Bibliographic turf
Tue 6 Nov 2007, 4:54 pm
The post The Strange Dynamics of Technology Adoption and Promotion in Academia on Dan Cohen’s Digital Humanities Blog and its inspiration, Resistance to Zotero? on Bruce D’Arcus’s darcusblog had me thinking about Zotero and Refworks.
Cohen and D’Arcus wonder why Zotero–a free, open source reference management tool that runs as a Firefox plugin–doesn’t get more love and support from the academic community, particularly from librarians.
As I read it, I thought “I resemble that remark!” I could see where Cohen and D’Arcus were coming from, even though I started feeling defensive at the same time. So I thought I’d unpack this a little bit here.
The whole thing kind of starts with a review of Zotero called Mark of Zotero in Inside Higher Ed, specifically a comment from Steven Bell where he points out that many academics may already have access to a similar bibliographic utility, RefWorks, due to campus-wide subscriptions. In fact, the library where I work subscribes to RefWorks on behalf of the campus.
D’Arcus wonders why librarians in particular are wedded to their proprietary solutions like RefWorks to the point of feeling like a “traitor” if they were to promote Zotero instead.
I don’t know that I would feel like a “traitor” to promote Zotero over our campus subscription to Refworks. In fact, I feel a little bit like a traitor to Zotero: I signed on early as someone interested in Zotero and they sent me a t-shirt. All RefWorks ever sent were some crummy mousepads!
But I don’t really promote Zotero, and I wondered why. It’s a very nice product, it is free, open source, easy to use, etc. Am I a RefWorks corporate tool? Here is what I came up with:
My library has invested more than just money in RefWorks. We have invested staff time in learning how it works, developing handouts, coming up with classes to teach people how to use it, and so on. Now that we have had it for a few years, I feel pretty good that students can talk to just about anyone on the reference desk and get competent help with RefWorks. If we were to throw Zotero into the mix, we’d have a big staff education project on our hands. Zotero is nice and easy to use, but I don’t think it is immediately apparent how to use all its functions, so I’d anticipate people would be asking for help if we promoted Zotero. (Personally, I always need to click around a bit before I can remember how to actually create a bibliography from my saved citations.)
D’Arcus seems to treat the fact that RefWorks can be acccessed via the web without installing anything from pretty much any computer is just another feature. To my mind, this is the feature that separates RefWorks from Zotero at a school like mine where students move from computer to computer all the time. Wherever they sit down at an internet-enabled computer, on- or off-campus, their data is accessible. No monkeying around with special configurations or putting Firefox and a Zotero library on a USB drive. (I should note that as I write this, I’m having trouble connecting to the RefWorks site. Curse you, gods of irony!)
Similarly, as much as I love Firefox, it is important to point out that for many people, using Zotero isn’t as simple as “using Zotero.” It means using an unfamiliar browser and installing a plugin. Easy for me, not so easy for under-motivated students and faculty.
I understand, I think, what D’Arcus is saying about “free as in freedom” as it relates to Zotero. It’s certainly one of many things I consider when choosing software. But I wonder if he’s not overstating his case to the point of spreading FUD when he says things like “I don’t think many people realize how crucial bibliographic data is to a scholar. A rather intense frustration can result from feeling that such crucial data is locked-in to closed products that have a history of glacial innovation.” All the reference management tools I have used feature multiple ways to export the data. I just did a quick, unscientific test export from RefWorks to Zotero which appeared to go smoothly, bringing along the bibliographic data and my notes. But maybe D’Arcus means something else, and I’m misreading him.
In the comments on the post by Cohen, D’Arcus says “I almost have to wonder rather cynically if this [promotion of RefWorks over Zotero] doesn’t have to do with some kind of organizational turf-guarding; the belief that librarians alone ‘own’ the bibliographic space?” I’m probably the wrong person to respond to that, but I think the real answer is probably less sinister. For my part, I think that RefWorks is easier to manage and support than Zotero would be, and that the web-accessibility of the program outweighs a lot of other considerations. I am resolving to use Zotero a bit more, so I’ll be better able to recommend it to students or faculty when it would be more appropriate. And if they come up with a zero-install web-based version, you can bet I will look at it very carefully indeed.


Steve: let me clarify the point I make that you wonder might be FUD.
First, some background. I’m a professional scholar, so my livelihood is tied in no small part to the documents I create and publish, whose value is in turn tied to the sources that I cite. I am also a former Endnote user (and beta tester), and have played with RefWorks enough to know it’s not for me.
When I was an Endnote user, I found two things: first, and without getting into intense detail, Endnote often could not represent a lot of my data. To store the stuff it could not naturally represent, I had to come up with hacks like using custom fields that had no meaning beyond my own particular workflow.
So, yes, I can export data from Endnote in a variety of formats (though there are long-standing bugs in, for example, Endnote’s RIS export that require workarounds), but I do have this little problem that I can’t even get a lot of my data into these applications, much less reliably export them.
But more importantly, and the real point I was making here, is that I also found that documents I created using the Endnote Word plug-in could only work with a) Endnote, and b) Word. When I mentioned being “locked in”, then, I was referring more to the second problem than the first. That’s not FUD; it’s fact.
So the “frustration” I refer is to is realizing my documents were dependent on a proprietary extension that has a history of yearly paid bug fixes, and a rather less-than-stellar concern for serving its users. One can say that’s a harsh assessment, but I don’t think it’s FUD.
Now, let’s be clear: Zotero has some of these limitations as well at the moment. It’s Word (and OpenOffice) functionality is implemented in specialized fields that don’t really work outside of Zotero. But the reasons for this is technical and resource issues; not business. They will get resolved, and I intend to do what I can to make that happen.
Finally, on your point about web access, I agree … except: RefWorks is a pretty poor web application by contemporary Web 2.0 standards. Much more importantly, the Zotero team is working on server functionality that will go way, WAY beyond what RefWorks provides. We’re talking seamless syncing of data across different machines, social networking functionality based on open standards, fully open data access of richer data than is possible in Endnote and RefWorks, etc., etc.
These things are not just technical buzzwords: they will deliver real value to your students and faculty.
But, to get to the real point: the code will be free! Free, as in, not only zero cost, but also freely downloadable in source form, and able to be hacked on by anyone.
Which is a roundabout way of getting to my real point: where is the real, tangible, institutional support (cash, resources, evangelism, etc.) for Zotero from the academy? Don’t complain about the limitations of Zotero 1.0, help—in whatever way you can—make 1.5 and 2.0 deliver on the great promise of this project.
I grant that it might make some sense to wait for Zotero 2.0 to really prove itself, but I hope to see you firmly on the Zotero bandwagon at that point at least ;-)
Comment by Bruce D'Arcus — November 6, 2007 @ 5:48 pm
Thanks for the clarification, Bruce. Sounds like you aren’t trying to spread FUD about RefWorks and EndNote. Instead it sounds like you are confident that Zotero will quickly improve beyond its current limitations due to the superior vision of the Zotero team in combination with its openness. Fair enough.
Comment by Steve Lawson — November 6, 2007 @ 5:56 pm
Um, for anyone that reads through my previous comment, apologies for the sloppy reference to multiple “real points”! Been a long day …
Comment by Bruce D'Arcus — November 6, 2007 @ 6:41 pm
This is timely, as I’m installing EndNote on my laptop at this very moment and I’m planning on learning how to use it today. I’m a moderate Zotero evangelist, as it works well for me, and (all other things being equal) open>=closed.
So why learn EndNote? Because students use it, and they should be free to use what they want. As a staff member, I feel like I should be prepared to help them with the tool(s) that they choose. I think anything that you’re used to using is “eas(y) to manage and support.”
P.S. We have a Zotero QuickStart on our website, and they have great tutorials on zotero.org.
Comment by John Bickar — November 7, 2007 @ 12:31 pm
Steve, A word to the wise, People tend to turn a death ear to religious zealots
Comment by kalvin — November 7, 2007 @ 6:35 pm
I’d like to chime in on the conversation, and let me out myself as an academic librarian right off the bat.
A couple of issues bother me in this discussion. First, it’s a little naive to assume that libraries are typically the part of the university that purchases bib software. Certainly not true in the case of Berkeley… it was a campus-level decision.
But more important is the mistaken belief that a single tool will serve all the various populations on a campus equally well. I work directly with undergrads and grad students, and it would be the rare undergraduate who would need all the features of Zotero, even those working on theses. Yes, some could, but for most students it would just be a case of too many features, too steep a learning curve. For many, even Refworks is more than they need.
As someone who teaches research, I consider it my job to point individuals to the best bib software for their personal needs. In some cases Zotero is great, probably a better option than Endnote, but not for everyone.
Lynn
Comment by Lynn Jones — November 8, 2007 @ 6:36 pm
john: sure thing; makes sense.
kalvin: a really productive contribution to the discussion; avoid any of the substance of the issues, and instead dismiss it all with a specious turn-of-phrase. Can you really not do better than that?
BTW, the phrase is “deaf ear”.
Comment by Bruce D'Arcus — November 8, 2007 @ 8:37 pm
Bruce, I almost canned that comment from kalvin as spam. But it would be pretty odd spam.
Ph34R teh death 34R!
Comment by Steve Lawson — November 8, 2007 @ 10:20 pm
[...] The Strange Dynamics of Technology Adoption and Promotion in Academia and Steve Lawson gave some good reasons for not promoting Zotero- including investment (monetary and human) in RefWorks, ease of use of RefWorks (since it’s [...]
Pingback by nirak.net - Musings of an LIS Student » More thoughts on Zotero and proselytizing — November 14, 2007 @ 10:44 pm
Chiming in quite late to this, but I wanted to point out to Lynn that Zotero is FAR easier to use than RefWorks. For an undergrad (or a master’s student working on a term paper), it’s as simple as a few clicks. I showed it in a seminar a few weeks ago–only going as far as saving references from PubMed, a web site, and our library catalog, then creating a stand-alone bibliography–and the students actually gasped in appreciation. With RefWorks, it’s easy, but not THAT easy.
Comment by Erika Sevetson — November 29, 2007 @ 4:08 pm
I love Zotero, but my company won’t let anyone install Firefox.
Comment by j-damn — February 6, 2008 @ 11:18 pm
@j-damn:
If you work at an academic institution, you may be able to find enough people who believe in the ideals of free/open source to change policy.
In any case, very few places restrict installation of firefox & not the installation of other software. You may be able to push for a review of firefox & state the business need. If it is just a matter of not having administrative privs, you might get away with portable firefox.
Comment by Matt — February 11, 2008 @ 5:16 pm