| Description: | Publications List: We obtained copies of all of the papers published by our
surveyed groups up until August 2020, the vast majority of which were open access. Each
journal was classified according to disciplinary category(ies) using SCOPUS, SCIMAGO and
journal-stated discipline fields if not listed in those databases, being generous rather
than reductionist in allocation. In this manner 128 specific journal disciplines were
identified across all working groups, from agriculture to ecology to parasitology and
water science. Guided by the Australia and New Zealand Fields of Research categorisation
(ANZFoR1], these specific disciplinary categories were then clustered under 22
disciplinary divisions, with two non-ANZFoR categories created due to no suitable matches
in the ANZFoR Divisions. The disciplinary divisions used were: agriculture, veterinary and
food sciences, biological sciences, biomedical and clinical sciences, built environment
and design, commerce, management and tourism services, earth sciences, economics,
education, engineering, environmental sciences, health sciences, history, heritage and
archaeology, human society, information and computing sciences, language, communication
and culture, law and legal studies, mathematical sciences, philosophy and religious
studies, physical sciences, and psychology. The two additional divisions were ‘bio water
science’ which covered all freshwater and marine biological sciences, and ‘general
science’ which enabled the classification of journals like Science and Nature that cover
multiple disciplines. Citations Table Methods: To obtain the disciplinary diversity of
articles cited by each group to produce their publications, we first extracted which
journals were cited in the published papers. Each journal was classified according to
disciplinary category(ies) using SCOPUS, SCIMAGO and journal-stated discipline fields if
not listed in those databases, being generous rather than reductionist in allocation.
Guided by the Australia and New Zealand Fields of Research categorisation (ANZFoR1], these
specific disciplinary categories were then clustered under 22 disciplinary Divisions, with
two non-ANZFoR categories created due to no suitable matches in the ANZFoR Divisions (we
also noted relevant Groups nested under each Division). The disciplinary divisions used
were: agriculture, veterinary and food sciences, biological sciences, biomedical and
clinical sciences, built environment and design, commerce, management and tourism
services, earth sciences, economics, education, engineering, environmental sciences,
health sciences, history, heritage and archaeology, human society, information and
computing sciences, language, communication and culture, law and legal studies,
mathematical sciences, philosophy and religious studies, physical sciences, and
psychology. The two additional divisions were ‘bio water science’ which covered all
freshwater and marine biological sciences, and ‘general science’ which enabled the
classification of journals like Science and Nature that cover multiple disciplines.
Feedback Methods: Working Group members were asked via electronic survey about their
perceptions of group performance (satisfaction and perceived effectiveness on a 1-5 point
scale with an invitation to make comments explaining their choice). We also invited
open-ended comments about the primary factors that they felt contributed to their working
group's effectiveness or lack thereof. Links to the questionnaire were emailed first to
the DataONE email distribution list during an All Hands meeting in 2014 (including to
members who were not in attendance at the meeting). The survey was subsequently emailed to
Working Group members of the two synthesis centers. In all cases, 2 weeks was given for
return with an extension of another week, and the groups chosen had finished or were close
to finishing their work. We included in our analysis only groups from which we received
survey responses from at least 20% of members. |
