As an academic who is still relatively ‘wet behind the ears’, I saw this as great opportunity to really build a good foundation for my research and to start things ‘right’. I have always felt that scholarship in its essence is the contribution of critical thought to a vast and ever-growing canon and as such researchers must deal with volumes and volumes of texts, articles, art works, etc. What has always intrigued me is how one stores and organizes all this information as I don’t buy that just because one has their PhD they have the genius capacity to store all the data to remain ‘informed’… well at least at first.
As a result I have been in search of a citation system that would fit nicely into my research process since 2009. I was looking for something simple, portable and would last the test of time and software updates. In my search I have talked to professors, tutors and postgraduate researchers and discussed their personal methods of managing their information. I have received many useful suggestions but was surprised to find out that most scholars I have spoken too at OCAD, Harvard, Camberwell and Goldsmiths still collect their data the old fashioned way of either writing down/typing each item. The system that I have seen most commonly used involves the organization of text files in folders saved (and religiously backed up/printed out) on one’s hard drive.
Systems of storing these files were either done by theme (problematic when there is cross-over in themes in certain texts), by date (only useful if historical chronology is relevant to one’s analysis) and by writing project (useful if one has plenty of articles/essays/books under their belt of which they could use the attached bibliographies as organized resources according to the title of the project). Some scholars both senior and junior have used good old fashioned paper. Notebooks, file folders, clippings, and photocopies etc. This method seemed to be the most flexible as it could incorporate all the said electronic techniques but it was very far from being portable.

As a technophile I was looking for a digital answer. I like the idea that libraries of texts can be accessed from the palm of my hands anywhere in the world without ever having to worry about losing it, and I wanted to incorporate this in my methodology of data collection from the start of my postgraduate research. I was referred to the Endnote , the reference management software by Thompson Reuters, but was told by many that it wasn’t as portable as I may think. EndNote is a program that can pull complete citations form electronic library searches and add them to your personal online database. This database is then made accessible by Microsoft Word and as a result gives the writer the flexibility of changing citation styles with just a few clicks of the mouse. It allows for the storage of extra notes, multimedia files and tags to help organize the information. It seemed to be the perfect fit only the longevity point that was being made to me was the fact that the personal database one created was only accessible so long as you maintained your annual user fee. I could certainly get this waived so long as I was at Goldsmiths (as my tuition fees include an EndNote package) but the entire database I created over my time at Goldsmiths would be inaccessible once I left Goldsmiths! This was not a feasible option.

Grab from zotero.org
In keeping with the Web 2.0 ethos of free and open source software (FOSS) I decided to look for a FOSS version of Endnote. What I found was Zotero. Below is an interesting description of the birth of Zotero pulled up from the ever trustworthy (and also publicly collaborative and thus ubiquitous) Wikipedia:
Endnote/Zotero legal dispute
During September 2008, Thomson Reuters, the owners of Endnote, sued the Commonwealth of Virginia for $10 million and requested an injunction against competing reference management software.[4][5] George Mason University‘s Center for History and New Media developed Zotero, a free/open source extension to Mozilla Firefox. Thomson Reuters alleges that the Zotero developers reverse engineered and/or decompiled EndNote, that Zotero can transform proprietary EndNote citation style files (.ens) to the open Citation Style Language format, that they host files converted in this manner, and that they abuse the “EndNote” trademark in describing this feature. Thomson Reuters claims that this is violation of the site license agreement. They also added a restrictive click-thru license to their styles download web site.[5]
George Mason University responded that it would not renew its site license for EndNote and that “anything created by users of Zotero belongs to those users, and that it should be as easy as possible for Zotero users to move to and from the software as they wish, without friction.”[6] The journal Nature editorialized that “the virtues of interoperability and easy data-sharing among researchers are worth restating. Imagine if Microsoft Word or Excel files could be opened and saved only in these proprietary formats, for example. It would be impossible for OpenOffice and other such software to read and save these files using open standards — as they can legally do.” [7]
The case was dismissed on June 4, 2009.[8]

So long story short, I am using a mixture of a Zotero database connected to my Firefox browser in combination with a collection of carefully foldered and sub-foldered pdfs and text files. I am also currently recklessly tempting fate as I have yet to back anything up.
