Search

This poster introduces the efficient set of research support services available in University of Jyväskylä’s (JYU) Open Science Centre (OSC). The set includes several essential services for researchers to help them execute an open and responsible research process. The continuous improvement of research support services has led to an interlinked, integrated and harmonious set of technical solutions, processes and workflows which meet the needs of researchers and help them implement open science and FAIR policies in practice. They also save time and enable better working processes for the researchers but also for the experts conducting these services. The poster describes two main services which are interlinked and which both aim to make processes and workflows effortless. One of the main services is when metadata from research information system Converis is utilized using API in the self-archiving process of research articles to the institutional repository. OSC’s experts record the publication metadata on behalf of researchers and the same metadata of the publications is used in the self-archiving process. Also, data harvesting is used to get notification of new publications of researchers affiliated to JYU. Often the researchers don’t even have to inform OSC when their new publication is out. This effortless process combines two different systems (CRIS and institutional repository) and connects workflows regarding them. The poster also introduces a dynamic research data management tool which enables a fluent data management process. The goal of the development of this tool has been to free the researchers of having to learn the use of several different systems. The tool helps the researchers to track the handling process of their data and guides through all the necessary phases of the data management process. Again, the data once recorded is being utilized in other systems and in other phases of the whole process. Both the tool and the data management process it enables are integrated to other systems which are needed for example in storing and sharing the research data.

Aim To question the efficacy of ‘gold’ open access to published articles. Background Open access is unrestricted access to academic, theoretical and research literature that is scholarly and peer-reviewed. Two models of open access exist: ‘gold’ and ‘green’. Gold open access provides everyone with access to articles during all stages of publication, with processing charges paid by the author(s). Green open access involves placing an already published article into a repository to provide unrestricted access, with processing charges incurred by the publisher. Data sources This is a discussion paper. Review methods An exploration of the relative benefits and drawbacks of the ‘gold’ and ‘green’ open access systems. Discussion Green open access is a more economic and efficient means of granting open access to scholarly literature but a large number of researchers select gold open access journals as their first choices for manuscript submissions. This paper questions the efficacy of gold open access models and presents an examination of green open access models to encourage nurse researchers to consider this approach. Conclusion In the current academic environment, with increased pressures to publish and low funding success rates, it is difficult to understand why gold open access still exists. Green open access enhances the visibility of an academic’s work, as increased downloads of articles tend to lead to increased citations. Implications for research/practice Green open access is the cheaper option, as well as the most beneficial choice, for universities that want to provide unrestricted access to all literature at minimal risk. Keywords Open access, self-archiving, publishing, repository, scholarly literature, dissemination

The article tries to highlight the evolution and conceptual framework of institutional repositories and their impact on the academic and scholarly circles in terms of better visibility, wider audience and earlier communication of research. The characteristics associated with the institutional repositories are also highlighted, which makes them stand out from the crowd in the family of open access scholarly platforms. The study is based on the examination and evaluation of the articles published across various peer-reviewed journals showcasing numerous dimensions of institutional repositories, ranging from their evolution to open scholarly acceptance. A preliminary search on institutional repositories was carried through two well-renowned indexing/abstracting databases of peer-reviewed literature, Clarivate Analytic’s, Web of Science and Elsevier’s Scopus. Search terms like institutional repositories, institutional research output, open access repositories, green open access, open access, open access publishing, open access initiatives, digital libraries, directory of open access repositories, open DOAR and scholarly communication were run across the databases for article retrieval, and the relevant studies were extracted accordingly. To make the study more comprehensive and current, the studies citing the retrieved articles were also consulted. The study reveals that the benefits associated with institutional repositories are manifold. They recounter users with the information which was otherwise unavailable due to the reasons ranging from the non-availability of supplementary information (like unpublished reports and working papers, multimedia and audiovisual items, learning objects, other special item types, bibliographic references, datasets, lecture notes and so forth) to the paywall/subscription models adopted by commercial channels of scholarly communication. Furthermore, the social, research and technological factors tend to be the main motivating factors for their wider acceptance by the scholarly community at global, national, organizational, and individual levels. They enhance the preservation of institutional research output with increased viewership and prestige apart from achieving a potential research impact. They, in a real sense, have abrogated the unilateral assault orchestrated by the commercial publishers on the author community by democratizing their scholarly voices via open and barrierless scholarly platforms. They are the future of the academic output of an institution/author as they perform successfully within the constitutional boundaries of scholarly and academic publishing, thus safeguarding the rights and claims of every academic actor. Given the importance of institutional repositories for a more democratic, barrierless and impactful information communication, they are for sure going beyond various scholarly circles by breaking the traditional and rigid walls of scholarly endeavours. The study presents a useful overview of the progression of the institutional repositories, their intended purpose and how they serve to fill the gaps in scholarly publishing and meet the needs of the wider academic community. The article summarizes in one place a concise overview of the use and impact of institutional repositories. The study is also an eye-opener for scholars interested in the research in the field of institutional repositories.

(1) Background: The 2002 Budapest Open Access Initiative recommended the self-archiving of scientific articles in open repositories, which has been described as the “green road” to open access. Twenty years later, only one part of the researchers deposits their publications in open repositories; moreover, one part of the repositories’ content is not based on self-archived deposits but on mediated nonfaculty contributions. The purpose of the paper is to provide more empirical evidence on this situation and to assess the impact on the future of the green road. (2) Methods: We analyzed the contributions to the French national HAL repository from more than 1000 laboratories affiliated with the ten most important French research universities, with a focus on 2020, representing 14,023 contributor accounts and 164,070 deposits. (3) Results: We identified seven different types of contributor accounts, including deposits from nonfaculty staff and import flows from other platforms. Mediated nonfaculty contributions (deposits by libraries, import of bibliographic records, migration from other platforms, etc.) account for at least 48% of the 2020 deposits. We also identified differences between institutions and disciplines. (4) Conclusions: Our empirical results reveal a transformation of open repositories from self-archiving and direct scientific communication towards research information management. Repositories like HAL are somewhere in the middle of the process. The paper describes data quality as the main issue and major challenge of this transformation.

Initié par le CNRS en 2001, HAL est devenu, en 20 ans d’existence, une plateforme nationale mutualisée au service de l’ensemble des communautés scientifiques. HAL est tout à la fois une archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire et l’archive institutionnelle de la recherche française. Cette singularité est forte au sein des politiques publiques françaises de diffusion des publications scientifiques et de l’écosystème des archives ouvertes au niveau international. Elle est le fruit de la combinaison de trois facteurs : des actions individuelles, une mobilisation des communautés professionnelles et des stratégies institutionnelles, en lien étroit avec l’affirmation progressive de la science ouverte comme mode d’organisation de la recherche. L’article présente un regard réflexif sur l’évolution de HAL, sur ses principales étapes et sur l’environnement qui l’a porté. Il s’attache à présenter les fondements scientifiques, techniques et documentaires de HAL mais aussi à exposer les usages émergents puis massifs de cette archive par la communauté scientifique. Il interroge également la configuration actuelle de HAL et son devenir. Un double point de vue est privilégié : HAL est appréhendé comme un dispositif technico-documentaire et comme un écosystème au sein duquel interagissent chercheurs, institutions et professionnels de l’information scientifique, chacun de ces acteurs ayant une stratégie propre. Nous présentons les actions mises en œuvre et les acteurs mobilisés, analysons les résultats obtenus (en premier lieu l’enrichissement du contenu et développement de l’adhésion à HAL) et évoquons les facteurs de réussite comme les difficultés rencontrées. Initiated by the CNRS for its researchers in 2001, HAL has become, in 20 years of existence, a national shared platform at the service of all scientific communities. HAL is at the same time a multidisciplinary OA repository and the repository of the French research. This singularity is strong within the French public policies of diffusion of the scientific publications and the ecosystem of the open archives at the international level. It is the result of individual actions, the mobilisation of professional communities and institutional strategies, closely linked to the recognition of open science. The article presents a reflective look at this journey, its main stages and the environment that has supported it. It endeavours to present the scientific, technical and documentary foundations of HAL but also to expose the emerging and then massive uses of this archive by researchers, institutions and librarians. It also questions the current configuration of HAL and its future. We privilege a double point of view: HAL is apprehended as a technical-documentary device and as an ecosystem within which interact researchers, institutions and librarian, each of these actors having a own strategy. We present the actions implemented and the mobilised actors, analyse the obtained results (enrichment of the content and development of the adhesion to HAL) and evoke the success factors as well as the encountered difficulties.

Regardless of multiple efforts carried out across many countries to disseminate the ideas and the practice of open science, most scholars in the early 2020s do not self-archive their research articles and do not publish research papers in preprint form. Having received no education and training on open science, researchers are often puzzled on what to do, in practice, to start reaping the benefits of open science. This study offers a succinct vademecum on how to benefit from the open science approach to scholarly communication, no matter whether in natural or in humanistic and social sciences., Open science, Open access, Preprint, Self-archiving, Scholarly publishing.

Hybrid open access journals generally authorize self-archiving along with Author-pays model. Given the dependence of the Author-pays model on APCs paid by authors, it is expected to have a negative association with the free-of-charge Green model. By exploring a sample of 52,150 papers published in 47 Elsevier's hybrid journals, the study compares the OA models' citation performances to non-open access (NOA) model's and investigates the relationship between the quantities of their papers. Three OA groups are identified, including Green-only, APC-only and Green-APC. The OA papers show a citation advantage over the NOA articles, despite their lower number. The mixed APC-Green, gains the highest citation compared to the three other access models. However, the number of Green and APC-funded papers are revealed to have a negative association. Although, the combination of the Green and APC models magnifies the impact of OA papers, the inverse association between the quantities of their papers signifies that the lower number of the latter can be partially explained by the prevalence of the former. The results help academic librarians involved in advocating and managing OA to better understand authors' behaviors towards OA models and adopt a more supportive role for OA according to their preferences.

PurposeThe purpose of the study is to investigate the extent to which academic librarians in Nigerian universities utilize self-archiving options to make their research papers visible globally.Design/methodology/approachAn online survey was designed using SurveyMonkey software to collect data from 394 academic librarians in Nigerian universities.FindingsThe study revealed that the academic librarians in Nigerian universities know and actually use self-archiving options such as ResearchGate, institutional repository and academia.edu to self-archive their publications. While, self-archiving platforms like Kudos, Mendeley.com and personal websites/servers are not popularly used by the academic librarians. Factors such as increased exposure to previously published work broadens the dissemination of academic research generally, which increases institutions’ visibility, were among the options the academic librarians indicated as very important factors that motivate them to contribute their scholarly output to self-archiving options.Practical implicationsThe study called for academic librarians in developing countries to voluntarily sign-up to register with self-archiving options such as ResearchGate, Kudos, Mendeley.com, Academia.edu and others to enable them to self-archive their published papers for access globally by students, researchers.Originality/valueSelf-archiving of papers by authors will lead to an increased visibility of the author and possible citation of the work and chances of collaboration with international colleagues for research projects.

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to investigate the extent to which academic librarians in Nigerian universities use self-archiving options to make their research papers visible globally.Design/methodology/approachAn online survey was designed using SurveyMonkey software to collect data from 394 academic librarians in Nigerian Universities.FindingsThe study revealed that the academic librarians in Nigerian universities know and actually use self-archiving options such as ResearchGate, institutional repository and Academia.edu to self-archive their publications. While other promotional tools such as kudos, Mendeley.com and personal websites/servers are not popularly used by the academic librarians. Increased exposure of previously published work, broadens the dissemination of academic research generally, and increases institutions’ visibility were among the factors the academic librarians indicated as very important that motivate them to contribute their scholarly output to self-archiving options.Research limitations/implicationsOne major challenge to the study is that many academic librarians in Nigeria do not check their e-mails regularly to enable them to respond to a request to participate in an online survey; some of them do not have stable internet facilities, whereas others are reluctant to respond to an online questionnaire. These reasons led to a low response rate which makes it difficult to generalize findings.Practical implicationsFindings from the study will create awareness for academic librarians in developing countries to see the need to self-archive their pre-print and accepted version of their papers in different self-archiving platforms.Originality/valueSelf-archiving of papers by authors will lead to an increased visibility of the author and possible citation of the work and chances of collaboration with international colleagues for research projects.

PurposeThis paper aims to examine the level of open access (OA) adoption by researchers in Indian Institutes of Technology (IITs), identify predictors of OA status (OA vs non-OA) and explore the availability of OA versions of the articles and venues used by the researches for hosting of their articles.Design/methodology/approachArticles contributed by the researchers in IITs were searched using an advance search option in the Web of Science Core collection database. The search was restricted to journal articles published in English language in the year 2015. Of the 10,049 articles retrieved, 1,023 (10 per cent of the total) were chosen randomly. Articles selected after randomizations were exported to MS Excel for further analyses. Title of each article was searched in Google Scholar to assess its OA availability and venues used by the author for self-archiving. Details of ten articles could not be traced in Google Scholar, and they were excluded from the analysis. Based on the analysis of URLs, all OA articles were classified into three categories: gold OA, green OA and both gold and green OA. The OA articles available through green route were further classified into six categories based on the analysis of the websites and the self-archiving venues used by the authors: institutional repository, subject repository, researcher or scholar’s website, organizational website, ResearchGate and other websites.FindingsOf 1,013 articles examined, OA versions were found for 68.70 per cent of articles. Of the total OA articles, 10.26 per cent articles were available through gold OA and 58.44 per cent were available through green OA, while remaining 6.21 per cent were available via both gold and green OA routes. Although researchers use different venues for self-archiving their articles, ResearchGate and institutional repositories are the most preferred choices by the researchers in IITs. Researchers in IITs are seemed to be unaware of the self-archiving policies of publishers, as more than 85 per cent self-archived articles were found as final PDF versions that are normally not allowed by the publishers.Research limitations/implicationsThis study is limited to IITs, but it offers theoretical implications for extending its scope to different subjects and institutes. The findings of the study may be useful for the publishers and institutions for formulating OA policies. The findings of the study might be used for raising awareness of OA among researchers and encouraging them to contribute their research outcome in OA outlets.Originality/valueThis is the first study in India focusing on the availability of OA research.

© 2019 ASIS & T This study investigates motivations for self-archiving research items on academic social networking sites (ASNSs). A model of these motivations was developed based on two existing motivation models: motivation for self-archiving in academia and motivations for information sharing in social media. The proposed model is composed of 18 factors drawn from personal, social, professional, and external contexts, including enjoyment, personal/professional gain, reputation, learning, self-efficacy, altruism, reciprocity, trust, community interest, social engagement, publicity, accessibility, self-archiving culture, influence of external actors, credibility, system stability, copyright concerns, additional time, and effort. Two hundred and twenty-six ResearchGate users participated in the survey. Accessibility was the most highly rated factor, followed by altruism, reciprocity, trust, self-efficacy, reputation, publicity, and others. Personal, social, and professional factors were also highly rated, while external factors were rated relatively low. Motivations were correlated with one another, demonstrating that RG motivations for self-archiving could increase or decrease based on several factors in combination with motivations from the personal, social, professional, and external contexts. We believe the findings from this study can increase our understanding of users' motivations in sharing their research and provide useful implications for the development and improvement of ASNS services, thereby attracting more active users.

This study examined the extent of use of the institutional repository (IR) by academics at the University of KwaZulu-Natal (UKZN). The following research questions were addressed: What progress has been achieved to support the use of the university’s IR? What is the attitude of academics towards self-archiving? What challenges are hindering repository use at UKZN? What strategies can be employed to improve acceptance and use of the repository at UKZN? A mixed method research approach was adopted. A questionnaire was designed to gather quantitative data from academics, while qualitative data were sought from management and administrative staff of the university through interviews. Documents and statistical data from online websites were incorporated to corroborate field data. The study findings revealed that the signing of the Berlin Declaration, employment of a full-time IR librarian, updating of the DSpace, development of an online submission guide, and ongoing training and awareness programmes, were achieved to support the use of the IR. Academics’ attitude towards IR use was positive but was hampered by limited knowledge of OA and the benefits of uploading scholarly content on the IR, limited skill for self-archiving, and lack of time to upload content on the IR. Use of other OA platforms by some academics, such as subject repositories, personal websites and social media platforms like ResearchGate, Academia and Mendeley, took their attention away from the university’s IR. The study concluded that, with improved training, the implementation of a mandating OA policy and a reward system, use of the repository by academics at UKZN could improve.

The introduction of open-access institutional repositories in scholarly communication presents an opportunity for public universities in Zimbabwe to increase the visibility, reach and impact of their research output. However, this opportunity is missed because of the low utilisation of the repositories by scholars in the institutions. Guided by the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology model, the researchers investigated academics’ awareness levels of and attitudes, perceptions and concerns about institutional repositories with the aim of understanding academics’ deposit behaviour. Both qualitative and quantitative methods in the forms of a questionnaire and interviews were used to gather data from academics and library and research directors at eight universities and from policy documents and university websites. Stratified, systematic and convenience sampling techniques, including the complete enumeration method, were used. The findings revealed that academics lacked knowledge and awareness of institutional repositories and their value in scholarly communication. Therefore, marketing and training should be intensified to increase acceptance and usage of repositories.

In this episode, we talk to one of the big ones - the global publishing company Wiley. Wiley is a company with over 5000 employees that specializes in academic publishing. Our guest is Alice Wood, senior publishing development editor at Wiley. We want to know what their take on Open Science and Plan S is? What happens when you "flip" a journal? And how they see Open Science and Open Access as part of their company in the future. Wood also elaborates on what they are currently doing when it comes to making their own journals OA, what journals they choose to flip and if they do any changes to those journals after flipping. The host of this episode is Erik Lieungh. This episode was first published 10 January 2019.

Self-archiving offers opportunities for authors to more broadly disseminate their work—both in pre-print form before its submission to a journal and in post-print form after its acceptance and publication in a journal. This editorial provides authors with guidance in navigating the rapidly changing options for self-archiving and affirms that the Journal of the Medical Library Association encourages authors to self-archive their work to boost its reach and impact.

This study examines the differences in scholarly publishing and self-archiving practices of academic scholars in the faculties of agriculture and science in University of Peradeniya, Sri Lanka. Survey method was adapted and a questionnaire specifically designed was used to achieve the objectives of the study. The study population consisted of all permanent academic staff in the two faculties. The study established that majority of the respondents of both faculties were aware of self-archiving concept as a means for providing open access but not many of them had experience in self-archiving. Majority of respondents from both faculties began this activity two to three years ago and they learnt about self-archiving by working in a field with established subject based archives. The original motivators for self-archiving were self motivation and declared citation advantage of open access papers. Agriculture scholars deposited more full text articles in digital repositories than science scholars. When analyzing the results of this study, it was proved that most of the scholars in agriculture faculty preferred to deposit conference papers while science scholars mostly preferred preprint materials. PDF is the most preferred file format to deposit in the digital repositories.

This study seeks to explore institutional repository, social networking, and bibliographic databases of scholarly communication in Nigeria. Six institutional repositories (IR) were selected and fiv...

The current state of open access to journal publications within research areas belonging to the humanities has received relatively little research attention. This study provides a detailed mapping of the bibliometric state of open access to journal publications among ethicists, taking into account not only open access publishing in journals directly, but also where and in what form ethicists make their journal articles available elsewhere on the web. As part of the study 297 ethicists affiliated with top-ranking philosophy departments were identified and their journal publication information for the years 2010–2015 were recorded (1682 unique articles). The journal articles were then queried for through Google Scholar in order to establish open access status (web locations, document versions) of each publication record. Publication records belonging to the 20 most frequently used journal outlets (subset of 597 unique articles) were put under closer inspection with regards to alignment with publisher copyright restrictions as well as measuring unused potential to share articles. The results show that slightly over half of recent journal publications are available to read for free. PhilPapers and academic social networks (Academia.edu and ResearchGate) were found to be key platforms for research dissemination in ethics research. The representation of institutional repositories as providers of access was found to be weak, receiving the second lowest frequency rating among the eight discrete web location categories. Further, the study reveals that ethicists are at the same time prone to copyright infringement and undersharing their scholarly work.

Examines SHERPA/RoMEO publisher open access (OA) policy information for 100 publishers over a 13 year period (2004–2016) to consider whether their size, type or country (UK or US) affected the development of their OA policy over time. A publisher’s RoMEO colour code, whether they offered a Gold OA option, and the mean number of restrictions as to when, how and where papers may be self-archived, were all mapped. Kruskal–Wallis tests were run to assess whether the differences between their 2004 and 2016 positions were statistically significant. Finds that the growth of Green and Gold OA policy approaches has not been evenly distributed amongst publishers with some significant differences amongst publishers of different size, types and country (UK and US). Large commercial publishers are more likely to be allocated a RoMEO colour code, but at the same time place a high volume of restrictions as to where and how authors might self-archive. Small publishers are less likely to have a RoMEO green colour code, but the volume of restrictions they place on self-archiving are minimal. University presses appear not to be engaging with either OA agenda to any considerable degree. UK and US publishers’ OA policies appear to be influenced by the national OA policy environment which, considering the global nature of the scholarly journals market, was more pronounced than might have been anticipated.

Purpose The purpose of the study is to investigate the extent to which academic librarians in African universities know and use self-archiving options to make their papers visible globally. Design/methodology/approach An online survey was designed using SurveyMonkey software to collect data from 455 academic librarians working in 52 universities in Africa. Findings The study revealed that the academic librarians in Africa are aware of ResearchGate, institutional repository, personal website/server, kudos and Mendeley and they actually upload papers to self-archiving platforms such as institutional repository, ResearchGate, academia.edu and personal websites/servers. Factors such as increased exposure of one’s previously published work, provides exposure for works not previously published (e.g. seminar papers), broadens the dissemination of academic research generally and increases one’s institutions’ visibility were among the options the academic librarians rated as very important factors that motivate them to submit their scholarly output to the self-archiving options. It was also found that majority of the academic librarians in Africa checked the publishers’ website for copyright policy compliance before submitting their papers to the platform. Practical implications The study called for academic librarians in developing countries to voluntarily sign-up to register with self-archiving options such as ResearchGate, kudos, Mendeley.com, academia.edu and others to enable them self-archive their published papers for access globally by students, researchers, etc. Originality/value The findings of this study will add to the body of knowledge by bringing to light the extent of awareness and use of self-archiving options by academic librarians in universities in Africa.

This essay explores a set of existential risks that accompany digital storage capacities, devices, and promises: the anxious exhaustion of digital housekeeping; the disorientation of self-archiving...

PurposeThe purpose of the study is to know the various factors librarians consider while selecting Open Access (OA) journal for publication and to identify the challenges librarians face with OA journal publishing. Design/methodology/approachOnline questionnaire was designed to collect data from 402 academic librarians in 87 universities in Africa using SurveyMonkey software. FindingsThe study found that academic librarians are aware of the “green” and “gold” routes but not familiar with the “diamond” route. The study revealed that a large number of the academic librarians have published only one paper in OA journals, followed by those who have not published any paper in OA journals. The study also revealed that reputation of journal and impact factor of journal were seen as very important among the factors that inform them of choosing OA. The majority of the respondents agreed that author fees, and lack of stable internet connectivity are the major barriers to publishing in OA journals. Practical implicationsThe study recommends that academic libraries in institutions of higher learning in Africa should organize seminars periodically on the need for their librarians to research and publish in OA journals. Social implicationsIdentifying factors involved in author decisions to publish in OA journals will help illuminate issues that may encourage or discourage author support of OA publishing models. Further understanding of these issues can assist the efforts to improve author perceptions of and confidence in OA publications. Originality/valueIt is believed that this study of African librarians publishing in OA journals is the first study in the region.

European-based SHERPA (Securing a Hybrid Environment for Research Preservation and Access) services are a suite of free scholarly communication resources aimed at proving authors information on publisher’s open access policies. SHERPA’s most notable service is RoMEO, is a database aggregating publisher archiving policies which allows researchers quick access to copyright and self-archiving policies of more than 23,000 global publishers.

The exponential growth of number of journals and increasing prices has engendered the idea of open access among academic communities. To boost the open access movement and to make it a success many institutions, organizations and funding agencies are framing policies making it mandatory for researchers/academicians to make their intellectual publications available on open access platform. The paper aims to examine the copyright issues related to mandatory open access self-archiving and the availability of defined policies to guide the authors of scholarly publications in mandatory deposition. The relevant data for the study was collected through published literature and websites. The result shows that along with the early advocates, many other Indian institutions and publishers are also gradually moving towards the open access platform. However, sufficient information is not available on the website of institutional repository to determine the archiving rights of the authors.

ResearchGate is increasingly used by scholars to upload the full-text of their articles and make them freely available for everyone. This study aims to investigate the extent to which ResearchGate members as authors of journal articles comply with publishers' copyright policies when they self-archive full-text of their articles on ResearchGate. A random sample of 500 English journal articles available as full-text on ResearchGate were investigated. 108 articles (21.6%) were open access (OA) published in OA journals or hybrid journals. Of the remaining 392 articles, 61 (15.6%) were preprint, 24 (6.1%) were post-print and 307 (78.3%) were published (publisher) PDF. The key finding was that 201 (51.3%) out of 392 non-OA articles infringed the copyright and were non-compliant with publishers' policy. While 88.3% of journals allowed some form of self-archiving (SHERPA/RoMEO green, blue or yellow journals), the majority of non-compliant cases (97.5%) occurred when authors self-archived publishers' PDF files (final published version). This indicates that authors infringe copyright most of the time not because they are not allowed to self-archive, but because they use the wrong version, which might imply their lack of understanding of copyright policies and/or complexity and diversity of policies.

Scholarly communication in science, technology, and medicine has been organized around journal-based scientific publishing for the past 350 years. Scientific publishing has unique business models and includes stakeholders with conflicting interests-publishers, funders, libraries, and scholars who create, curate, and consume the literature. Massive growth and change in scholarly communication, coinciding with digitalization, have amplified stresses inherent in traditional scientific publishing, as evidenced by overwhelmed editors and reviewers, increased retraction rates, emergence of pseudo-journals, strained library budgets, and debates about the metrics of academic recognition for scholarly achievements. Simultaneously, several open access models are gaining traction and online technologies offer opportunities to augment traditional tasks of scientific publishing, develop integrated discovery services, and establish global and equitable scholarly communication through crowdsourcing, software development, big data management, and machine learning. These rapidly evolving developments raise financial, legal, and ethical dilemmas that require solutions, while successful strategies are difficult to predict. Key challenges and trends are reviewed from the authors' perspective about how to engage the scholarly community in this multifaceted process.

Posting preprints online allows psychological scientists to get feedback, speed dissemination, and ensure public access to their work. This guide is designed to help psychological scientists post preprints and manage them across the publication pipeline. We review terminology, provide a historical and legal overview of preprints, and give guidance on posting and managing preprints before, during, or after the peer-review process to achieve different aims (e.g., get feedback, speed dissemination, achieve open access). We offer concrete recommendations to authors, such as post preprints that are complete and carefully proofread; post preprints in a dedicated preprint server that assigns DOIs, provides editable metadata, is indexed by GoogleScholar, supports review and endorsements, and supports version control; include a draft date and information about the paper’s status on the cover page; license preprints with CC BY licenses that permit public use with attribution; and keep preprints up to date after major revisions. Although our focus is on preprints (unpublished versions of a work), we also offer information relevant to postprints (author-formatted, post-peer-review versions of a work) and work that will not otherwise be published (e.g., theses and dissertations).

Using the genesis of the Manhattan poems by the German poet Thomas Kling (1957-2005) as a case study, this article uses the metaphor “stratigraphic soundings” as a means to characterize a writing process which is not based on variants or “réécriture”, but on language installations. Findings in Kling’s archive testify to the poet’s role as an archaeologist of language; they also shape the role of the editor who likewise undertakes test drillings into a poetry of “supersedimented textuality” and “bottomless stratigraphy” (Jacques Derrida).

Traces the 12-year self-archiving policy journey of the original 107 publishers listed on the SHERPA/RoMEO Publisher Policy Database in 2004, through to 2015. Maps the RoMEO colour codes (‘green’, ‘blue’, ‘yellow’ and ‘white’) and related restrictions and conditions over time. Finds that while the volume of publishers allowing some form of self-archiving (pre-print, post-print or both) has increased by 12% over the 12 years, the volume of restrictions around how, where and when self-archiving may take place has increased 119%, 190% and 1000% respectively. A significant positive correlation was found between the increase in self-archiving restrictions and the introduction of Gold paid open access options. Suggests that by conveying only the version of a paper that authors may self-archive, the RoMEO colour codes do not address all the key elements of the Bethesda Definition of Open Access. Compares the number of RoMEO ‘green’ publishers over time with those meeting the definition for ‘redefined green’ (allowing embargo-free deposit of the post-print in an institutional repository). Finds that RoMEO ‘green’ increased by 8% and ‘redefined green’ decreased by 35% over the 12 years. Concludes that the RoMEO colour codes no longer convey a commitment to green open access as originally intended. Calls for open access advocates, funders, institutions and authors to redefine what ‘green’ means to better reflect a publisher’s commitment to self-archiving.

The paper investigates open access (OA) self archiving policies of different Open Access Repositories (OARs) of COAPI (Coalition of Open Access Policy Institutions) founder members as reported in June 2011 (i.e. a total of 22 members against a total of 46 COPAI members as reported by Open Biomed (http://openbiomed.info/2011/08/coapi-cats/). The paper consulted three databases (OpenDOAR, ROAR and ROARMAP) in order to evaluate twenty-two (22) COAPI-members OARs self archiving policy documentations and highlights of some progress on issues so far. After analyzing policy documentations, key findings have been highlighted and common practices have been suggested in line with global recommendations and best practice guidelines at national and international levels for strengthening national research systems. The paper has implications for administrators, funding agencies, policy makers and professional librarians in devising institute specific self archiving policies for their own organization.

 There is scant research-based evidence on the development and adoption of open access (OA) and institutional repositories (IRs) in Africa, and in Kenya in particular. This article reports on a study that attempted to fill that gap and provide feedback on the various OA projects and advocacy work currently underway in universities and research institutions in Kenya and in other developing countries. The article presents the findings of a descriptive study that set out to evaluate the current state of IRs in Kenya. Webometric approaches and interviews with IR managers were used to collect the data for the study. The findings showed that Kenya has made some progress in adopting OA with a total of 12 IRs currently listed in the Directory of Open Access Repositories (OpenDOAR) and five mandatory self-archiving policies listed in the Registry of Open Access Repositories Mandatory Archiving Policies (ROARMAP). Most of the IRs are owned by universities where theses and dissertations constitute the majority of the content type followed by journal articles. The results on the usage and impact of materials deposited in Kenyan IRs indicated that the most viewed publications in the repositories also received citations in Google Scholar, thereby signifying their impact and importance. The results also showed that there was a considerable interest in Swahili language publications among users of the repositories in Kenya.

Higher education institutions typically employ Institutional Repositories (IRs) in order to curate and make available Electronic Theses and Dissertations (ETDs). While most of these IRs are implemented with self-archiving functionalities, self-archiving practices are still a challenge. This arguably leads to inconsistencies in the tagging of digital objects with descriptive metadata, potentially compromising searching and browsing of scholarly research output in IRs. This paper proposes an approach to automatically classify ETDs in IRs, using supervised machine learning techniques, by extracting features from the minimum possible input expected from document authors: the ETD manuscript. The experiment results demonstrate the feasibility of automatically classifying IR ETDs and, additionally, ensuring that repository digital objects are appropriately structured. Automatic classification of repository objects has the obvious benefit of improving the searching and browsing of content in IRs and further presents opportunities for the implementation of third-party tools and extensions that could potentially result in effective self-archiving strategies.

This is a preprint of a chapter whose final and definitive form was co-published in Exploring Digital Libraries: Foundations, Practice, Prospects by Facet Publishing (2014) and ALA Neal-Schuman (2014).

This article considers Christian Boltanski's Recherche et presentation de tout ce qui reste de mon enfance, 1944–1950 (1969) as a programmatic statement on the personal archive. Responding to the recent explosion of interest in work which foregrounds the artist as curator or archivist, I consider Boltanski's ambition to record ‘all the moments of our lives’ as an engagement with archival practices which extends significantly beyond the ironic self-reflection on the archive in Boltanksi's work. Boltanski's 1969 comments both recall Bush's Memex and anticipate recent developments in personal archiving, in particular lifelogging and self-tracking. In this context, I evaluate Boltanski's ‘reconstitution’ and ‘vitrine’ works for what they say about the potential of lifelogging to create a comprehensive personal archive and in terms of their implicit critique of the idea of the quantified self. Despite its apparent proximity to Boltanski's concerns, the quantified self suggests a version of selfhood coextensive...

International audience; Open access repositories (OAR) are becoming increasingly important and it becomes necessary to improve self-archiving interfaces to increase deposits made by their authors. This paper evaluates the DSpace self-archiving interface with the Trifocal framework to propose communication improvements and to show that assessing the interface's ability to communicate reports improvements mainly related to the application domain.

All refereed journals will soon be available online; most of them already are. This means that anyone will be able to access them from any networked desk-top. The literature will all be interconnected by citation, author, and keyword/subject links, allowing for unheard-of power and ease of access and navigability. Successive drafts of pre-refereeing preprints will be linked to the official refereed draft, as well as to any subsequent corrections, revisions, updates, comments, responses, and underlying empirical databases, all enhancing the self-correctiveness, interactivity and productivity of scholarly and scientific research and communication in remarkable new ways. New scientometric indicators of digital impact are also emerging to chart the online course of knowledge. But there is still one last frontier to cross before science reaches the optimal and the inevitable: Just as there is no longer any need for research or researchers to be constrained by the access-blocking restrictions of paper distribution, there is no longer any need to be constrained by the impact-blocking financial fire-walls of Subscription/Site-License/Pay-Per-View (S/L/P) tolls for this give-away literature. Its author/researchers have always donated their research reports for free (and its referee/researchers have refereed for free), with the sole goal of maximizing their impact on subsequent research (by accessing the eyes and minds of fellow-researchers, present and future) and hence on society. Generic (OAi-compliant) software is now available free so that institutions can immediately create Eprint Archives in which their authors can self-archive all their refereed papers for free for all forever . These interoperable Open Archives will then be harvested into global, jointly searchable "virtual archives" (e.g., ). "Scholarly Skywriting" in this PostGutenberg Galaxy will be dramatically (and measurably) more interactive and productive, spawning its own new digital metrics of productivity and impact, allowing for an online "embryology of knowledge."

Purpose – This paper aims to determine the outcome of the different measures taken towards open access (OA) to peer-reviewed research by measuring aggregate availability of a sample of journal articles. This sample was then used to examine the factors contributing to the availability or non-availability of types of article. Design/methodology/approach – A sample of articles was taken from the Scopus database based on a search by surname. This minimised any skew that would result from a dataset based on subject or source. The results were analysed to determine availability by subject and differences in availability based on source. Findings – Less than 30 per cent of articles are available in their year of publication, rising to nearly 40 per cent in following years. Repositories are responsible for slightly less than 50 per cent of available articles. Substantial differences exist between the practices of scholarly societies and commercial publishers. Practical implications – Aggregate availability is dependent on a range of activities and current efforts need to be maintained to ensure its continuance. Moves towards OA by commercial publishers are not a major factor. Social implications – Non-affiliated researchers are able to access less than half of the peer-reviewed literature. Originality/value – This study differs from similar work by looking at access from the users’ viewpoint. Rather than looking at the total amount of material to which access is provided, it looks at the proportion of high-value information which is available.

Purpose – The study aimed to investigate the perceptions of faculty members at a medium-sized university towards self-archiving and participation in institutional repositories (IRs). Design/methodology/approach – The research participants were from a medium-sized university. An online survey was distributed and a total of 217 responses were received which yielded a 40 per cent overall response rate. Faculty perceptions of the IR were measured through nine dimensions, the results of which were later summarised using principal component factor analysis. Findings – Faculty members’ perception of IRs and willingness to contribute to the IRs were closely associated with scholarly productivity rather than prior knowledge of and experience with IRs. Those who possessed scholarly materials were significantly more likely to have a positive perception of IRs and, therefore, were more likely to contribute to IRs than those who did not. Seniority in faculty rank contributed negatively to faculty members’ perception of the repository. Research limitations/implications – The study used a non-probability sampling technique to collect data about the faculty’s perception of IRs at a single institution of higher education. Variables for faculty background were limited to rank and academic discipline. Originality/value – In three ways: First, the study contributed to research on faculty perception of IRs in academia and approached the issue from the perspective of a teaching-oriented institution. Second, the relationship between faculty's willingness to participate in and their perception of IRs was measured. Third, a binary logistic regression model was used to estimate factors that influence faculty's perception of the institution's IRs.

Contiene 10 figuras y una tabla, Open access (OA) literature is digital, online, free of charge, and free of most copyright and licensing restrictions. The lack of clarity of publisher permissions for archiving in OA repositories affects the adoption of the green OA route. This paper explores editorial policies and elf-archiving conditions in 1,615 Spanish scholarly journals. 48% are published by university and research institutions, 25% by associations/societies, and 17% by commercial publishers; social sciences and humanities (SSH)accounted for 67% of the journals (44.5% and 22.5%, respectively) followed by health sciences (20%); 71% offered gratis access immediately after publication, and 11% after an embargo; 31% provided some mention of author rights. Self-archiving was specifi cally allowed by 65% of the journals; 52% were classified as ROMEO-blue, 12% as green and 15% as white, and 21% could not be classifi ed; 21%, mostly in SSH, used some type of Creative Commons license., Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad. Proyecto coordinado refs. CSO2011-29503-C02-01 CSO2011-29503-C02-02.

The degree to which scholarly journal articles published in subscription-based journals could be provided open access (OA) through publisher-permitted uploading to freely accessible web locations, so called green OA, is an underexplored area of research. This study combines article volume data originating from the Scopus bibliographic database with manually coded publisher policies of the 100 largest journal publishers measured by article output volume for the year 2010. Of the 1,1 million articles included in the analysis, 80.4% could be uploaded either as an accepted manuscript or publisher version to an institutional or subject repository after one year of publication. Publishers were found to be substantially more permissive with allowing accepted manuscripts on personal webpages (78.1% of articles) or in institutional repositories (79.9%) compared to subject repositories (32.8%). With previous studies suggesting realized green OA to be around 12% of total annual articles the results highlight the substantial unused potential for green OA.

PurposeThis paper aims to report on the findings of the second phase of the Behavioural strand of the EC‐funded PEER project (http://www.peerproject.eu/). The paper seeks to explore authors' and readers' behaviours in relation to authors' peer‐reviewed accepted manuscripts in open access repositories.Design/methodology/approachThe research was undertaken using a mixed‐method approach, involving the distribution of a survey by the 12 participating publishers to their authors in selected journal titles and a participatory workshop with European researchers from selected disciplinary areas.FindingsResearchers' attitudes towards versions of published journal articles made open access via open access repositories may vary depending on whether researchers report behaviours from the perspective of an author or a reader. The research found that disciplinary cultures, norms and traditions shape authors' self‐archiving behaviour and readers' use of those versions of journal articles held in repositories.Research limitations/implicationsOne of the limitations of the research is that it was impossible for the research team to gauge the representativeness of the survey compared to the actual disciplinary distribution of the population of EU researchers, as such population information is not available in an aggregated and consistent format.Originality/valueThe PEER Observatory is an unprecedented large‐scale collaboration between publishers, researchers and repositories to investigate the effects of self‐archiving at European level. The paper provides a disciplinary reading of the findings and augments the understanding of how disciplinary culture and norms shape authors' and readers' behaviours in relation to self‐archiving.

The paper analyzes publishers’ copyright policies and self-archiving conditions of Spanish scientific journals. Data are extracted from the directory DULCINEA that contains information of 1318 Spanish journals, of which 775 (61%) allow some form of self-archiving to be about 60% of the post-print version and allowing them 87% of the deposit of the version of record. In 72% of journals the deposit can be performed immediately after publication and in 16% after article acceptance. 72% of the journals are freely available without charge to the user this figure raises up to 86% if free access after an embargo is considered. Only 18% of the journals use Creative Commons licenses. The adoption of different open access journals model in Spain is favorable, however there is still a high percentage of journals (39%) that do not provide any information about authors and publishers rights and that difficult or inhibits reuse of published articles.

Kevin Smith, Director of Scholarly Communications at Duke University, mapped out a set of best practices to help North American Serials Interest Group attendees determine reasonable, responsible actions working within copyright while avoiding lawsuits or choosing not to do something simply because “we don't know” if that use is permissible. The U.S. Copyright Act of 1976 has not kept pace with advances in technology, creating a whole new set of concerns as to what constitutes fair use for libraries. Smith reviews the fair use analysis for four of the eight principles identified in the Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for Academic and Research Libraries and concludes with his own set of solutions to end the conflict: stop giving up copyright for scholarly works; help universities develop new promotion and tenure procedures, especially for digital scholarship; and publish in open access venues or retain rights and self-archive.

INTRODUCTION Faculty contribution to the institutional repository is a major limiting factor in the successful provision of open access to scholarship, and thus to the advancement of research productivity and progress. Many have alluded to outreach messages through studies examining faculty concerns that underlie their reluctance to contribute, but specific open access messages demonstrated to resonate most with faculty have not been discussed with sufficient granularity. Indeed, many faculty benefits and concerns are likely either unknown to the faculty themselves, or unspoken, so the literature’s record of faculty benefits and perceptions of open access remains incomplete at best. DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM At Rutgers University, we have developed a targeted message that both addresses these unspoken/unknown concerns and benefits and speaks to the promise and inevitability of open access in a changing scholarly communication landscape. This paper details that message and its rationale, based on a critical review of the literature currently informing outreach programs, in order to provoke further discussion of specific outreach messages and the principles underlying them. NEXT STEPS A robust scholarly communication organization, open access policy advisory board, expanded outreach, and sustained momentum will be critical to ensuring success with measurable outcomes. Metrics used to evaluate both OA policy implementation efforts and institutional repositories should be reevaluated in light of the governing objectives of open access outreach efforts and tools. It is hoped that a reassessment of the message and the metrics will better align both with the true promise and prerequisites of open access.