1 / 26

Overview of RIOJA: Repository Interface for Overlaid Journal Archives and Its Developments

This presentation outlines the progress of RIOJA, a project focused on establishing an overlay journal model for academic research in Astrophysics and Cosmology. Funded by JISC, RIOJA aims to enhance the accessibility and sustainability of scholarly publications by using content from established repositories like arXiv. It includes findings from community surveys and aims to recommend digital preservation strategies while considering the costs associated with an arXiv-overlay journal. Key insights into researcher preferences and necessary functionalities for journal success are also discussed.

livi
Télécharger la présentation

Overview of RIOJA: Repository Interface for Overlaid Journal Archives and Its Developments

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Repository Interface for Overlaid Journal Archives (RIOJA) : an overview of work in progress Panayiota Polydoratou Martin Moyle e-mail: lib-rioja@ucl.ac.uk

  2. Outline of the presentation • RIOJA – some project info • Overlay journal model – context & definition attempt • RIOJA aims and methods • Community surveys - some preliminary results • Observations and future work

  3. RIOJA – project info • 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 16 months partnership – July 2008 • Researchers from UCL, Cambridge, Glasgow and Imperial • UCL Library Services • Technical staff from Cornell University • Astrophysics and Cosmology our subject domain

  4. RIOJA – the context • Impetus came from academic researchers in Astrophysics and Cosmology • Perceptions: • arXiv subject repository is highly important • journals are little-used • and why do subscriptions cost so much? • adding a quality stamp to arXiv deposits would cut out the need for formal publication in journals

  5. "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)

  6. 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-assured • Open access • Sustainable

  7. 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 journal • an implementation of the RIOJA toolkit • arXiv repository • OJS journal software

  8. 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) • Sustainability • Estimate the running costs foran arXiv-overlay journal • Identify and appraise cost-recovery options for an arXiv-overlay journal

  9. 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?

  10. Questionnaire survey – Some administrative info • Survey run between June 8th - July 15th, 2007 • Scientists in fields astrophysics and cosmology – hazy boundaries • Top - 100 academic institutions in science • Top - 15 non academic institutions in science • Cosmocoffee subscribers

  11. 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

  12. 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

  13. 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

  14. Some observations • Important factors • In general both scientists and publishers contacted were disposed favourably towards the overlay journal model. • Scientific community acceptance • Quality assurance • Peer review process • Sustainability and long term archiving • Traditional copy-editing function remains important to researchers • Visibility of research in indexing services • Not so important factors • Print version of journal • Subscription cost • Journal endorsed by the professional society

  15. Future work • Exploring sustainability issues and potential implementations • Writing results from interviews with members of editorial boards/publishers • Costs associated with publishing processes • Is there a business model? • RIOJA meeting – 7 July 2008 (http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ls/rioja/meeting)

  16. Further information • Project team: lib-rioja@ucl.ac.uk • Web site: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ls/rioja • RIOJA meeting: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ls/rioja/meeting

  17. Thank you!

  18. 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

More Related