Open Access News

News from the open access movement

Monday, November 26, 2007

November issue of Serials

The November issue of Serials is now online.  Here are the OA-related articles.  (Only abstracts are free online, at least so far.)

  • Stephen Pinfield, Can open access repositories and peer-reviewed journals coexist?  Abstract:   It is often assumed that open access repositories and peer-reviewed journals are in competition with each other and therefore will in the long term be unable to coexist. This paper takes a critical look at that assumption. It draws on the available evidence of actual practice which indicates that coexistence is possible at least in the medium term. It discusses possible future models of publication and dissemination which include open access, repositories, peer review and journals. The paper suggests that repositories and journals may coexist in the long term but that both may have to undergo significant changes. Important areas where changes need to occur include: widespread deployment of repository infrastructure, development of version identification standards, development of value-added features, new business models, new approaches to quality control and adoption of digital preservation as a repository function.

  • Sally Morris, Will the parasite kill the host? Are institutional repositories a fact of life - and does it matter?  Abstract:   Despite an apparent lack of enthusiasm among academics themselves, institutional repositories seem set to grow. Two studies have highlighted the possible damage which could be caused to journal subscriptions by widespread self-archiving. If journals were damaged financially, the scholarly community would lose some functions which it appears to value very highly: management of peer review; editing; selecting and collecting content into a convenient package. It would also suffer indirectly, if learned societies were no longer able to give the same support to their disciplines. However, publishers cannot afford simply to oppose these developments; rather, they need to work with the scholarly community to identify those functions which are of greatest importance to the community in the digital era, and then to work out how to deliver and market these.

  • Sarah Watson, Authors' attitudes to, and awareness and use of, a university institutional repository.  Abstract:   This article reports the findings of an author study at Cranfield University. The study investigated authors' publishing behaviours, attitudes, concerns, and their awareness and use of their institutional repository (IR), Cranfield QUEprints. The findings suggest that despite a reasonable amount of advocacy many authors had not heard of QUEprints and were not aware of its purpose. Once explained, all authors saw at least one benefit to depositing a copy of their work to QUEprints, but many were unsure how to deposit, preferring to depend on the Library to do the work. The authors voiced few concerns or conditions regarding the inclusion of their work in QUEprints, but felt that it would be an extra, inconvenient step in their workload. This research led to the development of the Embed Project which is investigating how to embed the IR into the research process and thereby encourage more authors to deposit their work.

  • Frederick J. Friend, UK access to UK research.  Abstract:   Technological changes are providing opportunities for easier access to publicly-funded research. While these opportunities for easier access have been growing, concerns have been expressed that current business models are preventing their realization. Even well-funded university libraries are unable to purchase all the books and journals required by researchers and learners. A survey conducted by JISC, CURL and SCONUL looked at six situations of access in one UK university to the research papers and books written by researchers in another comparable UK university. The survey indicates that UK researchers and learners may not have access to around one-third of publications by researchers in other UK universities. The shortfall in access varies from university to university and relates to all types of content but particularly to books and journals from smaller publishers. Targeted additional funding and support for new access models are suggested to improve access for UK researchers to UK research.