Étiquette : open repositories

Catégories
EN

Faculty self-archiving: Motivations and barriers

This study investigated factors that motivate or impede faculty participation in self-archiving practices – the placement of research work in various open access (OA) venues, ranging from personal Web pages to OA archives.

The author’s research design involves triangulation of survey and interview data from 17 Carnegie doctorate universities with DSpace institutional repositories.

The analysis of survey responses from 684 professors and 41 telephone interviews identified seven significant factors: (a) altruism – the idea of providing OA benefits for users; (b) perceived self-archiving culture; (c) copyright concerns; (d) technical skills; (e) age; (f) perception of no harmful impact of self-archiving on tenure and promotion; and (g) concerns about additional time and effort.

The factors are listed in descending order of their effect size. Age, copyright concerns, and additional time and effort are negatively associated with self-archiving, whereas remaining factors are positively related to it.

Faculty are motivated by OA advantages to users, disciplinary norms, and no negative influence on academic reward. However, barriers to self-archiving – concerns about copyright, extra time and effort, technical ability, and age – imply that the provision of services to assist faculty with copyright management, and with technical and logistical issues, could encourage higher rates of self-archiving.

URL : http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/123585469/abstract

Catégories
status

MELIBEA : « MELIBEA (http://www.accesoab…

MELIBEA :
« MELIBEA (http://www.accesoabierto.net/politicas/) is a directory and a validator of institutional open-access (OA) policies regarding scientific and academic work. As a directory, it describes the existing policies. As a validator, it subjects them to qualitative and quantitative analysis based on fulfilment of a set of indicators ( http://www.accesoabierto.net/politicas/politicas_estructura.php) that reflect the bases of an institutional policy.  »
URL : https://arl.org/Lists/SPARC-OAForum/Message/5529.html

Catégories
EN

The ADMIRAL Project: A Data Management Infrastructure for Research Across the Life sciences

ADMIRAL is a project of the Image Bioinformatics Research Group and is funded by the JISC. The purpose of the ADMIRAL Project is to create a two-tier federated data management infrastructure for use by life science researchers, that will provide services (a) to meet their local data management needs for the collection, digital organization, metadata annotation and controlled sharing of biological datasets; and (b) to provide an easy and secure route for archiving annotated datasets to an institutional repository, The Oxford University Data Store, for long-term preservation and access, complete with assigned Digital Object Identifiers and Creative Commons open access licences.

URL : https://web.archive.org/web/20110828062449/http://imageweb.zoo.ox.ac.uk/wiki/index.php/ADMIRAL

Catégories
status

Scientific journal publishing: yearly vo…

Scientific journal publishing: yearly volume and open access availability :
« Introduction. We estimate the total yearly volume of peer-reviewed scientific journal articles published world-wide as well as the share of these articles available openly on the Web either directly or as copies in e-print repositories.
Method. We rely on data from two commercial databases (ISI and Ulrich’s Periodicals Directory) supplemented by sampling and Google searches.
Analysis. A central issue is the finding that ISI-indexed journals publish far more articles per year (111) than non ISI-indexed journals (26), which means that the total figure we obtain is much lower than many earlier estimates. Our method of analysing the number of repository copies (green open access) differs from several earlier studies which have studied the number of copies in identified repositories, since we start from a random sample of articles and then test if copies can be found by a Web search engine.
Results. We estimate that in 2006 the total number of articles published was approximately 1,350,000. Of this number 4.6% became immediately openly available and an additional 3.5% after an embargo period of, typically, one year. Furthermore, usable copies of 11.3% could be found in subject-specific or institutional repositories or on the home pages of the authors.
Conclusions. We believe our results are the most reliable so far published and, therefore, should be useful in the on-going debate about Open Access among both academics and science policy makers. The method is replicable and also lends itself to longitudinal studies in the future. »
URL : http://informationr.net/ir/14-1/paper391.html

Catégories
status

New Gateways to Scholarly Communication …

New Gateways to Scholarly Communication through Open Access :
« The draumatic changes in 21st century has been occurred in the world of publication of scolarly communication.One of the phenomenais of Open Access Publishing Model.The open access movement is increasingly guiding the publishing practices of scholarly research. This paper will look at developments in the open access movement, how open access affects scholarly communication, and what eventual role librarians will play in its progress. »
URL : http://eprints.rclis.org/18044/

Catégories
status

SWORD v2.0: Deposit Lifecycle : SWORD is…

SWORD v2.0: Deposit Lifecycle :
SWORD is a hugely successful JISC project which has kindled repository interoperability and built a community around the software and the problem space. It explicitly deals only with creating new repository resources by package deposit ­ a simple case which is at the root of its success but also its key limitation. This next version of SWORD will push the standard towards supporting full repository deposit lifecycles by using update, retrieve and delete extensions to the specification. This will enable the repository to be integrated into a broader range of systems in the scholarly environment, by supporting an increased range of behaviours and use cases.
URL : http://sword2depositlifecycle.jiscpress.org/files/2010/07/SWORDv2.pdf

Catégories
status

No-Fault Peer Review Charges: The Price …

No-Fault Peer Review Charges: The Price of Selectivity Need Not Be Access Denied or Delayed :
Plans by universities and research funders to pay the costs of Open Access Publishing (« Gold OA ») are premature. Funds are short; 80% of journals (including virtually all the top journals) are still subscription-based, tying up the potential funds to pay for Gold OA; the asking price for Gold OA is still high; and there is concern that paying to publish may inflate acceptance rates and lower quality standards. What is needed now is for universities and funders to mandate OA self-archiving (of authors’ final peer-reviewed drafts, immediately upon acceptance for publication) (« Green OA »). That will provide immediate OA; and if and when universal Green OA should go on to make subscriptions unsustainable (because users are satisfied with just the Green OA versions) that will in turn induce journals to cut costs (print edition, online edition, access-provision, archiving), downsize to just providing the service of peer review, and convert to the Gold OA cost-recovery model; meanwhile, the subscription cancellations will have released the funds to pay these residual service costs. The natural way to charge for the service of peer review then will be on a « no-fault basis, » with the author’s institution or funder paying for each round of refereeing, regardless of outcome (acceptance, revision/re-refereeing, or rejection). This will minimize cost while protecting against inflated acceptance rates and decline in quality standards.
URL : http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/21348/