. Everyone is welcome. You can attend either talk or both, and everything is free, including the lunch.
Date and time: Wednesday 26th February 2020, 12-2pm Venue: Tech Hub Lecture, Ormskirk Campus Programme: 1200-1215 Lunch 1215-1300 Emerald: ‘Getting Published’ 1300-1345 IEEE: ‘How to get published with IEEE’ 1345-1400 Presenters available for questions
——-*STOP PRESS* The trial has now been extended to 31 March——-
You’ve been sharing your thoughts on Sage Research Methods – here on trial until 13 February. Here’s a summary of the best feedback.
Sage Research Methods is an online platform with authoritative case studies, ebooks and videos on different methodologies. Also included are tools spanning the research process like the Project Planner. See our post from December to learn more.
Written by academics, these demonstrate “how methods are applied in real research projects”. Among the experts, Edge Hill lecturers have authored several cases including Clare Woolhouse (Faculty of Education) and Paul Simpson (Faculty of Health, Social Care and Medicine). One author in the participant observation & mixed qualitative methods series told us how the cases are aimed at both students and experienced researchers, and that Sage encourages authors to write accessibly
Little Green Books
The Little Green Books are a series covering quantitative applications in the social sciences, great for taking your research in a new direction. One person noted, “The Little Green Books look extremely useful to me as a PhD student, as I will be performing analyses on my data that I still need to learn”. Little Blue Books meanwhile, are short and accessible texts on a range of qualitative methods.
The Project Planner
Another PhD student tweeted us to say how this resource has helped plan her research project through each stage, going into the project registration process. Key steps like defining a Topic, reviewing the literature, developing research questions, etc are introduced, explained, and plotted along your timeline. This would apply equally well to an undergraduate or Masters dissertation.
Some respondents noted that downloading resources can sometimes be troublesome, but overall there has been lots of praise for Sage Research Methods. Here are a few comments:
I would certainly use this for teaching and research purposes. If it’s updated at regular intervals, it might make keeping reading lists up-to-date that bit easier
A lot of the content is very advanced, I strongly believe it can be incredibly useful to other students like me that are eager to advance the researching skills and hope to work in a research setting in future
I think this is a brilliant, comprehensive resource (that includes methods-related innovation) for staff and students across the Faculty as well as in social sciences, arts and humanities.
There’s still time to try it!
The trial finishes on 13 February. After this, Library and Learning Services will assess feedback and usage levels, and decide whether to purchase a subscription to specific parts of the platform. Even if you don’t have time to check it out fully, be sure to download any interesting cases, chapters, etc for later while you can!
Some tips for promoting your research online and tracking how it’s doing
After doing the research and getting your outputs published, it can feel like the dissemination will surely take care of itself – you can tweet it, make it open access on Pure (if the publisher allows) and let your networks do the rest right? This works to an extent, but there are some great tools out there to push it even further.
Set up in 2019, Edge Hill Figshare is a home for any research materials worth sharing that don’t have a home elsewhere such as datasets, figures, conference presentations, or posters. These can be added to Pure in some cases, but Figshare visualises them an brings them to life. For example, by sharing a poster in Figshare like this PhD student has done, you can connect it to a global community, give it a DOI, and track any views, downloads, or altmetrics activity. This exposure also provides an opportunity direct traffic back to your research outputs. To get started, just go to the site, log in and share something. Learning Services can provide, help, advice, or training sessions.
Altmetrics track research impact via social media channels, websites, policy documents, blogs, Wikipedia, etc. They demonstrate impact far quicker than citations, and can track engagement beyond academia. For example, one 2019 study about how the human gaze can deter seagulls swooping to take food like chips received global exposure across news media, and this is reflected in the altmetric count, but in academica it has yet to accrue many citations.
Workshop: ‘Promoting Research Using Social Media’
On 25 March 2020, Dr Costas Gabrielatos from English, History and Creative Writing is running this workshop. It discusses the combined use of academic networking websites (e.g. Research Gate, Academia) and social media to make reseach visible and accessible. All staff and research students are welcome – either book via MyView or email email@example.com.
‘Maximizing dissemination and engaging readers: The other 50% of an author’s day: A case study’
This paper has some great tips for disseminating research across and beyond our regular bubbles echo chambers. This includes harnessing the power of influencers and taking the opportunity of conference hashtags.
Definitely worth trying, this platform enables researchers to work with journalists to present their research for broader audiences and reach new readers. The company is coming on campus in February and March and you can book a one-to-one with one of their highly expereinced editors.
Using Altmetric data, we can get a picture of the most-mentioned research from Edge Hill in terms of news media, policy, bloggers, social media and more. Here are the top results, broken down by faculty.
Altmetric is a company which provides an ‘attention score’ for research, measuring the number of times an article, book chapter, conference paper, etc is mentioned in government policy, on Twitter, in the news, or even in Wikipedia articles. In calculating the score, some sources have greater weighting than others – news mentions score higher than tweet for example. The score is visualised using a spiral, sometimes called an Altmetric ‘donut’:
In the above example, the Altmetric donut is blue and red – the blue part represents the number of tweets, and the larger red area represents news media.
In this excercise, the top 50 Altmetric scores for Edge Hill University research from November 2018 – December 2019 were recorded. The top three scoring research outputs for each faculty are presented below.
Faculty of Education
Research by Tim Cain, Karen Boardman and Annabel Yale received the highest scores. The primary source of attention for the research was via Twitter users, so the Altmetric ‘donuts’ display a blue colour. Professor Cain’s article benefitted from being free-to-read for a short period of time, which many education professionals sharing the access link.
Faculty of Arts and Sciences
Research by Linda Kaye, Gray Atherton & Liam Cross and Andy Sparks received the highest scores. Dr Kaye’s research benefitted from broad news outlet coverage – it was mentioned by The Telegraph, Yahoo, and many others and generated headlines such as ‘Spending a Lot of Time on WhatsApp May Actually Make You Feel Less Lonely And Boost Your Self Esteem‘. The next highest scoring research was ‘The Animal in Me…’ which received most of its attention via Twitter (193 tweets) and like the paper by Dr Sparks, is open access.
——-*STOP PRESS* The trial has now been extended to 31 March——-
We have a trial to Sage Research Methods, a resource to answer all your research methods questions until 13 February 2020.
Sage Research Methods is an online platform with ebooks, videos, and tools that provide authoritative information on how to perform hundreds of research methods. The material is perfect for academic work, and is definitely worth using in your bibliography!
Use the Methods Map to learn about the features of a particular research methods and link through to relevant ebooks and videos:
Access over 1000 searchable ebooks to give an edge to your work such as ‘Corrupt Research’:
There are over 125 hours of videos, including tutorials and expert videos. Each video includes a trascript which auto-scrolls, allowing you to follow it through playback.
The trial lasts until 13 February, but if you want us to keep Sage Research Methods let us know! Please email firstname.lastname@example.org and tell us how you feel.
As an academic at Edge Hill University, your Pure profile will display your H-index by default (see above image). This though, can show a different number to the H-index displayed in a Google Scholar profile. Here is the same author’s h-index in Google Scholar:
This shows the total h-index to be 49, so 13 points higher than the number quoted in Pure.
Why the difference?
The reason for the difference is that the figure in Pure is taken from Scopus, not Google Scholar. H-index numbers are lower in Scopus compared with Scholar because there is less content – Scopus has around 43 million items, whereas Scholar has been estimated to include around 300 million – far more than any other database. This doesn’t make Scopus an inferior source, it indexes high quality journals admitted on the basis of merit, whereas Scholar uses a powerful algorithm to pull in anything it can find on the web that ‘looks’ academic. This includes dissertations, theses, and some poor or even so-called ‘predatory’ journals.
Why use the number from Scopus?
On a practical basis, Scopus is used because both it and Pure are Elsevier products, and as such can exchange data. Google Scholar however, does not share such data with other platforms.
What should I do?
If you don’t want to display your Scopus h-index, you edit the setting and do this. Go to: edit profile > Portal Profile > untick the box.
For more information please contact Liam Bullingham, Research Support Librarian: email@example.com
Normally, to publish an article with a major publisher like Sage, researchers can only make their work open access by depositing it in Pure (‘green open access’). This is because making the work free to read on the journal’s webpages (‘gold open access’) carries a fee called an ‘article processing charge’ (APC) and can cost up to £3000.
For the remainder of 2019 though, Sage Publishing is offering Edge Hill authors a ‘zero rate APC’ deal – facilitating free gold open access.
There are a few conditions such as already-published or in-production articles being excempt. If you’re interested in benefitting from the deal, please contact Liam Bullingham, our Research Support Librarian to learn more: firstname.lastname@example.org
Note: This blog post was originally shared on the Research Office blog. Find it here
If you’re a Pure user at EHU, by the time you read this you’ll have greater visibility of the open access (OA) status of your research outputs in the Pure back-end.
In the Assessment section of the output record, you will be presented with a colour-coded marker that tells you if REF OA compliance has been met, not met, or if Pure can’t determine it from the information supplied. You’ll also be given the dates that inform that OA status.
This information only appears if the output falls within the scope of the REF2021 Open Access Policy (i.e. articles that were accepted since April 2016), but knowing the OA compliance status can help you decide whether you need to request a REF exception for that output.