EN

Research Ethics, Open Science and CRIS

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Joachim Schöpfel, Otmane Azeroaul, Monika Jungbauer-Gan

The purpose of this paper is to analyze how current research information systems (CRIS) take into account ethical issues, especially in the environment of open science. The analysis is based on a review of the literature on research information management, CRIS, open science and research ethics.

The paper provides a framework for the assessment of CRIS on two levels: are CRIS (= their data model, format, functionalities, etc.) compliant with ethical requirements from the research community, funding bodies, government, etc., i.e., can they appropriately process data on research ethics (protocols, misconduct, etc.), and which are the ethical issues of the development, implementation and usage of CRIS?

What is the impact of new ethical requirements from the open science movement, such as integrity or transparency? Can CRIS be considered as ethical infrastructures or “infraethics”?

Concluding this analysis, the paper proposes an empirical approach for further investigation of this topic. The originality of the paper is that there are very few studies so far that assess the implications of research ethics and open science on the CRIS.

URL : https://hal.univ-lille.fr/hal-03034276

EN

Open Access Legislation and Regulation in the United States: Implications for Higher Education

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Anjam Chaudhary, Kathy Irwin, David Hoa Khoa Nguyen

Accessing quality research when not part of an academic institution can be challenging. Dating back to the 1980s, open access (OA) was a response to journal publishers who restricted access to publications by requiring a subscription and limited access to knowledge.

Although the OA movement seeks to remove costly barriers to accessing research, especially when funded by state and federal governments, it remains the subject of continuous debates. After providing a brief overview of OA, this article summarizes OA statutory and regulatory developments at the federal and state levels regarding free and open access to research.

It compares similarities and differences among enacted and proposed legislation and describes the advantages and disadvantages of these laws. It analyzes the effects of these laws in higher education, especially on university faculty regarding tenure and promotion decisions as well as intellectual property rights to provide recommendations and best practices regarding the future of legislation and regulation in the United States.

URL : Open Access Legislation and Regulation in the United States: Implications for Higher Education

DOI : https://doi.org/10.17161/jcel.v4i1.13637

EN

Centering Accessibility: A Review of Institutional Repository Policy and Practice

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Talea Anderson, Chelsea Leachman

INTRODUCTION

Libraries have proposed institutional repositories as a means of providing universal access to university research. However, in recent years, it has become clear that universities and libraries have neglected web accessibility in constructing services including open access publishing programs.

METHODS

To better understand accessibility practices in relation to institutional repositories, survey responses were collected from repository managers. The survey consisted of five multiple choice and two open-ended questions regarding remediation and accessibility practices used by repository managers.

RESULTS & DISCUSSION

While the importance of accessibility has been well documented, survey responses showed that few policies and practices have been put in place to ensure accessibility in institutional repositories. Key barriers to accessibility included lack of organizational resources, lack of time, inadequate training, and product restrictions.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that accessibility should be prioritized in future creation of policies and allocation of library resources.

URL : Centering Accessibility: A Review of Institutional Repository Policy and Practice

DOI : https://jlsc-pub.org/articles/abstract/10.7710/2162-3309.2383/

FR

Ce que les collections numériques font aux bibliothèques

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Auteurs/Authors : Benoît Epron, Florence Burgy

Le développement des collections numériques interroge en profondeur le rôle et les pratiques professionnelles en bibliothèques. Dans cet article, nous abordons la question de ces nouvelles collections à la fois du point de vue des professionnels et des usagers. Nous proposerons une analyse portant sur les questions de choix et de sélection, d’organisation et de classification et enfin de services rendus aux usagers.

Cette analyse d’appuiera sur trois caractéristiques des collections numériques que sont leur instabilité, leur offre quasi infinie et leur hétérogénéité. Ces trois dimensions obligent les bibliothécaires à reconsidérer leur fonction et leur rôle dans la construction intellectuelle et organisationnelle des collections. Nous aborderons enfin la réception de ces collections numériques du point de vue des usagers.

En effet, les usagers sont aujourd’hui largement confrontés à des offres proches dans leur structure de celles des bibliothèques. Le modèle de l’abonnement conduit à des mécanismes de paiement forfaitaire pour l’accès, et non la possession, à un vaste ensemble de ressources numériques, sans cesse en évolution.

Le développement très rapide de ce type de modèle pour l’ensemble des industries culturelles amène chez les individus, et donc les usagers des bibliothèques, au développement d’une forme de littératie numérique d’appréhension et d’exploitation de ces collections.

Cela passe par des interfaces innovantes d’exploration et de médiation dans lesquelles nous retrouvons certains mécanismes récurrents : les étagères infinies et la recommandation algorithmique.

Nous conclurons cet article par la présentation rapide de projets en cours sur ces problématiques et la nécessité de déployer une réflexion en profondeur sur la place des bibliothèques dans ce nouvel écosystème.

URL : https://www.erudit.org/en/journals/documentation/1900-v1-n1-documentation04880/1064745ar/abstract/

EN

Measuring the impact of special collections and archives in the digital age: opportunities and challenges

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Author : Christina Kamposiori

This paper is based on the outcome of a recent Research Libraries UK (RLUK) project that aimed to explore and understand the approaches employed by RLUK members for capturing and measuring the impact of activities based on special collections and archives.

In today’s constantly evolving information and scholarly environment, educational and cultural institutions, such as research libraries, are faced with a pressing demand to assess the value of their services and evidence their impact.

As part of our goal to develop a better understanding of how research libraries respond to this demand, we collected and analysed case-study and survey data from across the RLUK membership that show the practices and methods of research libraries for increasing and assessing the impact of their collections and related services.

As our results showed, research libraries increasingly employ audience-focused strategies and take advantage of the new possibilities offered by the digital age to enhance access to collections, reach a range of audience groups and achieve greater impact.

However, a number of issues, such as the lack of structured methodologies to capture and evaluate the full reach of digital collections and resources or the long-term impact of collections, can make the process of measuring and evidencing value a challenging task for institutions.

In this paper, we will present some of the key findings showing the pathways to impact followed by special collection and archive professionals in the UK and Ireland and reflect on the opportunities and challenges that the digital era presents for increasing and measuring this impact.

URL : Measuring the impact of special collections and archives in the digital age: opportunities and challenges

DOI : http://doi.org/10.18352/lq.10345

EN

Transformative agreements: Do they pave the way to open access?

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Ángel Borrego, Lluís Anglada, Ernest Abadal

Transformative agreements, also known as ‘offsetting’, ‘read and publish’, or ‘publish and read’ agreements, have shifted the focus of scholarly journal licensing from cost containment towards open access publication.

An analysis of 36 full‐text transformative agreements recorded in the ESAC registry shows that ‘transformative agreement’ is an umbrella term that encompasses different kinds of contracts. We differentiate between pre‐transformative, partially transformative, and fully transformative agreements.

Pre‐transformative agreements are traditional subscription licences that grant article processing charge (APC) discounts or vouchers for open access publication of a limited number of articles. Partially transformative agreements differentiate between a read fee and a publish fee to cover the processing charges of a certain number of articles.

Fully transformative agreements allow unlimited open access publication of the scholarly output of the subscribing institution. In all three categories, some agreements restrict open access publication to hybrid journals, whereas others allow publication in both hybrid and gold journals.

Transformative agreements are more transparent than traditional journal licences, allow authors to retain copyright, and make provisions to facilitate the management of open access workflows.

It is hard to assess whether these agreements are just a temporary phase in the transition towards open access or will perpetuate the current structure of the scholarly communication system and its associated high costs.

URL : Transformative agreements: Do they pave the way to open access?

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1347

EN

The odd couple: contrasting openness in innovation and science

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Maximilian Heimstädt, Sascha Friesike

Over the last few decades, two domains have undergone seemingly similar transformations: Closed innovation turned into open innovation, closed science into open science. In this essay we engage critically with recent calls for a close coupling of the two domains based on their apparent commonality: openness.

Comparing the historically-specific ways in which openness has been defined and mobilised, we find substantial differences between open innovation and open science. While openness in innovation was developed as an analytic concept and redefined quite flexibly over time, openness in science was created as a programmatic concept and its initial definition has been preserved rather rigidly.

Contrasting openness in innovation and science helps anticipate some of the unintended consequences that a close coupling of these domains might yield. A close coupling might alienate advocates for change within the academic community, marginalise maintenance-oriented collaborations between science and practice, and increase the dependence of science on profit-oriented platforms.

Reflecting upon these unintended consequences can help policy-makers and researchers to fine-tune their concepts for new forms of engagement across the science-practice divide.

URL : The odd couple: contrasting openness in innovation and science

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1080/14479338.2020.1837631