Dissertation to Book? A Snapshot of Dissertations Published As Books in 2014 and 2105, Available in Open Access Institutional Repositories

Authors: Anna Marie Johnson, Tyler Goldberg, Robert Detmering

INTRODUCTION: Graduate students sometimes express consternation about whether the presence of their dissertation in an open access institutional repository (IR) will harm their chances of being able to publish the manuscript as a book. Several studies have addressed the question from different perspectives, but the avenue of examining what had actually been published had not been explored.
METHODS: This study examines books published in 2014 and 2015 that were listed as dissertations in one large book vendor database. A list of books was downloaded and searched in both ProQuest’s Dissertations & Theses Global database and Google to identify a matching dissertation.
RESULTS: Only a small percentage of books published as dissertations were found in ProQuest and then subsequently in IRs. The number of libraries holding book titles with corresponding dissertations in IRs dropped between 2014 and 2015. The lists of publishers who published dissertations as books was very similar between 2014 and 2015 data and included large, commercial publishers.
DISCUSSION: Students should be aware that only a small percentage of the total number of dissertations produced in a year are subsequently published as books, that the time between dissertation and book publication is substantial, and that some subject areas are more likely to be published than others.
CONCLUSION: These findings provide nuance to the discussions of dissertations in open access repositories and a starting point to monitor trends in this area. They should also provide librarians who are providing supplementary guidance to graduate students with information about the publishing landscape.

SourceJournal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication

Citation: Johnson, A.M., Goldberg, T. & Detmering, R., (2017). “Dissertation to Book? A Snapshot of Dissertations Published As Books in 2014 and 2105, Available in Open Access Institutional Repositories”. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication. 5(1). DOI: http://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.2177


Open Data, Privacy, and Fair Information Principles: Towards a Balancing Framework

Authors: Frederik Zuiderveen Borgesius, Jonathan Gray & Mireille van Eechoud

Abstract: Open data are held to contribute to a wide variety of social and political goals, including strengthening transparency, public participation and democratic accountability, promoting economic growth and innovation, and enabling greater public sector efficiency and cost savings. However, releasing government data that contain personal information may threaten privacy and related rights and interests. In this Article we ask how these privacy interests can be respected, without unduly hampering benefits from disclosing public sector information. We propose a balancing framework to help public authorities address this question in different contexts. The framework takes into account different levels of privacy risks for different types of data. It also separates decisions about access and re-use, and highlights a range of different disclosure routes. A circumstance catalogue lists factors that might be considered when assessing whether, under which conditions, and how a dataset can be released. While open data remains an important route for the publication of government information, we conclude that it is not the only route, and there must be clear and robust public interest arguments in order to justify the disclosure of personal information as open data.

Source: Open Data, Privacy, and Fair Information Principles: Towards a Balancing Framework

Citation: Frederik Zuiderveen Borgesius, Jonathan Gray, and Mireille van Eechoud, Open Data, Privacy, and Fair Information Principles: Towards a Balancing Framework, Berkeley Technological Law Journal 30:3 (2016). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15779/Z389S18


Opening Up Communication: Assessing Open Access Practices in the Communication Studies Discipline

Author: Teresa Auch Schultz

Abstract: INTRODUCTION Open access (OA) citation effect studies have looked at a number of disciplines but not yet the field of communication studies. This study researched how communication studies fare with the open access citation effect, as well as whether researchers follow their journal deposit policies. METHOD The study tracked 920 articles published in 2011 and 2012 from 10 journals and then searched for citations and an OA version using the program Publish or Perish. Deposit policies of each of the journals were gathered from SHERPA/RoMEO and used to evaluate OA versions. RESULTS From the sample, 42 percent had OA versions available. Of those OA articles, 363 appeared to violate publisher deposit policies by depositing the version of record, but the study failed to identify post-print versions for 87 percent of the total sample for the journals that allowed it. All articles with an OA version had a median of 17 citations, compared to only nine citations for non-OA articles. DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION The citation averages, which are statistically significant, show a positive correlation between OA and the number of citations. The study also shows communication studies researchers are taking part in open access but perhaps without the full understanding of their publisher’s policies.

Citation: Schultz, T.A., (2017). Opening Up Communication: Assessing Open Access Practices in the Communication Studies Discipline. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication. 5(1). DOI: http://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.2131


Altmetrics and Archives

Author: Elizabeth Joan Kelly

Abstract: Altmetrics are an alternative to traditional measurement of the impact of published resources. While altmetrics are primarily used by researchers and institutions to measure the impact of scholarly publications online, they can also be used by archives to measure the impact of their diverse online holdings, including digitized and born-digital collections, digital exhibits, repository websites, and online finding aids. Furthermore, altmetrics may fill a need for user engagement assessments for cultural heritage organizations. This article introduces the concept of altmetrics for archives and discusses barriers to adoption, best practices for collection, and potential further areas of study.

Citation: Kelly, Elizabeth Joan (2017) “Altmetrics and Archives,” Journal of Contemporary Archival Studies: Vol. 4 , Article 1. Available at: http://elischolar.library.yale.edu/jcas/vol4/iss1/1


Stop this waste of people, animals and money

Author: David Moher et al

Abstract: Predatory journals are easy to please. They seem to accept papers with little regard for quality, at a fraction of the cost charged by mainstream open-access journals. These supposedly scholarly publishing entities are murky operations, making money by collecting fees while failing to deliver on their claims of being open access and failing to provide services such as peer review and archiving.

Despite abundant evidence that the bar is low, not much is known about who publishes in this shady realm, and what the papers are like. Common wisdom assumes that the hazard of predatory publishing is restricted mainly to the developing world. In one famous sting, a journalist for Science sent a purposely flawed paper to 140 presumed predatory titles (and to a roughly equal number of other open-access titles), pretending to be a biologist based in African capital cities. At least two earlier, smaller surveys found that most authors were in India or elsewhere in Asia. A campaign to warn scholars about predatory journals has concentrated its efforts in Africa, China, India, the Middle East and Russia. Frequent, aggressive solicitations from predatory publishers are generally considered merely a nuisance for scientists from rich countries, not a threat to scholarly integrity.

Our evidence disputes this view. We spent 12 months rigorously characterizing nearly 2,000 biomedical articles from more than 200 journals thought likely to be predatory. More than half of the corresponding authors hailed from high- and upper-middle-income countries as defined by the World Bank.

Citation: Moher, David, et al. “Stop This Waste of People, Animals and Money.” Nature 549, 23–25. http://doi.org/10.1038/549023a


What Do Data Librarians Think of the MLIS? Professionals’ Perceptions of Knowledge Transfer, Trends and Challenges

Authors: Camille V. L. Thomas, Richard J. Urban

Abstract: There are existing studies on data curation programs in library science education and studies on data services in libraries. However, there is not much insight into how educational programs have prepared data professionals for practice. This study asked 105 practicing professionals how well they thought their education prepared them for professional experience. It also asked supervisors about their perceptions of how well employees performed. After analyzing the results, the investigators of this study found that changing the educational model may lead to improvements in future library data services.

Citation: Thomas, Camille V. L., and Richard J. Urban. “What Do Data Librarians Think of the MLIS? Professionals’ Perceptions of Knowledge Transfer, Trends and Challenges.” Pre-print. College & Research Libraries. 2017. http://crl.acrl.org/index.php/crl/article/view/16726.


Publication Patterns of U.S. Academic Librarians and Libraries from 2003 to 2012

Authors: Deborah D. Blecic, Stephen E. Wiberley Jr., Sandra L. De Groote, John Cullars, Mary Shultz, Vivian Chan

Abstract: This study investigated contributions to the peer-reviewed library and information science (LIS) journal literature by U.S. academic librarian (USAL) authors over a ten-year period (2003–2012). The results were compared to those of two previous five-year studies that covered the time periods of 1993–1997 and 1998–2002 to examine longitudinal trends. For USAL authors as a group, publication productivity, the proportion of peer-reviewed articles contributed to the LIS literature, and sole-authorship declined. Among USALs who did publish, productivity patterns remained similar over twenty years, with a slight increase in the percentage of USAL authors who published three or more articles in five years. The top twenty high-publication libraries from 2003 to 2012 were from public research universities, unlike two earlier studies that found private university libraries among the top twenty.

Citation: Blecic, Deborah D., Stephen E. Wilberley, Jr., Sandra L. De Groote, John Cullars, Mary Shultz, and Vivan Chan. “Publication Patterns of U.S. Academic Librarians and Libraries from 2003 to 2012.” College and Research Libraries 78, no. 4 (2017): 442-458. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.78.4.442.


Reproducibility Librarianship

Author: Vicky Steeves

Abstract: Over the past few years, research reproducibility has been increasingly highlighted as a multifaceted challenge across many disciplines. There are socio-cultural obstacles as well as a constantly changing technical landscape that make replicating and reproducing research extremely difficult. Researchers face challenges in reproducing research across different operating systems and different versions of software, to name just a few of the many technical barriers. The prioritization of citation counts and journal prestige has undermined incentives to make research reproducible.

While libraries have been building support around research data management and digital scholarship, reproducibility is an emerging area that has yet to be systematically addressed. To respond to this, New York University (NYU) created the position of Librarian for Research Data Management and Reproducibility (RDM & R), a dual appointment between the Center for Data Science (CDS) and the Division of Libraries. This report will outline the role of the RDM & R librarian, paying close attention to the collaboration between the CDS and Libraries to bring reproducible research practices into the norm.

Citation: Steeves, Vicky. “Reproducibility Librarianship.” Collaborative Librarianship 9, no. 2 (2017): 80-89. http://digitalcommons.du.edu/collaborativelibrarianship/vol9/iss2/4.


Scaling Up Perma.cc: Ensuring the Integrity of the Digital Scholarly Record

Authors: Kim Dulin and Adam Ziegler

Abstract: IMLS awarded the Harvard Library Innovation Lab a National Digital Platform grant to further develop the Lab’s Perma.cc web archiving service. The funds will be used to provide technical enhancements to support an expanded user base, aid in outreach efforts to implement Perma.cc in the nation’s academic libraries, and develop a commercial model for the service that will sustain the free service for the academic community. Perma.cc is a web archiving tool that puts the ability to archive a source in the hands of the author who is citing it. Once saved, Perma.cc assigns the source a new URL, which can be added to the original URL cited in the author’s work, so that if the original link rots or is changed the Perma.cc URL will still lead to the original source. Perma.cc is being used widely in the legal community with great success; the IMLS grant will make the tool available to other areas of scholarship where link rot occurs and will provide a solution for those in the commercial arena who do not currently have one.

Citation: Dulin, K., & Ziegler, A. (2017). Scaling Up Perma.cc: Ensuring the Integrity of the Digital Scholarly Record. D-Lib Magazine, 23(5/6). https://doi.org/10.1045/may2017-dulin


Globalization, Open Access, and the Democratization of Knowledge

Author: Harrison W. Inefuku

Abstract: In many ways, developments in information and communication technology (ICT) and open access have disrupted inequities in academic publishing and global information flows. However, efforts to fully globalize and democratize information demand intentional efforts to involve and center perspectives that traditional forms of communication have marginalized. Information professionals and the systems they create must proactively attend to developing equitable and inclusive information systems. Initiatives such as SHARE and FORCE11, discussed below, indicate promise for fulfilling the vision and promise of democratized knowledge.

Citation: Inefuku, H.W. (2017). Globalization, Open Access, and the Democratization of Knowledge, EDUCAUSE Review.