Abstract
Objective. The study aims to understand the impact of descriptive metadata in academic events. It focuses on the need for analytical frameworks that consider the events' characteristics and the interests of the participants.
Design/Methodology/Approach. The article focuses on academic event management and metadata quality based on user preferences and feedback. It surveyed Ukrainian organizers and scholars between August and October 2022, analyzing the responses of 1,270 participants using descriptive statistics and qualitative analysis in RStudio.
Results/Discussion. The survey showed that most (over 84%) of organizers and academics are dissatisfied with the metadata quality, with a third rating it as very bad. Frequent errors in metadata emphasized the need for better management, including a preference for using identifiers like ORCID and DOI and a preference for open access to information about academic events.
Conclusions. The results highlight the importance of developing specialized tools for metadata management and standardization of metadata elements in Ukraine to facilitate organization and participation in academic events at national and international levels.
Originality/Value. The study makes an important contribution to understanding descriptive metadata management in academic events in Ukraine, suggesting ways to improve efficiency in this area.
Funder
Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine
Reference66 articles.
1. Hillmann, D. I., and Westbrooks, E. L. (2004). Introduction to Metadata in Practice. Faculty Publications, UNL Libraries. Paper 166. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libraryscience/166.
2. Gamble, M., and Goble, C. (2011). Quality, trust, and utility of scientific data on the web: Toward a joint model. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Web Science Conference (WebSci '11). New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery. Article 15, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1145/2527031.2527048 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1145/2527031.2527048.
3. Hauschke, C., Nazarovets, S., Altemeier, F., and Kaliuzhna, N. (2021). Roadmap to FAIR Research Information in Open Infrastructures. Journal of Library Metadata, 21(1–2), 45–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/19386389.2021.1999156 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/19386389.2021.1999156.
4. Government of Ukraine. (2022). Government Resolution "On Approval of the National Plan regarding Open Science," No. 892-r, October 8, 2022, Kyiv. Retrieved from https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/892-2022-%D1%80#Text.
5. International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions. (2017). IFLA annual report. IFLA.
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Status of high-impact scientific publication in nursing in Latin America;EAI Endorsed Transactions on Pervasive Health and Technology;2024-04-23