Ingrid Schuett-Abraham and Roland Heynkes, 8.6.2003
The reasons |
|
|---|---|
 |
Subject specific data bases act as working group memory |
|
Computer aided information networking creates knowledge |
|
Cooperation overcomes the flood of information |
|
TSE research profits from interdisciplinary cooperation avoiding jargon |
|
Collegial discussion about article understanding improves the quality of literature work |
|
Hypertext enhances the efficiency of cooperative literature work |
Problem:
With time it becomes increasingly difficult to recall what we have read and where, and to review and correct one's interpretations. Also, working groups normally lose substantial knowledge with leaving colleagues.
Solution:
This can be overcome by creating personal subject specific data bases. Downloads from commercial and public data bases like Pubmed with bibliographical information and abstracts save a great deal of work. You only have to add by yourself what you do not find there (e.g. books, laws, official opinions, personal communication). Whenever you read an article just add to the corresponding record the information you perceived and how you interprete it. You can also note possession of an electronic or paper copy. This will provide you with an Computer supported personal or work group memory of your background information.
Problem:
Pieces of information grow into knowledge and become significant only in the right context. However it is hardly possible to compile and connect so many facts solely within a human brain.
Solution:
With their background knowledge including subsequent publications experienced readers can often obtain more information from older articles and provide better interpretation of the results than it had been possible for the authors themselves. Therefore in one's own specific subject data base and especially the analyses, all information relevant for a specific question can quickly be retrieved by key words and copied into a common text. A number behind each single information links it to the data set of origin which holds all available additional information. By comparison it becomes immediately apparent how confirmed or controversial the information is. It also helps to recognize important information overlooked during the first reading. Consequently the article reviews of one's own data bank improve with time in completeness and preciseness.
Problem:
Scientific areas like the TSE-research produce many more articles than individual scientists or even working groups can read.
Solution:
To be successful literature work needs cooperation and should not be restricted to closed circles. As many competent colleagues as possible should put together information on certain topics from all articles published in their field of research. The reviews should enable others to quickly get an overview and to immediately retrieve the details the review author took from each reviewed article. This spares the reader the laborious task of having first to obtain cited articles found in conventional literature lists of classical reviews and then to search for the quoted passages supporting the author's view. Ideally a mouseclick leads the reader directly to the corresponding parts of the analyses of the quoted articles. From there links can be set to the original papers whenever they are accessible via Internet. Hypertexts provide the quickest access from the review via the article analysis to the original source.
Problem:
Problem areas like TSE safety can only be handled by broad interdisciplinary cooperation. This would result in massive problems with understanding and communication if everybody wrote in his/her professional jargon.
Solution:
Interdisciplinary cooperation requires comprehensible writing. Therefore reviews and analyses have to be phrased in a way understood by all participants. If possible, the words should be used in their colloquial meaning. Technical terms should be avoided or linked to a special glossary in which the author explains the sense in which he used them.
Problem:
The critical evaluation of published results is demanding and prone to error. Misinterpretations might have serious consequences for one's own work.
Solution:
By making reviews and article analyses available to all cooperating partners the texts are exposed to scientific discussion. Thus the cooperative literature work profits from corrections, critical comments and additional information by colleagues.
Problem:
Classical conferences facilitate communication by visual contact. However, they are costly and restricted by time problems. Internet conferences in contrast are cheap and independent of locus and time. However, writing the mails is time consuming and the achieved results do not always justify the effort. Misunderstandings due to lack of non-verbal communication are inevitable, and debaters tend to block discussions with unproductive self-opinionated disputes.
Solution:
Hypertext-Projects fully concentrate on producing well documented and traceable results and are thus highly efficient. At the same time each participant can adjust his/her participation to his/her individual needs and capabilities.
All these solutions are combined in a Hypertext-project which serves as frame for our interdisciplinary cooperation in TSE literature work. Meanwhile all technical and organisational problems have essentially been solved. Already the profit for the cooperating partners by far exceeds the required effort. Synergic effects will increase with every new participant, creating broad and lasting knowledge for all.
TSE hypertext project
home page
Authors index
my own articles
my critical analyses of research articles
Remarks and critical comments by experts are highly welcome any time.
Copyright Roland Heynkes and Ingrid Schütt-Abraham