RESEARCH POSTER PRESENTATION DESIGN © 2011

www.PosterPresentations.com

Supplemental Journal Article Materials:

A progress report on an information industry initiative

Who could possibly quibble with the idea of publishing supplemental materials to a journal article? Making them available allows the Earth and space scientists to demonstrate supporting evidence, such as multimedia, computer programs, and datasets; gives the authors the opportunity to present in-depth studies that would not otherwise be available; and enables the readers to replicate experiments and verify their results. However, the scholarly publishing ecosystem is now being threatened by a veritable tsunami of supplemental materials that have to be peer reviewed, identified, described, and made discoverable and citeable; such materials also have to be archived, preserved, and perpetually converted to the contemporary file formats to be available to a future researcher. Moreover, the readers often have no clear indication of how critical a particular supplemental material is to the scientific conclusions of the article and thus are not sure whether they should spend their time reading/viewing/running it. In some cases it is not even clear what the material actually supplements. While one segment of the research community argues that even more supplemental materials should be made available, another segment increasingly voices its concern stating categorically that a research article is not a data dump or an FTP site. From the publisher's perspective, dealing with supplemental materials in a responsible fashion is becoming an increasingly costly proposition.

Faced with formidable challenges of managing supplemental materials, the information profession community in 2010 formed a joint NISO/NFAIS Working Group to develop Recommended Practices for curating supplemental materials during their life cycle, including but not limited to their selection, peer review, editing, production, presentation, providing context, identification, linking, citing, hosting, discovery, metadata and markup, packaging, accessibility, and preservation. The Recommended Practices also intend to address roles and responsibilities of authors, editors, peer reviewers, publishers, libraries, abstracting and indexing services, and – to a lesser extent –official data centers and institutional repositories. Finally, the document will contain broad principles and detailed technical implementation related to metadata, linking, packaging, and accessibility of supplemental materials.

ABSTRACT

THE TREND

RECOMMENDED BUSINESS PRACTICES

CHALLENGES

Heterogeneity. An archive (ZIP, TAR, RAR) or a document (PDF, MS Word) may contain both Integral and Additional content. The two may need to be separated for different identification, linking, preservation, and migration.

Hierarchy and recurrence. An archive may contain a tree with many branches and sub-branches with nested objects and groups.

Granularity down. At what level should metadata be applied: the entire set of supplemental materials, object groups, or individual objects?

Granularity up. Should supplemental materials be linked to the core article as a whole or should individual supplemental objects or their groups be linked to a specific item within the core article, e.g., a figure or a table?

Relationships. Some objects are logically different but have a few metadata elements in common, e.g., a series of aerial photographs, while other objects constitute alternate representations of the same logical entity, e.g., multiple representation of a protein or of a chemical structure. Should relation type among objects be recorded? Can one object in a group be considered Integral, while others may be Additional, or should content classification be applied to a work, and not to a manifestation/representation?

Subjectivity. Is supplemental material importance "in the eye of the beholder?“ I.e., what is Additional to one actor may be Integral to another. Given that resources are limited, a determination may have to be made that some beholders are more equal than others, so that a decision made upfront determines downstream processing.

Expenditures. Real costs, hypothetical benefits.

Business models. Are supplemental materials a money maker or a money waster for those who curate them?

SOURCES

1. Carpenter, T. (2009), Journal article supplementary materials: A Pandora’s box of issues needing best practices, Against the Grain 21(6), p.84.

2. Marcus, E. (2009), Taming supplemental material, Cell 139(1), p.11, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2009.09.021

3. Maunsell, J. (2010), Announcement regarding supplemental material, J. Neurosci. 30(32), p.10599, http://www.jneurosci.org/content/30/32/10599.full.

4. Borowski, C. (2011), Enough is enough, J. Exp. Med. 208(7), p.1337, http://dx.doi.org/10.1084/jem.20111061.

5. NFAIS (2009), Best practices for publishing journal articles, 30 pp., http://www.nfais.org/files/file/Best_Practices_Final_Public.pdf.

6. Beebe, L. (2010), Supplemental materials for Journal articles: NISO/NFAIS Joint Working Group, Information Standards Quarterly 22(3), p.33, http://dx.doi.org/10.3789/isqv22n3.2010.07.

7. Schwarzman, A. (2010), Supplemental materials survey, Information Standards Quarterly 22(3), p.23, http://dx.doi.org/10.3789/isqv22n3.2010.05.

CONTACT

Alexander (‘Sasha’) Schwarzmansschwarzman@agu.org +1-202-777-7518

http://eposters.agu.org/files/2011/11/Schwarzman-IN31A-1430-AGU-Fall-Meeting-2011-12-07_Poster.pdf

During the last decade, the percentage of articles with supplemental materials published in the scientific, technical, and medical field has been steadily increasing.

" over time the concept of supplemental material will gradually give way to a more modern concept of a hierarchical or layered presentation in which a reader can define which level of detail best fits their interests and needs."

(Emily Marcus, Editor-in-Chief of Cell)

In his article *1+, Todd Carpenter referred to supplemental materials as "Pandora’s box of issues."

Supplemental materials comprise a diverse set of content, including but not limited to:

• multimedia (video, animations, audio, virtual reality, and other dynamic content);

• gene sequences, protein structures, chemical compounds, crystallographic structures, 3-D images;

• computer programs (algorithms, code, libraries, and executables);

• text, tables, figures (constituting entire sections of the articles, such as Materials and methods, Extended methodology, Survey results, Bibliographies, Derivations, etc.); and

• datasets.

Datasets, though important, are only one type of supplemental materials, and are not the focus of this group.

The community has responded to the challenge in various ways. Researchers appear to be split on the issue: while some argue that more supplemental materials should be made available and are optimistic about the technology’s ability to solve some of the above problems, others argue that a scholarly journal "is not a data dump" and an article "is not an FTP site."

Making supplemental materials available in electronic form has provided unquestionable benefits to the scholarly community. However, the veritable explosion of supplemental materials has posed a number of challenges.

Degree of importance. Do I (reviewer, reader) really need to look at supplemental materials?

Discoverability. How do I (librarian, indexer) know the article has supplemental materials?

Identification, linking, and citing. How do I know which article is the parent of an orphaned supplemental material? How do I provide a persistent link to the supplemental materials, and how do I cite them?

Viability and Preservation. Will it be possible to render (read, play, execute, etc.) supplemental materials in 20 years? 200 years? It is likely that supplemental materials will have to undergo constant conversion. Then, do I look at the original object or the converted one? Are they equivalent?

Transmission and packaging. How do I package supplemental materials with the article when transmitting them to an archive or fulfilling an interlibrary loan request? How do I ensure that nothing was lost or corrupted?

Intellectual property rights. Who has rights over supplemental materials, and where are those recorded?

Curatorial responsibility. Who has custody over supplemental materials: an author, a publisher, a library, a data center, an institutional repository, an archive, or/and any other actor?

Business models. Last but not least, if someone is going to provide identification, description, preservation, and other types of processing of supplemental materials, what sustainable business models could support the expense?

The Working Group's objective is to produce Recommended Practices for supplemental journal article materials. The Business Working Group (BWG) concentrates on the business rules, policies, and practices:

• scope of and general principles for Recommended Practices;

• definitions: supplemental materials, article, data, metadata, multimedia;

• curation and life cycle: selection, peer review, editing, production, presentation, providing context, referencing, citing, managing/hosting, discoverability, and preservation;

• intellectual property rights management and accessibility; and

• roles and responsibilities of authors, editors, peer reviewers, publishers, libraries, A&I services, repositories.

The Technical Working Group (TWG) focuses on the technical aspects of handling supplemental materials:

• metadata and granularity of markup needed to support business practices;

• identifiers for and linking to and from supplemental materials;

• archiving, preservation, and forward migration of supplemental materials;

• packaging, exchange, and delivery of supplemental materials; and

• technical support for accessibility practices recommended by the BWG.Chart courtesy of Ken Beauchamp, American Society for Clinical Investigation. Used by permission.

Integral content Additional content

Selecting / Peer reviewing supplemental materials

At the same level as core article May not be reviewed at the same level

Copyediting supplemental materials

At the same level as core article. Should be noted if not

May not be edited at the same level. If so, should be noted

Referencing supplemental materials within article

Cite/link at the same level as table or figure. No reference list entry, for this content is part of article

Provide in-text citation and link at the appropriate point in text, rather than at the end

Citing supplemental materials from other pubs

Not to be cited separately. Cite article as a whole

Can be cited separately

References within supplemental materials

Integrate references into the reference list of the core article

Keep references separate from the core article reference list

Preserving supplemental materials Preserve at the same level as the core article

Provide metadata markup

Include in migration plans

Take preservation into consideration when accepting

If uncertain about preservation, have author submit to a trusted repository and link to it

Intellectual property rights Treat rights in the same manner as the rights for the core article

Anyone who has access to online article should also have access to Integral content

Determination of rights for Additional content may differ and should be transparent to users

Identifying / linking and managing supplemental materials

•Identify supplemental materials using DOIs to ensure linking•Links should be bidirectional•Separate DOIs for Integral and Additional content•If journal content is hosted by a host / aggregator it should also deliver supplemental materials•An author’s website is not an appropriate place for the sole posting of supplemental materials

Discovering supplemental materials

•Consistent placement, naming, and navigation•Indicate presence in the table of contents•Link to Integral content from within the article•Link to Additional content “above the fold” on the first PDF or HTML page of the article•Aid A&I services by including metadata that indicate the purpose and format of the supplemental materials

Providing context for supplemental materials

Include on a landing page or within the content:•Core article citation and DOI•Title and/or succinct statement about the content•For multimedia: player, file extension, and size •List multiple files•Browser information, if supplemental content rendition is browser- dependent •Supplemental material DOI or another identifier, if assigned

•ID•version•label•contrib_group•content_descriptor•title

•language •alt_title•accessibility_long_desc•summary•subject_descriptor•physical_form_descriptor

•ref_count•publication_info•creation_date•preservation_level•copyright / license•open_access

RESEARCHER COMMUNITY RESPONSE

WHAT IS IN THE PANDORA’S BOX?

Alexander (‘Sasha’) Schwarzman, NISO/NFAIS Working Group co-chair

IN31A-1430

YES, WE CAN… BUT SHOULD WE?

Publishers too responded in different ways. In 2009, Cell imposed strict limits on the number and kind of supplemental materials that could be accepted [2]. In 2010, The Journal of Neuroscience banned supplemental materials altogether and announced that it would embed dynamic content in its articles’ PDF format *3+. In 2011, The Journal of Experimental Medicine introduced a policy limiting supplemental materials only to "essential supporting information [4]."

The NISO/NFAIS Working Group on Journal Article Supplemental Materials began its activity in August 2010. It consists of a well-balanced mixture of publishers, librarians, archivists, A&I and citation linking services, and independent consultants. They come from the private sector and government, and include representatives from commercial, non-commercial, academic, and non-academic institutions.

INFORMATION INDUSTRY COMMUNITY RESPONSE

CLASSIFICATION: INTEGRAL, ADDITIONAL, AND RELATED CONTENT

The Working Group has introduced a clear distinction between Integral and Additional supplemental content.

Integral content is not really supplemental; rather, it is essential for the full understanding of the work by the general scientist or reader in the journal's discipline but is placed outside the article for technical, business, or logistical reasons*. In general, the publisher maintains responsibility for hosting and curating this content in the same way the article itself is treated. (For some specialized journals, content held in an external repository may be considered Integral.)

Additional content is truly supplemental: it provides a relevant and useful expansion of the article in the form of text, tables, figures, multimedia, or data. It may aid any reader to achieve deeper understanding of the work through added detail and context. Generally, the author has created this content, and the publisher hosts it or places it on the open web**.

Related content refers to the materials that the author wishes to make the reader aware of because it may add to the understanding of the work, or aid the replication or verification of the results. It generally resides in an official data center or institutional repository. The author may or may not have been the creator, and the publisher has no responsibility or authority over this content and does not host it. Journals treat references to this content differently. Many expect it to be listed as another cited reference, and others link to it outside the citation list. Because the publisher lacks any authority, the Working Group offers no recommended practices for Related content.

WHAT DOES THE FUTURE HOLD?

TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS

Metadata schema

•Supplemental material (top-level "wrapper ")

•Core article (parent article) metadata

•Type: Integral or Additional

•Core article item being supplemented (figure, table, etc.)

•Descriptive metadata

•Physical metadata

•Object or Object group

Descriptive metadata

Physical metadata

•creation_application–platform–software (name, version)–application_information•ext_link•filename•fixity–fixity_method–fixity_value•format•format_registry

•mime_subtype•mime_type•primary_representation•relationship•rendering-application–platform–software (name, version)–application_information•size•validity

TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONS (CONTINUED)

Two types of object groups

•Logically different objects that share some common metadata, e.g., a series of graphs or images

• Various representation of the same logical object, e.g.,

chemical structure represented by:

– a connection table,

– an image of a molecule in a static orientation, and

– an interactive application allowing manipulation by the user;

protein-related information represented by:

– analytical measurements,

– chemical structure, and

– derived structures.

Packaging

• Journal title / ISSN

• Core article metadata

• Persistent link to core article

• Persistent link to supplemental materials

•Manifest (machine-readable)

– Number of top-level object groups / objects

– Number of objects in each object group

– File names and total size of each object group with its objects

– Copyright status of each object group / object

– Description

– Executable information and instructions

FOOTNOTES

* More precisely, the notion of Integral supplemental content arises only when a publisher can not or will not incorporate essential content in the article’s version of record. Consider, for example, an article that in its first section cites a critically important video. This video will be considered Integral supplemental material whether the article is published in a print-only journal (where it cannot be incorporated in the version of record because of the physical nature of the print medium) or in an electronic journal whose version of record is PDF/A (which forbids embedding dynamic objects). The same video can, however, be embedded in a regular PDF or in HTML; if a journal considers those its version of record then the video simply becomes part of the article, the same way any figure or table cited in its body are. in this case, the notion of Integral supplemental material does not need to be invoked at all.

** Interestingly, not making a distinction between Integral and Additional content presents a problem even for the journals that have seemingly addressed the supplemental materials issue. Thus, for The Journal of Neuroscience that embeds dynamic content in its PDFs, the question of how essential that content is remains unanswered. Similarly, Cell that integrates its videos in the HTML but also lists the same videos on the Supplemental Information tab does not provide an indication whether the video is crucial or merely ancillary for the full understanding of the work.