Trends from the Canadian IR ETD Survey 2012…

Trends from the Canadian IR/ETD Survey 2012 :

“The purpose of the 2012 Canadian IR/ETD Survey was two-fold. The first was to show the growth of Institutional Repositories (IRs) across Canada. The second was to illustrate the state of the electronic theses and dissertations (ETD) submission programs at Canadian institutions granting graduate degrees, where a thesis or dissertation is a requirement for graduation. The survey was a follow-up to one conducted in April/May 2009. We had 38 responses to the survey, with 5 duplicates. The duplicates were caused by two responses from the same institution. Therefore a total of 33 institutions responded. The trends below are based on the responses from the 33 institutions. The IR address was an optional field, but it did indicate that the responses were evenly distributed across Canada.”

Héloïse un site sur les politiques des éditeurs…

Héloïse : un site sur les politiques des éditeurs scientifiques en matière de libre accès aux articles de revues :

“Afin de mieux communiquer auprès des chercheurs sur les autorisations en matière de dépôt, a été mise en place la plateforme d’information Héloïse à l’adresse : Elle résulte d’un partenariat entre le CCSD (Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe), une unité du CNRS dédiée à la réalisation d’archives ouvertes, le SPCS (Syndicat de la Presse Culturelle et Scientifique) et le SNE (Syndicat National de l’Edition). Elle fait suite à plusieurs années de réflexion menée par le groupe de travail sur le libre accès du GFII (Groupement Français de l’Industrie de l’Information).

Cette plateforme est la réponse aux attentes des auteurs en matière de transparence des règles fixées par les éditeurs français en matière de dépôt des articles de revues. En effet, d’autres plateformes existent dans le monde anglo-saxon (SHERPA-RoMEO) ou hispanophone (Dulcinea), mais ne permettent pas de renseigner les informations de manière aussi fine et fiable, d’autant qu’elles ne sont pas forcément alimentées par les éditeurs eux-mêmes.

Nous invitons vivement les éditeurs à s’inscrire et à enregistrer leurs politiques sur Héloïse et à en informer leurs comités de rédaction.”


PEER Economics Research Final Report This study…

PEER Economics Research – Final Report :

“This study considers the effect of large-scale deposit on scholarly research publication and dissemination (sharing of research outputs), beginning with the analysis of publishers and
institutions managing repositories and their sustainability. The study associates costs with specific activities, performed by key actors involved in research registration, certification, dissemination and digital management: authors, the scholarly community, editors, publishers, libraries, readers and funding agencies. Contrary to most of the existing literature, the study analyses cost structures of individual organizations. The focus of this study is therefore to provide context for the costs to specific organizations and to their choices in terms of scale and scope.”


A Review of Open Access Self-Archiving Mandate Policies

This article reviews the history of open access (OA) policies and examines the current status of mandate policy implementations. It finds that hundreds of policies have been proposed and adopted at various organizational levels and many of them have shown a positive effect on the rate of repository content accumulation.

However, it also detects policies showing little or no visible impact on repository development, and attempts to analyze the effects of different types of policies, with varied levels of success. It concludes that an open access mandate policy, by itself, will not change existing practices of scholarly self-archiving.


PEER Behavioural Research Authors and Users vis à…

PEER Behavioural Research: Authors and Users vis-à-vis Journals and Repositories (final report) :

“The Behavioural research project is one of three independent research projects commissioned and managed by PEER as part of the PEER Observatory. The aim of the Behavioural research
project was to address the role of stage-two manuscript repositories in the scholarly and scientific communication system by exploring perceptions, motivations and behaviours of authors and readers. The research was carried out between April 2009 and August 2011 by the Department of Information Science and LISU at Loughborough University, UK.”


Faculty self archiving behavior factors affecting the decision…

Faculty self-archiving behavior : factors affecting the decision to self-archive :

“A transformation in scholarly communication is occurring due to the interactions among Internet technologies, new ways of accessing and disseminating scholarly content, as well as changes in the legal, economic, and policy aspects of scholarly publication systems. Self-archiving – the placement of research material on publicly accessible web sites – is an emerging practice used to disseminate scholarly content in a cost-effective and timely manner. This practice is supported by university libraries and public funding agencies through the support or provision of Open Access repository services. Nevertheless, many repositories suffer from low rates of participation. Institutional Repositories (IRs), in particular, have difficulty recruiting content from faculty members whose conduct research and generate a wide variety of research materials. To address this problem, I investigate the motivational factors affecting faculty to participation in various forms of self-archiving practices.

Based on the socio-technical network framework, this study views self-archiving practices as intertwined with technologies and social factors. The factors identified include cost, benefit, and contextual aspects of self-archiving, in addition to individual characteristics. To examine these significant factors affecting self-archiving, my research design involves triangulation of survey and interview data of faculty members sampled from 17 Carnegie Research Universities with DSpace IRs. The sample is also stratified by academic discipline due to existing evidence of variation based on fields.

The analysis of survey responses from 684 professors and 41 phone interviews found that the factor of altruism has the strongest effect on faculty self-archiving. This factor, however, is characterized more by reciprocity, rather than pure altruism. Self-archiving culture has the second greatest impact on the decision to self-archive. Therefore, faculty self-archiving is influenced greatly by intrinsic benefits or disciplinary norms, as opposed to extrinsic benefits. Concerning IRs in particular, results shows that the primary reason professors contribute to the repositories is the perceived ability of IRs to preserve scholarly content. This implies that digital preservation should be significantly more a core function of IRs. IR contributors are also concerned about copyright than non-contributors. Thus IR staff need to provide guidance for copyright management to alleviate this concern and any confusion.”


Recruiting Content for the Institutional Repository The Barriers…

Recruiting Content for the Institutional Repository: The Barriers Exceed the Benefits :

“Focus groups conducted at Carnegie Mellon reveal that what motivates many faculty to self-archive on a website or disciplinary repository will not motivate them to deposit their work in the institutional repository. Recruiting a critical mass of content for the institutional repository is contingent on increasing awareness, aligning deposit with existing workflows, and providing value-added services that meet needs not currently being met by other tools. Faculty share concerns about quality and the payoff for time invested in publishing and disseminating their work, but disagree about metrics for assessing quality, the merit of disseminating work prior to peer review, and the importance of complying with publisher policies on open access. Bridging the differences among disciplinary cultures and belief systems presents a significant challenge to marketing the institutional repository and developing coherent guidelines for deposit.”