Esther Plomp

Esther Plomp

Position / Title

Postdoc/Research Developer

ORCID

0000-0003-3625-1357

Last updated July 8, 2025

Biography

Esther is an Open Science enthusiast and enjoys to contribute to a more equitable way of knowledge generation and to facilitate others in working more transparently. Esther started as a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Aruba Research Center in January 2025. Here she works on improving the visibility of UA Researchers and their research outputs and provides support with funding opportunities, particularly regarding the data management component. Esther also works on several research projects, such as her eScience Fellowship project on tracking research objects (other than peer reviewed articles), and a Software Sustainability Institute Fellowship on facilitating contributions to open source/science communities, with a focus on The Turing Way. Her research field is Bioarchaeology, with a particular focus on Isotope Archaeology.

Publication Search Results

Now showing 1 - 10 of 21

Valuing a broad range of research contributions through Team Infrastructure Roles: Why CRediT is not enough
(2023) Esther Plomp
Scientific research is increasingly reliant on larger teams with diverse skills and expertise. As a result, Team Infrastructure Roles (TIRs, Bennett et al. 2023) have gained prominence in research. These roles include Lab Technicians, Project Managers, Data Stewards, Research Community Managers, and Research Software Engineers. These specialised roles are key to the success of large research projects, and their expertise may contribute to enhancing the transparency of the research process. Yet, the current focus in research assessment on publications inadvertently sidelines supporting contributions of TIRs that may not translate directly into authorship on publications. TIR contributions are therefore invisible in research assessment if the focus remains on publications, even when contribution roles are described by the CRediT taxonomy. CRediT is a step forward as it allows for a more transparent recording of contributions, but only for a limited range of research outputs. Contributorship on tangible research outputs, while more transparent, is therefore still insufficient to evaluate all research contributions. The current research assessment system needs to be reimagined so that the entire spectrum of research activities and contributions to the research process are valued.
Ethics and applications of isotope analysis in archaeology
(American Journal of Biological Anthropology, 2024) Stantis, C.; Schaefer, B. J.; Correia, M. A.; Alaica, A. K.; Huffer, D.; Esther Plomp; Di Giusto, M.; Chidimuro, B.; Rose, A. K.; Nayak, A.; Kendall, E. J.
This synthesis explores specific ethical questions that commonly arise in isotopic analysis. For more than four decades, isotope analysis has been employed in archeological studies to explore past human and animal dietary habits, mobility patterns, and the environment in which a human or animal inhabited during life. These analyses require consideration of ethical issues. While theoretical concepts are discussed, we focus on practical aspects: working with descendant communities and other rights holders, choosing methods, creating and sharing data, and working mindfully within academia. These layers of respect and care should surround our science. This paper is relevant for specialists in isotope analysis as well as those incorporating these methods into larger projects. By covering the whole of the research process, from design to output management, we appeal broadly to archaeology and provide actionable solutions that build on the discussions in the general field.
A guide for social science journal editors on easing into open science
(Research Integrity and Peer Review, 2024) Silverstein, P.; Elman, C.; Montoya, A.; McGillivray, B.; Pennington, C. R.; Harrison, C. H.; Steltenpohl, C. N.; Roer, J. P.; Corker, K. S.; Charron, L. M.; Elsherif, M.; Malicki, M.; Hayes-Harb, R.; Grinschgl, S., Neal, T.; Evans, T. R.; Karhulahti, V.-M.; Krenzer, W. L. D.; Belaus, A.; Moreau, D.; Burin, D.I; Chin, E; Esther Plomp; Mayo-Wilson, E.; Lyle, J.; Adler, J.M.; Bottesini, J.G.; Lawson, K.M.; Schmidt, K.; Reneau, K.; Vilhuber, L.; Waltman, L.; Gernsbacher, M.A.; Plonski, P.E.; Ghai, S.; Grant, S.; Christian, T.-M.; Ngiam, W.; Syed, M.
Journal editors have a large amount of power to advance open science in their respective fields by incentivising and mandating open policies and practices at their journals. The Data PASS Journal Editors Discussion Interface (JEDI, an online community for social science journal editors: www.dpjedi.org) has collated several resources on embedding open science in journal editing (www.dpjedi.org/resources). However, it can be overwhelming as an editor new to open science practices to know where to start. For this reason, we created a guide for journal editors on how to get started with open science. The guide outlines steps that editors can take to implement open policies and practices within their journal, and goes through the what, why, how, and worries of each policy and practice. This manuscript introduces and summarizes the guide (full guide: https://doi.org/0. 31219/osf. io/hstcx).
Ten simple rules for pushing boundaries of inclusion at academic events
(PLOS Computational Biology, 2024) Hall, S. M.; Kochin, D.; Carne, C.; Herterich, P.; Lewers, K. L.; Abdelhack, M.; Ramasubramanian, A.; Michael Alphonse, J. F.; Ung, V., El-Gebali, S.; Currin, C. B.; Esther Plomp; Thompson, R.; Sharan, M.
Inclusion at academic events is facing increased scrutiny as the communities these events serve raise their expectations for who can practically attend. Active efforts in recent years to bring more diversity to academic events have brought progress and created momentum. However, we must reflect on these efforts and determine which underrepresented groups are being disadvantaged. Inclusion at academic events is important to ensure diversity of discourse and opinion, to help build networks, and to avoid academic siloing. All of these contribute to the development of a robust and resilient academic field. We have developed these Ten Simple Rules both to amplify the voices that have been speaking out and to celebrate the progress of many Equity, Diversity, and Inclusivity practices that continue to drive the organisation of academic events. The Rules aim to raise awareness as well as provide actionable suggestions and tools to support these initiatives further. This aims to support academic organisations such as the Deep Learning Indaba, Neuromatch Academy, the IBRO-Simons Computational Neuroscience Imbizo, Biodiversity Information Standards (TDWG), Arabs in Neuroscience, FAIRPoints, and OLS (formerly Open Life Science). This article is a call to action for organisers to reevaluate the impact and reach of their inclusive practices.
A Manifesto for Rewarding and Recognizing Team Infrastructure Roles
(Journal of Trial and Error, 2023) Bennett, A.; Garside, D.; Gould van Praag, C.; Hostler, T. J.; Esther Plomp; Kherroubi Garcia, I.; Schettino, A.; Teplitzky, S.; Ye, H.
The Scientific Reform Movement has highlighted the need for large research teams with diverse skills. This has necessitated the growth of professional team infrastructure roles (TIRs) who support research through specialised skills, but do not have primary responsibility for conceiving or leading research projects. TIRs such as Lab Technicians, Project Managers, Data Stewards, Community Managers, and Research Software Engineers all play an important role in ensuring the success of a research project, but are commonly neglected under current reward and recognition procedures, which focus on the individual academic researcher instead of the teams involved. Without meaningful identification and recognition of TIR contributions, we risk reinforcing the conceptual and practical division between academic researchers and TIRs. This situation is inequitable and detrimental to the research enterprise: the limited potential for career advancement for TIRs may cause them to leave for other occupations, ultimately leading to a loss of institutional skill, expertise, and memory. This contribution explores the evolution of specialist TIRs and the status of these positions in various settings. We provide three case study descriptions of TIR activities, so that readers may become more familiar with the breadth and depth of their work. We then propose system level changes designed to embed meaningful recognition of all contributions. Acknowledging the contributions of all research roles will help retain skill and expertise, and lead to collaborative research ecosystems that are well-positioned to address complex research challenges.
Ten simple rules for starting FAIR discussions in your community
(PLOS Computational BiologyPublic Library of Science (PLoS), 2023) Belliard, F.; Maineri, A. M.; Esther Plomp; Ramos Padilla, A. F.; Sun, J.; Zare Jeddi, M.
This work presents 10 rules that provide guidance and recommendations on how to start up discussions around the implementation of the FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) principles and creation of standardised ways of working. These recommendations will be particularly relevant if you are unsure where to start, who to involve, what the benefits and barriers of standardisation are, and if little work has been done in your discipline to standardise research workflows. When applied, these rules will support a more effective way of engaging the community with discussions on standardisation and practical implementation of the FAIR principles.
Taking the TU Delft Carpentries Workshops Online
(Journal of eScience Librarianship, 2022) Esther Plomp; Tsang, Emmy; Martinez Lavanchy, Paula M.
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands (TU Delft) stopped its activities on campus until autumn 2021 and moved all teaching activities to an online setting. This article describes the challenges and lessons learned from successfully moving basic programming workshops, Software Carpentry workshops, online. The article details the local TU Delft context, the online workshop tools that were employed, and the roles that the organising team played to organise and run these online workshops. To successfully adapt to the online context, it was important to adjust the original planning and programme for the Carpentry workshops. General challenges of online workshops and solutions that worked for the TU Delft team are also shared. Through iteratively developing the online workshops over the past year, the team has enhanced both learners’ and organisers’ experience. The lessons learned will continue to be valuable when the workshops are transitioned back to a physical setting when COVID-19 protective measures are lifted.
Going Digital: Persistent Identifiers for Research Samples, Resources and Instruments
(Data Science Journal, 2020) Esther Plomp
The uptake of Persistent Identifiers (PIDs) has increased in recent years and has improved the Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability and Reusability (FAIR) of various research related objects (e.g., data, software, researchers and research organisations). The uptake of PIDs for physical aspects of research (such as samples, artefacts, reagents and analyses instruments) has thus far been embraced primarily for use in the fields of Earth and life Sciences. Wider adoption of PIDs for physical aspects of research can improve the findability and accessibility of these resources, which will allow for data to be put into more detailed context. By using PIDs all the information about a sample or artefact could be more easily available in a single location, allowing for persistent links to other sources of relevant information. Through the use of interoperable (metadata) standards and shared forms of documentation it will be easier to collaborate across multiple disciplines and the reusability of resulting data and the physical samples and artefacts themselves will improve. Wider adoption of PIDs for physical aspects of research is challenging, as research communities will have to work together to establish relevant standards that are meaningful across multiple domains. The infrastructure for wider adoption already exists, it is now up to research communities to adopt standards and PIDs for the physical aspects of their research and up to funding and research institutes to support this broader adoption.
IsoArcH Data Management Plan example
(Zenodo, 2024) Esther Plomp; Kootker, Lisette; Salesse, Kevin
eScience Center Fellowship Programme 2024: Application Form Esther Plomp
(Zenodo, 4/8/2024) Esther Plomp
Proposal submitted by Esther Plomp on 8 April 2024 for the eScience Center Fellowship Programme 2024. Summary: Evaluation of researcher performance is currently a contested subject within academia. Although many researchers contribute to their field of expertise in a multitude of manners, the most stringent criteria of success is the number of research articles published. Subverting the current “publish or perish” culture requires a novel approach to the evaluation of research objects (such as software, data and methods) other than research articles. However, there is currently no standardised way to track such research objects. This project aims to identify and quantify the role of research objects, in particular research software, within the Faculty of Applied Sciences at TU Delft and evaluate how these are being shared within the research community. By monitoring open research objects such as software, the project aims to stimulate an open research culture and incentivise scientists to adhere to Open Science practices and the FAIR principles.