AO: The analysts note a tension in that collaboration is becoming a demand for humanities scholars even as many types of research audits continue to predominantly consider individual
AO: The analysts are talking about a “knowledge transfer” model, talking about knowlege as if it is a concrete and discrete object that travels the same everywhere (and isn’t changed
AO: The analysts look at how computer-based collaborative systems (intranets, electronic mail, list serves) increase information activities such as accessing, searching, sharing,
AO: The analysts used varying technologies to advertise about the meetings for community peer review. These included: “advertised the meeting on posters in the area in general stores
AO: Little discussion of the actual data practices. This is a limitation of their data collection method. They also do not discuss their own data practices.Read more
AO: Analysts cite Hockey (2012) who uses the term “indirect collaboration” to describe the “reusability” of data and tools produced in the academy that find application and use
AO: “The increase in open-access journal–university library partnerships (such as in the case of ShareCA and CA’s move to place OJS at Duke Libraries) is a crucial step towards...Read more
AO: The analysts note that consent is an ongoing process and changes over time. They therefore advocate for continuous check-in at moments such as when new information about plastic
AO: The analysts cite similarities with feminist methodological work from the 1980s and 1990s where questions of “what counts” (what knowledge, what skills, what experience etc.)
AO: Kenner writes: “The need and desire for digital infrastructure—often seen as a format that can extend the reach of our work—creates opportunities for collaboration with experts...Read more
AO: While the analysts look in interesting ways at collaboration across human - material; material - material ways, they do not talk about ecological ways that these collaborations
