panayiota polydoratou martin moyle e-mail: [email protected]
DESCRIPTION
Repository Interface for Overlaid Journal Archives (RIOJA): a feasibility study reporting the views of scientists in astrophysics and cosmology. Panayiota Polydoratou Martin Moyle e-mail: [email protected]. Outline of the presentation. RIOJA – some project info - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
Repository Interface for Overlaid Journal Archives (RIOJA): a feasibility study reporting the views of scientists in astrophysics and cosmology
Panayiota Polydoratou
Martin Moyle
e-mail: [email protected]
UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
Outline of the presentation
RIOJA – some project infoOverlay journal model – context & definition
attemptRIOJA aims and methodsQuestionnaire survey - some preliminary resultsObservations and future work
UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
RIOJA - Repository Interface for Overlaid Journal Archives (http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ls/rioja)
Funded by the JISC - Joint Information Systems Committee (http://www.jisc.ac.uk) under the Repositories and Preservation Programme
A 1-year partnership Researchers from UCL, Cambridge, Glasgow and Imperial UCL Library Services Technical staff from Cornell University
Astrophysics and Cosmology our subject domain
RIOJA – project info
UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
RIOJA – the context
Impetus came from academic researchers in Astrophysics and Cosmology
Perceptions:arXiv subject repository is highly important journals are little-usedand why do subscriptions cost so much?adding a quality stamp to arXiv deposits would cut out the
need for formal publication in journals
UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
"Journals are already redundant as a way of distributing research results [in this discipline]"
"How can it cost this much to publish papers in journals?" "Ultimately a 'journal' should just be a quality mark that
appears with a particular online version of an article in an online repository"
Although... need for Editors (paid?)
career concerns (funders, RAE, promotion boards)
there must be some costs we haven't thought of...?
"the hard part will be getting people involved – as authors, referees and editors – not the technical issues"
(All quotations taken from the CosmoCoffee bulletin board, 2005)
UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
Overlay journal model – a definition
Term “overlay journal” attributed to Ginsparg (1996), contribution and discussion by Smith (1999)
For RIOJA, an overlay journal model refers to: journals built on content deposited to and stored in one or
more repositories Quality-assuredOpen accessSustainable
UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
RIOJA - aims...
Build the RIOJA toolkit A set of APIs
some for implementation by a repository, some by a journal
some required (eg author validation, metadata extraction); others optional (eg trackback support)
Construct a demonstrator overlay journalan implementation of the RIOJA toolkit
arXiv repository PKP journal software
UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
RIOJA – aims…
Recommend a Digital Preservation strategy for content accepted by an arXiv-overlay journal
Supported by life-cycle costing techniques developed by the BL/UCL LIFE Project (http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ls/life)
SustainabilityEstimate the running costs for an arXiv-overlay journalIdentify and appraise cost-recovery options for an
arXiv-overlay journal
UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
RIOJA - methods
Questionnaire survey to 4,000+ researchers Selected from top 100 universities and other institutions (THES
World Rankings 2006), arXiv and other domain specific discussion lists
Interviews with editorial boards and publishers What does this community really want from a journal?
– Which "value-added" publisher services are really valued? – Which desirable functions are missing?
What factors are critical to the successful academic take-up of an arXiv-overlay journal?
UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
Questionnaire survey – Some administrative info
Survey run between June 8th - July 15th, 2007 Scientists in fields astrophysics and cosmology –
hazy boundariesTop - 100 academic institutions in scienceTop - 15 non academic institutions in scienceCosmocoffee subscribers
UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
Questionnaire survey – Some demographic characteristics
Contacted 4012 scientists in astrophysics and cosmology Response from 683 (17% response rate) A spread of response by role, 24% by professors, 20% by
research fellows, lecturers, readers, research assistants/associates
Experienced researchers (46% more than 10 years) 90% denoted research as their primary responsibility
UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
Response by role of the respondents
2%
7%
12%
20%
12%
12%
9%
4%
24%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
N/R
Other
Research Associate/Research Assistant
Research Fellow
Senior Research Fellow
Lecturer/Assistant Professor
Senior Lecturer/Associate Professor
Reader
Professor/Full Professor
UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
Responsibilities of the respondents
1%
4%
38%
90%
0%
1%
0%
21%
4%
6%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
N/R
Other (please specify)
Teaching
Research
Publisher - University press
Publisher - not for profit
Publisher - commercial
Head of research unit/group
Head of department
Editor/member of editorial board
UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
Questionnaire survey – Research and publication
97% write their research in the form of papers for peer reviewed journals
However, funding processes and RAE influence publication
3 most preferred journals for publication in top -10 – ISI impact factor
UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
Forms of resarch outputs
1% 3%
97%
29%
9%1% 1%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Book(s) Chapter(s) inbook(s)
Papers forsubmission topeer reviewed
journals
Papersincluded inconference
proceedings
Workshoppapers
Other (pleasespecify)
N/R
UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
Q8 In which of the following peer reviewed journals have you published your papers?
Base: 683 %
Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics
34 5
Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences
0 0
Astronomical Journal 171 25 Astronomy and Astrophysics 331 48.5 Astronomy and Astrophysics Review 4 0.6 Astrophysical Journal 476 69.7 Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series 108 15.8 Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics
66 9.7
Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 382 55.9 Nature 137 20.1 New Journal of Physics 7 1 Physical Review D 195 28.6 Physical Review Letters 128 18.7 Science 48 7 Other (please specify) 126 18.4 N/R 15 2.2
UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
Questionnaire survey – arXiv use and expectations of overlay journal model
80% use the arXiv as first point when looking for new research papers & 53% visit the arXiv on a daily basis
53% said yes to a new publishing journal model However: quality, peer review, long term archiving Money matters
YES: Journal website & archive of back issues, paying scientific editors
NO: print version of journal, paying referees, publisher profits
UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
Keeping up to date
15%
80%
17%24%
58%
22%13%
28%
7% 6% 1%0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
Perceived quality of the journal by the scientific community
97.3
± 1.2
High journal impact factor
88.9 ±
2.4
Being kept up-to-date during the refereeing process
81.6
± 3
Other factors (please specify)
75.3 ±
9.4 Inclusion in indexing/abstracting services (e.g. ISI Science Citation Index)
67.9
±
3.6
Reputation of the editor/editorial board
66.2
± 3.6
Journals that do not charge authors for publication
64.5
± 3.6
Open Access Journals (journals whose content is openly and freely available)
52.8
± 3.8
Low or no subscription costs
33.9 ±
3.6
Journals which publish a print version
29.8
± 3.5
Journals published by my professional society
26.9
± 3.4
Journals which have a high rate of rejection of papers
21.1
± 3.1
Key: Very
unimportant Fairly
unimportant Neither
Fairly important
Very important
Statement Rating % agree
UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
Table 1. Distribution of money over several journal functions
None 1 2 3 4 5 Not sure
Paying scientific editors 23 23 60 240 141 15 21 Paying copy editors 8 28 73 256 134 6 15 Maintenance of journal software
4 20 73 238 147 9 30
Journal website 5 28 79 225 149 20 15 Online archive of journal's own back issues
9 27 52 202 189 18 19
Production of paper version
138 101 125 107 29 4 14
Extra features such as storage of associated data
30 63 105 182 100 6 26
Publisher profits 142 122 138 91 9 0 19 Paying referees 249 70 70 85 22 8 18 Other 3 1 1 1 3 2 3
UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
Funding sources for journals' functions
Research funders
(Councils, government, etc.)
, 388 Sponsorship (e.g. Learned Society),
282
Other , 11
N/R, 15
Library subscriptions,
337
Author pays on submission (e.g. using research
funds), 34
Author pays on acceptance (e.g. using research
funds), 172
UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
Some observations
Important factors Scientific community acceptance
Quality assurancePeer review process
Sustainability and long term archiving
Not so important factors Print version of journal Subscription cost Journal endorsed by the professional society
UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
Future work
Entering the second phase of community surveys
Interviews with members of editorial boards/publishers Costs associated with publishing processes Is there a business model? More work and testing on the technical side as APIs are now
implemented on the arXiv Start planning the RIOJA conference
UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
Further information
Project team: [email protected] Web site: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ls/rioja
UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
Thank you!
UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
References
Ginsparg, P. (1996). Winners and Losers in the Global Research Village. Invited contribution, UNESCO Conference HQ, Paris, 19-23 Feb 1996. Available at: http://xxx.lanl.gov/blurb/pg96unesco.html
Smith, J W T. (1999). The deconstructed journal: a new model for academic publishing. Learned Publishing, Vol. 12 (2), pp. 79-91