New Content in Digital Repositories

The Changing Research Landscape

Natasha Simons, Joanna Richardson

• Publisher: Chandos Publishing
• Year: 2013
• Print ISBN: 9781843347439
• eBook ISBN: 9781780634098
• Topic: Languages & Linguistics
• Subtopic: Information Management
• Index: Languages & Linguistics

Research institutions are under pressure to make their outputs more accessible in order to meet funding requirements and policy guidelines. Libraries have traditionally played an important role by exposing research output through a predominantly institution-based digital repository, with an emphasis on storing published works. New publishing paradigms are emerging that include research data, huge volumes of which are being generated globally. Repositories are the natural home for managing, storing and describing institutional research content. New Content in Digital Repositories explores the diversity of content types being stored in digital repositories with a focus on research data, creative works, and the interesting challenges they pose. Chapters in this title cover: new content types in repositories; developing and training repository teams; metadata schemas and standards for diverse resources; persistent identifiers for research data and authors; research data: the new gold; exposing and sharing repository content; selecting repository software; repository statistics and altmetrics. - Explores the role of repositories in the research lifecycle, and the emerging context for increasing non-text based content - Focuses on the management of research data in repositories and related issues such as metadata and persistent identifiers - Discusses skills and knowledge needed by repository staff to manage content diversity

1

Introduction

Abstract:

The evolution of digital repositories is linked to that of the World Wide Web from the launch of arXiv in 1991. The success in 2001 of the EPrints software was a major impetus for the establishment of institutional repositories. Until recently the scholarly output that libraries have focussed on capturing in their repositories has tended to be limited to traditionally published works such as journal articles. However, new research outputs have brought new challenges; for example, new publishing paradigms have emerged with a focus on research data. Additionally, there has been an effort to improve the representation of creative works in repositories, bringing with it challenges in multimedia storage, preservation, description and discovery. This chapter discusses some of the major influences in the repository environment, including research accessibility and accountability, data sharing, and digital sustainability.

Key words

research accessibility

research accountability

publishing paradigms

digital data scholarship

Types of repositories

Aside from arXiv, which was launched in 1991 as a repository for preprints in physics, the first major software developed for institutional use was EPrints in 2000. So repositories are relatively new services which, while still maturing, are developing quite rapidly. Definitions abound, depending upon intended use. One of the most widely used is that of the IMS Global Learning Consortium (2003): ‘Conventionally a [digital] repository is any collection of resources that are accessible via a network without prior knowledge of the structure of the collection’. Its purpose is to manage, store and provide access to digital content.

The Joint Information Systems Committee (Jisc) makes the distinction between digital, institutional and open access repositories. Crow (2002) defines institutional repositories as ‘digital collections capturing and preserving the intellectual output of a single or multi-university community’. Although Jisc defines open access repositories as a separate type, conventionally the term ‘open access’ – versus ‘closed’ – refers to the lack of any requirement for authentication from the user in order for content to be accessed, irrespective of the type of repository involved.

In addition to the categories mentioned above, Erway (2012) discusses disciplinary repositories, which are defined as ‘places where findings of research in a particular field of study are made accessible’. She argues that this type of repository is important because of the aggregation of researchers based on discipline rather than institution, nationality, funding body or the like.

For the purposes of this book, the focus will be on repositories in the higher education and research sector and on content rather than purpose. At the same time it is important to acknowledge that there are different approaches to managing increasingly diverse content in repositories. Whereas some institutions house all their content in one repository, others have more than one, dedicated to different purposes. These types of decision tend to be greatly influenced by the research information architecture – and support – which have been developed at the individual institution. That is to say, a repository system is integrally linked to the IT systems and information architecture of the organisation holding and using it.

Research accessibility

In many countries government and private research organisations’ guidelines for funding and policy are placing pressure on universities to increase the accessibility of their research output. Traditionally libraries have played an important role by exposing institutional research output through their institutional repository. The ‘digital repository’, in the development and deployment of which libraries have had such a prominent role, has been mainly institution-based, although there are some notable discipline-based repositories, among them arXiv, RePEc, CogPrints, CoRR and CiteSeer^X. The use of repositories for providing open access to research has been seen as a logical step, given that the cycle of discovery has long been underpinned by the sharing of data, particularly scientific data, through publications.

White (2008) discusses the potential research management benefits of the repository:

‘To ensure the long-term sustainability of an institutional repository it is important that the repository is fully embedded in the strategy and culture of the institution. In a research-intensive institution, performing well in national research assessments like the UK or Australian research assessment exercises is mission critical. If the repository has an active role in this key activity the management and development of the repository further aligns itself with the heart of the institution’s purpose; from the core values and strategic aims through to the delivery of essential services. As research assessment methods move to embrace bibliometrics and other metrics, the need to maximise usage and citation impact will become even more urgent. There is, therefore, a growing case for repositories to be used as part of the research management infrastructure of their parent institutions.’

It should also be emphasised that placing research in an open access repository has been shown to increase the visibility and impact of the work (Hitchcock, 2010; Wagner, 2010). Impact is likely to remain a criterion of research quality.

Until recently the scholarly output that libraries have focussed on capturing has tended to be limited to traditional text-based published works. More recently new publishing paradigms have been emerging, with data – supporting journal articles – as the focus. Repositories have an important role to play in supporting the research life cycle as that support now moves to encompass more than just published research output.

Research accountability

Funding bodies and national governments are seeking an improved return on investment for funded research. In a number of countries accountability is measured among universities by means of a research assessment exercise. The United Kingdom now has its Research Excellence Framework (REF) (www.ref.ac.uk); New Zealand has introduced the Performance-Based Research Fund (PBRF) (http://www.tec. govt.nz/Funding/Fund-finder/Performance-Based-Research-Fund-PBRF-/). The Australian government has implemented a national research evaluation initiative – Excellence in Research for Australia (ERA) (http://arc.gov.au/era) – which is designed to provide benchmarking data for Australian universities in comparison with international measures.

In Australia and New Zealand, research outputs reported as part of these research assessment exercises include:

published scholarly (academic) work such as books, book chapters, journal articles and conference papers

work presented in non-print media such as films, videos and recordings

other types of output, such as products, performance and exhibitions.

Much effort is frequently invested in the administrative processes which gather and submit information about research for these quality assessment exercises. The advantage of using an institutional repository is the ability its situation affords to collect information about research. Institutional repositories also offer a detailed and systematic method of collating bibliographic information about research publications. In Australia the government has stipulated that all research outputs – regardless of format – nominated for peer review as part of ERA must be made accessible by universities and research organisations to designated experts via a repository. Depending upon the university, either the institutional repository has been used to store nominated research content or a different, purpose-built repository has been used.

Another important metric for institutional reputation is university rankings. A university’s research impact – the extent to which its research informs further research and practice – is a significant component of the university league table measures (O’Brien, 2010). Rankings have become important to stakeholders competing to attract the best students, lecturers, and researchers. As noted previously in the discussion on accessibility, placing research in an open access repository can increase the visibility and impact of the work. Given the fact that citations tend to carry a lot of weight in the various international ranking systems, repositories are important for their role in increasing citation impact.

Data sharing

Research is a competitive field, in which one of the keys to success is collaboration focussed on the ability to efficiently find and use quality data which is ready to be assimilated into a project – local, national or international – both in the immediate future and in the long term. The knowledge generated from the so-called ‘data deluge’ is seen as a key to global competitiveness while national prosperity is viewed as underpinned by knowledge innovation (O’Brien, 2010).

Within this context both governments and funding agencies are either mandating or strongly promoting freely available, publicly funded research findings. The policies of funding bodies such as the US National Institutes of Health (NIH), the US National Science Foundation (NSF), the Medical Research Council and the Wellcome Trust in the UK, the European Commission and – in Australia – the Australian Research Council (ARC) and the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) demonstrate the recent change in funding rules based on new research paradigms. In addition, many major research funders worldwide either currently have or are implementing policies that require grant holders to submit data management plans for formal approval and to manage their data in accordance with those plans. The NSF (2010), for example, stipulates that grant proposals must include a data management plan that addresses data sharing as a requirement. Repositories are logical enablers of collaboration inasmuch as they provide open access to quality data.

Learning life cycle

Publications are not the only research content used in coursework. The importance of research data is now coming...

Table of contents

• Cover image
• Title page
• Table of Contents
• Copyright
• List of tables
• List of abbreviations
• Acknowledgements
• Foreword
• About the authors
• Chapter 1: Introduction
• Chapter 2: New content types in repositories
• Chapter 3: Developing and training repository teams
• Chapter 4: Metadata schemas and standards for diverse resources
• Chapter 5: Persistent identifiers for research data and authors
• Chapter 6: Research data: the new gold
• Chapter 7: Exposing and sharing repository content
• Chapter 8: Selecting repository software
• Chapter 9: Repository statistics altmetrics
• Chapter 10: Conclusion
• Bibliography
• Index