Abstract:Introduction Academic computer science has an odd relationship with software: Publishing papers about software is considered a distinctly stronger contribution than publishing the software. The historical reasons for this paradox no longer apply, but their legacy remains. This limits researchers who see the open-source software movement as an opportunity to make a scholarly contribution. Expanded definitions of scholarship acknowledge both application and discovery as important components. 1 One obstacle remains: evaluation. To raise software to the status of a first-class contribution, we propose "best practices" for the evaluation of the scholarly contribution of open-source software. Typically, scholars who develop software do not include it as a primary contribution for performance reviews. Instead, they write articles about the software and present the articles as contributions. This conflation of articles and software serves neither medium well. An article describes an original intellectual contribution consisting of an idea, the argument for its importance and correctness, and supporting data. In contrast, software is more often an implementation of prior ideas in a usable form. It bridges the often considerable gap between an idea and the practical application of that idea. The original idea and its implementation represent distinct kinds of contribution. The critical gap is the perceived incomparability of these two contributions. Lacking a concise description adapted to the traditional practices of performance review committees, software is difficult to evaluate as a scholarly contribution and is often relegated to second-class status. We propose a framework for common assessment based on widely accepted definitions of scholarship. Within this general framework, we consider the material and procedures that a performance review committee uses to evaluate a publication. We then describe how software can be summarized in a compatible form of bibliographic citation and supplementary material.

How Important is Software to Library and Information Science Research? A Content Analysis of Full-Text Publications

Disciplinary Differences of Software Use and Impact in Scientific Literature

Software Citation in Theory and Practice

Special issue on software citation, indexing, and discoverability

How do software citation formats evolve over time? A longitudinal analysis of R programming language packages

A multi-level analysis of data quality for formal software citation

Research Software Sustainability and Citation

It's your software! Get it cited the way you want!

Attributing and Referencing (Research) Software: Best Practices and Outlook from Inria

Visual topical analysis of library and information science

Challenges of measuring the impact of software: an examination of the lme4 R package

Characteristics of LIS Research Articles Affecting Their Citation Impact

Software must be recognised as an important output of scholarly research

Assessing open source software as a scholarly contribution

Software Citation Implementation Challenges

The challenge and promise of software citation for credit, identification, discovery, and reuse

Investigation on the Statistical Methods in Research Studies of Library and Information Science.

Openness and Knowledge Sharing of Economics,Sociology,Law and Politics:A Comparative Study on Citations of Chinese Social Science Journals

Assessing the Impact of Software on Science: A Bootstrapped Learning of Software Entities in Full-Text Papers.

Do open access journals have a greater citation impact? A study of journals in library and information science

The evolution and shift of research topics and methods in library and information science