Search

This paper discusses the results of the 2021 International Electronic Theses and Dissertation (ETD) Survey. The survey found that the percentage of responses from outside the U.S. increased significantly since the first survey in 2013, rising from 18% of total responses to 41%, providing us with a higher degree of accuracy in assessing trends in ETD practices and also indicates a growing awareness of and interest in ETDs worldwide. Although ETD initiatives are widespread, there are still factors that influence a move from print to fully digital that include providing open access through an IR and increasing the visibility of institutional and student research. Accomplishing these goals requires that support and systems be in place, which can require funding, policy changes, tools, and technology updates.

The attached file provides a pre-registration of the analysis plan for data collected as part of a larger longitudinal study on behaviour change and habits soon after the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. The proposed analyses will examine differences in trajectories of motivation over time.

• This study aims to examine the relationship between motivation quality (e.g. autonomous motivation or controlled motivation) and subjective value for cognitive effort (subjective effort value). • Effort discounting is the process by which the objective value of a reward is subjectively devalued (i.e. discounted) given the effort required to attain the reward (Mitchell 2004; Sugiwaka and Okouchi 2004). • Subjective effort value in this study is operationalized in two different ways: o DV1 - Subjective effort value discounting questionnaires: The first way of assessing cognitive effort discounting was a task where participants read and summarized information, then completed questionnaires that present participants with a series of hypothetical choices between a smaller, immediate reward requiring no effort and a larger, delayed reward that requires different levels of effort on the reading and summarizing task (e.g. receive $20 now, without effort, or receive $50 in 4 hours after reading and summarizing 30 paragraphs) (Green and Myerson 2004).  In this study we evaluated subjective effort value at two reward magnitudes: • Small ($30) and large ($100)  There were also three effort magnitudes: • Small (65 paragraphs), medium (135 paragraphs), and large (200 paragraphs). o DV 2 - Cognitive Effort Discounting Task: The second was a more general assessment of the degree of effort discounting related to cognitive effort using the Cognitive Effort Discounting Task (Westbrook, Kester & Braver, 2013) which includes the n-back task as the cognitive task. o For both tasks, the indifference point (the point at which the individual would rather choose the larger reward given the effort required) is converted to a discounting rate. Participants are presented with several magnitudes of reward and effort (in the form of n-back load level) over several trials. • Motivation quality will be operationalized in three different ways: o Intrinsic task motivation – intrinsic motivation for a cognitively demanding task o Autonomous motivation (intrinsic motivation, identified motivation, integrated motivation) and controlled motivation (introjected motivation, extrinsic motivation) for cognitively demanding schoolwork o Autonomous motivation (intrinsic motivation, identified motivation, integrated motivation) and controlled motivation (introjected motivation, extrinsic motivation) for cognitively demanding leisure activities • Some additional analysis will be undertaken to determine whether participants perceived the different levels of effort magnitude to differ in subjective mental demand, subjective effort, and frustration. In addition, experience of the task (e.g. subjective mental demand, subjective effort, frustration) may be predicted by motivation. This will also be examined.

We are conducting wo systematic reviews, examining factors predicting goal progress over time, and predicting daily goal progress.

Pre-registration of analyses plan

• The model of value-based choice (Berkman, Hutcherson, Livingston, Kahn, & Inzlicht, 2017) conceptualizes self-control as a value-based decision where self-control occurs when the subjective value for the goal-directed behavior outweighs the subjective value for the temptation. This model posits several types of sources of subjective value, particularly for the goal-directed behavior. • The current study tests this model in the academic domain by identifying three sources of subjective value for the goal-directed behavior. Specifically, this study examines identity, motivation, and self-efficacy as sources of subjective value for outcomes related to self-control. In past research, identity, motivation, and self-efficacy are positively related to achievement outcomes (Bandura, 2001; Destin & Oyserman, 2009; Sheldon & Elliot, 1999). o Additionally, the complimentary identity-value model (Berkman, Livingston, & Kahn, 2017) suggests that self-relevant goal options (e.g., options connected to our core values) are given greater weight (i.e., has greater subjective value) when making goal-related decisions. • First, this study examines dispositional levels of identity, motivation, and self-efficacy related to the outcomes in the pursuit of a college major, such as GPA, goal progress and effort. Second, this study examines how daily changes in identity, motivation, and self-efficacy relate to class-related outcomes, such as amount of time spent studying. Third, this study examines various indicators of subjective value as potential mediating variables between identity, motivation, self-efficacy and outcomes.

This study aims to examine the relationship between autonomous and controlled motivation and two outcomes: the subjective value of effort and effort preference. In two studies, participants were asked to chose meal options for product testing a fictitious meal kit delivery business (similar to HelloFresh). They were then asked how much they would be willing to pay for three different meal kit packages which varied in level of effort. Subjective value of effort will be operationalised in this research as willingness to pay for the meal kit packages. Thus, the meal kit packages served as three (within-person) effort conditions: high effort, moderate effort, and low effort packages. Effort preference is operationalised as the preferred meal kit package. See table 1 for a more detailed description of the packages.

Using the Virginia Tech strategic plan as a guide, a team of its University Libraries faculty and staff designed a strategic planning approach for the library that directly engaged with University goals and explored two areas: 1) contributing to the equity-, diversity-, and inclusion-related (EDI) goals laid out in the University strategic plan, and 2) expanding upon efforts to broaden diversity and representation in the library. The team identified four major themes: accessibility, climate, employment and professional development, outreach, and advocacy, and used these themes to develop specific recommendations. The process served to shine the light on these topics within the library, allowing for reflection and self-understanding, crucial components to change and grow with more attention to inclusion and diversity. Recognizing a need for change, it is hoped the report leads to better advocacy and ally-ship and brings issues to light for other libraries engaging in similar processes. Accepted version

Course Description Learn from the Open Access Subvention Fund (OASF) manager how to get the library to pay the article processing charges (APCs) when your article is accepted by an OA journal that requires these fees. Since 2013 when Virginia Tech Libraries first made funds available, the OASF has grown to $215,000 to support articles published in scholarly OA journals. Everyone in the VT community—faculty, staff, and students, is eligible for support from the Libraries’ fund. In this session we will review the OASF award guidelines, identify journal and publisher databases to help you determine if a journal meets the funding criteria, locate OA journals in your field, and discuss VT’s new open access policy that was approved by the Board of Visitors in March 2021. If there’s time we will also talk about the Libraries’ publishing services, including open textbooks, and book subvention opportunities. Course Outcomes • Be familiar with the OASF award criteria • Gain knowledge of hybrid OA journals and publishers’ “double dipping” • Be familiar with sources of OA journals • Be aware of the VT OA policy

Dean Tyler Walters allocated the 2021 VT OASF $150,000 to support article processing charges (APC) in open access journals. By March 15, 2021, those funds had been fully depleted but additional funds continued to be awarded to qualifying requests. In fiscal year 2021, the Libraries received 183 requests, of which 85% met the award criteria. The OASF awarded $197,249.43 for 156 articles.

Since the IR may serve the institution as a digital library, it should accurately reflect the institution’s scholarship and activities. But how can we determine whether this is the case? This study proposes selecting several microcosms, creating a controlled vocabulary of terms and phrases, searching the vocabulary at the institution-level and in the IR, and comparing the percentage of hits in each. Assessing IRs from the perspective of its content is not a frame of reference generally used. This study compared three microcosms in the IR with the same microcosms in the institution at large--LGBTQ, Indigenous People, and Latinx. What percentage of similarity be considered a close enough correlation? While this is a review of one IR at a doctoral-granting land grant institution, a discussion of the methodology and results could lead to cross-IR analyses. This presentation describes developing the vocabularies, search strategies using the advantages and short-comings of Google and Solr, and what the data revealed about VTechWorks, the IR at Virginia Tech. Studying these microcosms within the IR also revealed the use or non-use of terms and phrases by certain author communities, e.g., graduate students through their ETDs and faculty through their published articles.

Institutional repositories are often measured by data points such as their size, or who deposits, or how much is deposited, or how many times items in the IR are used. These data, however, do not put the IR in a larger context and they do not facilitate comparing repositories across institutions. Therefore, I suggest using the contents of the institution’s website as the standard or baseline that its IR should minimally meet. We could put the repository in the context of the institution by evaluating how well the IR reflects or rep-resents its host institution. In his foundational SPARC paper, Raym Crow advised that IRs “should aim to become “tangible indicators of a university’s quality ... [so as to] ... demonstrate the scientific, societal, and economic relevance of its research activities.” VTechWorks is the institutional repository for Virginia Tech, a PhD granting insti-tution with about 37,000 students and 2000 faculty. At the time of this study (February–March 2021), VTechWorks had about 84,500 items, 96% of which were open access full text while 4% were embargoed, withheld, or legacy abstract-only items. Members of the university community populate VTechWorks, including faculty, for example, who deposit their works either directly or through the integrated Elements system. Students contribute to VTechWorks, including graduate students whose ETDs, electronic theses and dissertations, arrive from the Graduate School’s online approval system, and under-graduates when courses require deposit of final projects. VTechWorks staff also deposit formally and informally, for example after reading about a publication in the online daily news or handling SWORD deposited articles. Published online (Publication status)

This is a presentation providing information about scholarly communication and open access for GRAD 5204 Citizen Scholar Seminar. Also presenting were Jonathan Petters and Karen DePauw at this Zoom class on April 14, 2020.

You’re writing your thesis or dissertation, and you want to include an image that you didn’t create. Are you allowed to use it? Is that considered fair use? What if has a Creative Commons license? What about your thesis or dissertation - is that copyrighted? How does placing your thesis or dissertation in the institutional repository affect your ability to publish articles or books from it later on? Learn the answers to these questions and more in this workshop. By the end of this session, you’ll Understand the basics of copyright and fair use as they apply to your thesis and dissertation Know your rights as the author of a thesis or dissertation

Dean Tyler Walters allocated the 2020 VT OASF $150,000 to support article processing charges (APC) in open access journals. This year the Libraries received 203 requests, an increase of 32 over 2019. 83% of the requests met the award criteria. The OASF supported 168 articles.

Dean Tyler Walters allocated the 2019 VT OASF $140,000 to support article processing charges (APC) in open access journals. This year the Libraries received 171 requests, an increase of 28 over 2018. 77% of the requests met the award criteria. The OASF awarded $165,234 for 131 articles, though invoices paid did not exceed the Fund’s budget allocation.

Electronic theses/dissertations (ETDs) have been required at higher education institutions for twenty years. Although numerous goals have been realized, the majority of ETDs have not been transformed into new media. Accepted version

Jean Robbins was the first chair of the Peacock-Harper Culinary History Advisory Board. At the April 6, 2018, luncheon this presentation celebrated some of Jean Robbins's accomplishments and contributions on the first anniversary of her passing.

Do community-facing resources in the digital repository reflect the work being done at the university? Can examining a microcosm such as the LGBTQ-related materials indicate how successful a university’s digital repository is in avoiding unconscious bias? Searching the repository’s collections, including ETDs (electronic theses and dissertations) and Faculty Research, indicates whether these authors used particular terms in their scholarship, when the terms were used, and how frequently the terms appear. Comparing frequency and publication dates within, rather than across, collections is more revealing. Terms not used or used more or less frequently in one collection or the other and elsewhere within the IR may also be significant.

This is the 2018 annual report for the Research & Informatics division at University Libraries.

Course Description If you're writing an article for a scholarly journal, Virginia Tech Libraries will support the Article Publishing Charge (APC) of up to $1500 for publication in an open access (OA) journal. The fund also supports APCs for hybrid OA journals, if the publisher reduces institutional subscription prices. The OASF is available to everyone In the VT community—faculty, staff, and students. In this session we will review Virginia Tech’s Open Access Subvention Fund award criteria, locate OA journals, and identify databases that help determine if the publisher meets the funding criteria. Bring your laptop or tablet and practice or create an OASF request with the fund manager at hand. At the conclusion of the session you will be in a good position to have your next article funded, which you can link to your résumé, annual activity report, or dossier for promotion and tenure/continued appointment. Come prepared to also learn more about the Libraries’ publishing services and VT’s draft open access policy. Course Outcomes Understand the OASF award criteria Learn about hybrid OA journals and publishers’ “double dipping” Walk away with a draft the request for funds Know who to talk to about library publishing services Have a better understanding of the impact of an OA policy

For the Digital Science Thought Leadership Webinar on Oct. 26, 2017, Gail McMillan was invited to present Virginia Tech’s approach to open access (OA) activities and their steps towards an OA Policy. [Also presenting were Sally Rumsey, Head of Scholarly Communications & Data Management at Oxford University, and Arthur Smith, Open Access Service Manager at Cambridge University. The panel was organized by Kate Byrne, Symplectic, and moderated by Laura Wheeler, Digital Science. A video of the complete webinar will be released by Digital Science.]

This workshop is designed for busy faculty who want a jump start in developing new skills, mastering new tools, and learning new approaches related to sharing their work and extending their impact. As delivered in June 2017, University librarians and publishing experts presented a variety of tools and methods to enable faculty members to: (1) leverage their rights as authors, (2) build and manage their online presence, (3) share their work and get noticed, and (4) demonstrate their impact. Attendees had the opportunity to set and refine individual goals for their workshop participation and beyond. Hands-on time and assistance were included for attendees to make tangible progress in their identified areas. Time was also allocated for attendees to discuss common problems and solutions.

These slides were prepared for the Virginia Tech Graduate Student Assembly to introduce them to Open Access (OA) in general.

NLI Course (March1, 2017) Description If you're writing an article for a scholarly peer-reviewed journal, Virginia Tech Libraries will support the Article Publishing Charge of up to $1500 for an open access journal. In this session we will review Virginia Tech’s Open Access Subvention Fund award criteria, locate Open Access journals, and identify databases to help determine if the publisher meets the funding criteria. At the conclusion of the session you will be in a good position to have your next article funded, which you can link to your CV, FAR, or P&T dossier. Come prepared to also learn more about the Libraries’ publishing services.

Presented Feb. 1, 2017, these slides were created to facilitate a discussion about many aspects of scholarly communication at the request of Dr. Patrick Miller for the PhD colloquium in the Architecture and Design Research Program.

The Coalition of Open Access Policy Institutions (COAPI, https://sparcopen.org/coapi ) is committed to sharing information and resources to assist in the development and implementation of institutional Open Access (OA) policies. The COAPI Toolkit includes a diverse collection of resources that COAPI members have developed in the course of their OA policy initiatives. These resources are openly accessible and published here under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 licenses, unless otherwise noted on the resources themselves.