Exploring overlay journals: the RIOJA project UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
Repository Interface for Overlaid Journal Archives (RIOJA) : an overview of work in progress
Panayiota Polydoratou
Martin Moyle
e-mail: lib-rioja@ucl.ac.uk
RIOJA aims and methods
Observations and future work
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
Astrophysics and Cosmology our subject domain
UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
RIOJA – the context
Perceptions:
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
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...
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
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
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
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
Identify and appraise cost-recovery options for an arXiv-overlay journal
UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
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
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
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
UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
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
Papers included in conference proceedings
Workshop papers
N/R
Book(s) Chapter(s) in book(s) Papers for submission to peer reviewed journals Papers included in conference proceedings Workshop papers Other (please specify) N/R
Written forms of research outputs
7
21
663
200
59
9
5
Sheet1
In which form is your research most commonly written up?
Base: 683
663
97.1
200
29.3
9
1.3
N/R
5
0.7
Sheet1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Book(s) Chapter(s) in book(s) Papers for submission to peer reviewed journals Papers included in conference proceedings Workshop papers Other (please specify) N/R
Written forms of research outputs
Sheet2
Sheet3
UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
Q8 In which of the following peer reviewed journals have you published your papers?
Base: 683
Astrophysics
34
5
Sciences
0
0
Physics
66
9.7
382
55.9
Nature
137
20.1
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
101
549
114
164
396
148
90
194
49
38
8
Sheet1
Q10 How do you keep up to date with new advances in your field?
Base: 683
Sheet2
Sheet3
97.3
81.6
67.9
66.2
64.5
3.6
Open Access Journals (journals whose content is openly and freely available)
52.8
33.9
29.8
26.9
Journals which have a high rate of rejection of papers
21.1
None
1
2
3
4
5
9
27
52
202
189
18
19
30
63
105
182
100
6
26
In general both scientists and publishers contacted were disposed favourably towards the overlay journal model.
Scientific community acceptance
Traditional copy-editing function remains important to researchers
Visibility of research in indexing services
Not so important factors
Print version of journal
UCL LIBRARY SERVICES
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 )
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.
Smith, J W T. (1999). The deconstructed journal: a new model for academic publishing. Learned Publishing, Vol. 12 (2), pp. 79-91
Funding sources for journals' functions
Research
funders
(Councils,
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
Journal website 5 28 79 225 149 20 15
Online archive of
Production of paper
Extra features such as
storage of associated data
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
Q8 In which of the following peer reviewed
journals have you published your papers?
Base: 683 %
Astrophysics
Sciences
Astronomy and Astrophysics Review 4 0.6
Astrophysical Journal 476 69.7
Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle
Physics
Nature 137 20.1
Physical Review D 195 28.6
Physical Review Letters 128 18.7
Science 48 7
N/R 15 2.2
authors for publication
33.9
version
29.8
21.1
101
549
114
164
396
148
90
194
49
38
8
050100150200250300350400450500550600
7
21
663
200
59
9
5
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
650
700