Search

Good, Better, Best: Practices in Archiving & Preserving Open Access Monographs brings together the project’s growing knowledge and understanding around this community of practice, as well as reports on the Work Package’s research and development over the course of the project. Following an introduction chapter giving a brief background landscape summary alongside employed methodologies, Chapter 2, ‘A basic guidebook for the small and scholar-led press’ considers good, better, and best practices around file formats, metadata, content packaging, existing routes to digital publication archives, archiving and preservation workflows, and challenges surrounding copyright, reuse, and licensing. Additional chapters detail the repository workflow experimentations, both manual and automated, as well as successful proof-of-concept archiving in two online repositories: one, and institutional repository, and the other, the Internet Archive. Along with a chapter (Chapter 6) that explores the current understanding around implications for archiving and preserving complex and experimental monographs, two further chapters (7 and 8) look at future work: the expansion and development of the Thoth Archiving Network and the new Open Book Futures project, beginning May 2023. Appendices include signposting to toolkits, guides, and resources, as well as a brief glossary that provides links to more comprehensive archiving and preservation glossaries already in existence. We hope this will be a useful resource for the small and scholar-led press community and beyond. This is the final output of the Community-Led Open Publication Infrastructures for Monographs (COPIM) project's Work Package 7., Community-led Open Publishing Infrastructures for Monographs (COPIM) is supported by the Research England Development (RED) Fund, and Arcadia—a charitable fund of Lisbet Rausing and Peter Baldwin.

Projekt zum Mc Gurk Effekt für M04 an der Fernuni im HS2020

Übung zur Replikation einer Studie im Modul M4 der FernUni Schweiz

Technical methods for effectively archiving complex digital research publications and for creating an integrated collections of content in different formats have not yet been developed. As part of COPIM, an international partnership of researchers, universities, librarians, open access book publishers and infrastructure providers, WP7 (Work Package 7) have begun by compiling a digital preservation risk register. This report builds on that work in offering an overview of existing preservation solutions for Open Access (OA) research monographs. It brings together interviews conducted with representatives from several university presses and OA presses, and draws on the discussions that took place in a workshop held in September 2020 with a range of professionals in the archiving and preservation domain. What the interviews and the workshop have indicated is the need for a consensus on file formats, further awareness and a culture shift to acknowledge and respond to the importance of digital preservation, further support and guidance for small and scholar-led publishers to assure equity in the publishing and preservation landscape, and a clear way forward regarding techniques to effectively preserve the components of complex digital monographs, including links and embedded content. A number of opportunities for future work have been highlighted, among them tools, guidance, developing new workflows, and nurturing a network of advocates in specific communities. These avenues for future work are further elaborated on at the end of this report. Background COPIM (Community-led Open Publication Infrastructures for Monographs) is an international partnership of researchers, universities (Coventry University; Birkbeck, University of London; Lancaster University; and Trinity College, Cambridge), established open access publishers (the ScholarLed consortium, which includes Mattering Press, meson press, Open Humanities Press, Open Book Publishers and punctum books), libraries (UCSB Library and Loughborough University Library) and infrastructure providers (the Directory of Open Access Books and Jisc). COPIM is also collaborating closely with institutions such as the British Library and the Digital Preservation Coalition, and with the OPERAS-P project and the Next Generation Library Publishing project, in addition to consortium members. As well, a broad spectrum of academics, publishers, librarians, software developers, funders and others contribute as part of the working groups, events and projects that COPIM is setting up and running. COPIM’s funders are the Research England Development (RED) Fund, and Arcadia — a charitable fund of Lisbet Rausing and Peter Baldwin. The Project is dedicated to investigating the difficulties that impede the progress of small publishers interfacing with large-scale organisations and processes. Through the work of this project, the consortium is in the process of developing a significantly enriched, not-for-profit and open-source ecosystem for open access (OA) book publishing, supporting and sustaining a diversity of publishing initiatives and models, particularly within Humanities and Social Sciences (HSS) publishing. Work Package 7 of the COPIM Project will identify the key challenges associated with archiving research monographs in all their variation and complexity, and work towards developing new solutions. The concept of a monograph as “just” text with the occasional image or table is increasingly outdated. “Books” now come in multiple digital formats (e.g. PDF, XML, EPUB) as well as hardcopy, and can also include embedded material such as videos and interactive 3D models. In some publications, users can interact directly with content hosted externally, such as databases and URLs. As individual objects, each of these formats—such as a PDF file or a video—appear in established guidance and standards for preservation and can be reliably archived with time, effort and resource. Yet how does one archive a “book” which consists of all of these? Aims and Methodology This report aims to provide a brief overview of existing technical methods for digital preservation of open access (OA) monographs, and offer some possible avenues for development. As the report is based on work package activities from 2020, further documentation of work package activities can be expected as these progress, including case studies and good practice guidance. This report begins with a section detailing current practice in OA publishing, drawn from a series of semi-structured interviews of approximately 30 minutes conducted on Microsoft Teams in September and October 2020. The same interview questions were also supplied to several participants via email and via Online Surveys (formerly BOS). Though only a small set of responses were received, these have been incorporated into the findings. Opportunity exists for further discussions with publishers to enrich and advance the current findings. A wider analysis of the documentation pertaining to digital preservation at OA university presses and publishers was conducted during the same period, though documentation is limited. Additionally, our first workshop took place on 16 September 2020, run jointly with the Digital Preservation Coalition. This workshop brought together COPIM teammates and experts in digital preservation, which included the following: Senior member, Archiving body (Participant A) Department head, National library (Participant B) Digital conservationist, National library (Participant C) Senior member, Data archive (Participant D) Senior member, Preservation archive (Participant E) Scientist, National laboratory (Participant F) Department head, National library (Participant G) Senior member, Community of practice organisation (Participant H) Senior technical officer, University library (Participant I) These discussions feed into the points in section 3, as well as the concluding thoughts and summary of future work at the end of this report., Community-led Open Publishing Infrastructures for Monographs (COPIM) is supported by the Research England Development (RED) Fund, and Arcadia—a charitable fund of Lisbet Rausing and Peter Baldwin.

INTRODUCTION Cet article a pour but d’établir un pont entre les caractéristiques culturelles fondamentales de divers domaines d’études et la façon dont les activités de recherche sont représentées sur le Web universitaire, en mettant l’accent sur l’analyse qualitative des liens hypertextes. Pour ce faire, nous nous demanderons si la théorie de Whitley [1984] concernant l’organisation intellectuelle et sociale des sciences, bien connue dans le champ des études des sciences et des techniques, p...

Cet ouvrage, coordonné par Ghislaine Chartron, professeur au conservatoire des Arts et métiers (CNAM) et responsable de l'Institut national des techniques de la documentation (INTD). Annaïg Mahé, maître de conférences à l'Unité régionale de formation à l'information scientifique et technique (Urfist) de Paris et à l'école des Chartes, et Benoît Epron, maître de conférences à l'enssib, se propose d'explorer les pratiques documentaires dans l'enseignement supérieur et la recherche au moment clé du développement, voire de la croissance exponentielle de l'utilisation des outils numériques. À l'heure d'une maturité croissante de l'offre documentaire numérique et de ses potentiels dans tous les champs scientifiques, que connaissons-nous vraiment de la réalité des pratiques documentaires à l'université et dans les organismes de recherche ? Faire le point sur cette question fut l'objectif de la journée d'étude « Diversité des pratiques documentaires numériques dans les champs scientifiques » organisée à l'enssib en juillet 2009, qui a souhaité réunir un ensemble de travaux récents couvrant une large palette d'observations des pratiques dans la recherche et l'enseignement universitaire. Cette diversité concerne les méthodologies convoquées (quantitatives et qualitatives), les différents supports (notamment revues et ouvrages) et les différents champs disciplinaires (physique des hautes énergies, mathématiques et informatique, sciences de l'éducation, sciences politiques) : des mises en perspective plus transversales sont par ailleurs complémentaires. Les points de vue abordés sont internationaux.

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.

The Behavioural research: Authors and users vis-à-vis journals and repositories project was commissioned by PEER in April 2009 as part of a broader initiative to investigate the effects of the large-scale, systematic deposit of authors' final peer-reviewed manuscripts (also called stage-two research outputs) on reader access, author visibility, and journal viability, as well as on the broader ecology of European research. The specific aim of the behavioural research is to understand the extent to which authors and users are aware of open access (OA), the different ways of achieving it, and the (de)motivating factors that influence its uptake.