Login | Register

The Critical Role of Institutional Services in Open Access Advocacy


The Critical Role of Institutional Services in Open Access Advocacy

Neugebauer, Tomasz ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9743-5910 and Murray, Annie (2013) The Critical Role of Institutional Services in Open Access Advocacy. International Journal of Digital Curation, 8 (1). pp. 84-106. ISSN 1746-8256

[thumbnail of Publisher Version]
Text (Publisher Version) (application/pdf)

Official URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.2218/ijdc.v8i1.238


This paper examines the development of the Open Access movement in scholarly communication, with particular attention to some of the rhetorical strategies and policy mechanisms used to promote it to scholars and scientists. Despite the majority of journal publishers’ acceptance of author self-archiving practices, and the minimal time commitment required by authors to successfully self-archive their work in disciplinary or institutional repositories, the majority of authors still by and large avoid participation. The paper reviews the strategies and arguments used for increasing author participation in open access, including the role of open access mandates. We recommend a service-oriented approach towards increasing participation in open access, rather than rhetoric that speculates on the benefits that open access will have on text/data mining innovation. In advocating for open access participation, we recommend focusing on its most universal and tangible purpose: increasing public open (gratis) access to the published results of publicly funded research. Researchers require strong institutional support to understand the copyright climate of open access self-archiving, user-friendly interfaces and useful metrics, such as repository usage statistics. We recommend that mandates and well-crafted and responsive author support services at universities will ultimately be required to ensure the growth of open access. We describe the mediated deposit service that was developed to support author self-archiving in Spectrum: Concordia University Research Repository. By comparing the number of deposits of non-thesis materials (e.g. articles and conference presentations) that were accomplished through the staff-mediated deposit service to the number of deposits that were author-initiated, we demonstrate the relative significance of this service to the growth of the repository.

Divisions:Concordia University > Library
Item Type:Article
Authors:Neugebauer, Tomasz and Murray, Annie
Journal or Publication:International Journal of Digital Curation
Digital Object Identifier (DOI):10.2218/ijdc.v8i1.238
Keywords:open access, scholarly communication
ID Code:983116
Deposited By: Tomasz Neugebauer
Deposited On:15 Oct 2017 16:14
Last Modified:18 Jan 2018 17:56


Ayris, P. (2011). Conference report: OAI7 – Raising the bar for current developments in scholarly communication, a personal view. LIBER Quarterly: The Journal of the Association of European Research Libraries 21(1). Retrieved from http://liber.library.uu.nl/index.php/lq/article/view/8013/8356

Beasley, G. (2011). The senate resolution on open access at Concordia University. Feliciter 57(3), 101-102.

Bergman, C. (2012). Why are there so few efforts to text mine the open access subset of PubMed Central? Retrieved from

Bjork, B.C., Roosr, A. & Lauri, M. (2008). Global annual volume of peer reviewed scholarly articles and the share available via different open access options. Proceedings of the International Conference on Electronic Publishing, 12, 178-186. Retrieved from http://elpub.scix.net/cgi-bin/works/Show?178_elpub2008

Brinn, T., Jones, M. J. & Pendlebury, M. (2000). Measuring research quality: Peer
review 1, citation indices 0. Omega, 28(2), 237-239. doi:10.1016/S0305-0483(99)00048-1

Brody, T., Harnad, S. & Carr, L. (2006). Earlier web usage statistics as predictors of later citation impact. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 57(8), 1060-1072. doi:10.1002/asi.20373

Budapest Open Access Initiative. (2012). Ten years on from the Budapest Open Access Initiative: Setting the default to open. Retrieved from

Bunge, M. (2004). Clarifying some misunderstandings about social systems and their mechanisms. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 34(3), 371-381. doi:10.1177/0048393104266860

Bunge, M. (2003). Emergence and convergence: Qualitative novelty and the unity of knowledge. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Bunge, M. (1998). Social science under debate: A philosophical perspective. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
Concordia University. (2010). Concordia University senate resolution on open access. Retrieved from http://library.concordia.ca/research/openaccess/SenateResolutiononOpenAccess.pdf

Davis, P.M. (2011). Open access, readership, citations: A randomized controlled trial
of scientific journal publishing. The FASEB Journal. doi:10.1096/fj.11-183988

Davis, P.M. (2010). Does open access lead to increased readership and citations? A randomized controlled trial of articles published in APS journals. The Physiologist, 53(6), 197, 200-1.

Davis, P.M. (2009). Open access: Increased citations not guaranteed. Science, 325(5938), 266. doi:10.1126/science.325_266a

Foster, N.F. & Gibbons, S. (2005). Understanding faculty to improve content recruitment for institutional repositories. D-Lib Magazine, 11(1), 1-1.

Fry, J., Oppenheim, C., Probets, S., Creaser, C., Greenwood, H., Spezi, V. & White, S. (2009). PEER behavioural research: Authors and users vis-à-vis journals and repositories. LISU: Loughborough University. Retrieved from http://www.peerproject.eu/fileadmin/media/reports/Final_revision_-_behavioural_baseline_report_-_20_01_10.pdf

Gargouri, Y., Hajjem, C., Larivière, V., Gingras, Y., Carr, L., Brody, T. & Harnad, S. (2010). Self-selected or mandated, open access increases citation impact for higher quality research. PLoS ONE, 5(10), 1-12. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0013636

Gentil-Beccot, A., Mele, S., & Brooks, T. (2010). Citing and reading behaviours in high-energy physics. Scientometrics, 84(2), 345-355. doi:10.1007/s11192-009-0111-1

Nature. (2012). Gold in the text? Nature 483(7388). doi: 10.1038/483124a

Guedon, J. (2003). Open access archives: From scientific plutocracy to the republic of science. IFLA Journal, 29(2), 129-140. doi:10.1177/034003520302900204

Harnad, S. (2000). The invisible hand of peer review. Exploit Interactive 5. Retrieved from http://www.exploit-lib.org/issue5/peer-review/

Harnad, S., Brody, T., Vallières, F., Carr, L., Hitchcock, S., Gingras, Y. & Hilf, E.R. (2004). The access/impact problem and the green and gold roads to open access. Serials Review, 30(4), 310-314. doi:10.1016/j.serrev.2004.09.013

Harnad, S. (2008). Institutional repositories vs subject/central repositories - open access archivangelism. Retrieved from http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/414-guid.html

Harnad, S. & McGovern, N. (2009). Topic 4: Institutional repository success is dependent upon mandates. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Technology and Science 35, 27–31. doi:10.1002/bult.2009.1720350410

Harnad, S. (2010.) Gold open access publishing must not be allowed to retard the progress of green open access self-archiving. Logos: The Journal of the World Book Community (21)3-4, 86-93. doi:10.1163/095796511X559972

Harnad, S. (2011). Open access to research: Changing researcher behavior through university and funder mandates. JEDEM Journal of Democracy and Open Government 3(1), 33-41.

IEEE. (2011.) Peer review notice. CS Digital library. Retrieved from http://www.computer.org/portal/web/csdl/peerreview

Kennan, M.A. (2011). Learning to share: Mandates and open access. Library Management, 32(4), 302-318. doi:10.1108/01435121111132301
Kim, J. (2010). Faculty self-archiving: Motivations and barriers. Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology, 61(9), 1909-1922. doi:10.1002/asi.21336

Lawrence, S. (2001). Free online availability substantially increases a paper's impact. Nature, 411(6837), 521-521. doi:10.1038/35079151

Linde, P. (2010). Beyond OA-policy. ScieComInfo: Nordic-Baltic Forum for Scientific Communication 6(2). Retrieved from http://www.sciecom.org/ojs/index.php/sciecominfo/article/view/3623

Lynch, C.A. (2003). Institutional repositories: Essential infrastructure for scholarship in the digital age. ARL, 226. Retrieved from

McDonald, D. & Kelly, U. (2012). The value and benefits of text mining. London:
Jisc. Retrieved from http://www.jisc.ac.uk/publications/reports/2012/value-and-benefits-of-text-mining.aspx

Morris, S. & Thorn, S. (2009). Learned society members and open access. Learned Publishing, 22(3), 221-239. doi:10.1087/2009308

Murray-Rust, P. (2012). Towards a manifesto on open mining of scholarship. Retrieved from http://blogs.ch.cam.ac.uk/pmr/2012/05/01/towards-a-manifesto-on-open-mining-of-scholarship/

Open Citation Project. (2012). The effect of open access and downloads (‘hits’) on citation impact: A bibliography of studies. Retrieved from

Open Access Directory. (2011). Declarations in support of OA. Retrieved from http://oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/Declarations_in_support_of_OA

Open Access Directory. (2011). Statements by learned societies and professional associations. Retrieved from http://oad.simmons.edu/oadwiki/Statements_by_learned_societies_and_professional_associations

RCUK Administrator. (2012). The benefits of Open Access. Retrieved from http://blogs.rcuk.ac.uk/2012/08/10/the-benefits-of-open-access/

Sale, A. (2006). The acquisition of open access research articles. First Monday, 11(10).

Sale, A. (2006). Comparison of content policies for institutional repositories in Australia. First Monday, 11(4).

Schonfeld, R.C. & Housewright, R. (2010). Faculty survey 2009: Key strategic insights for libraries, publishers, and society. Ithaka S+R. Retrieved from http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/communia2010/sites/communia2010/images/Faculty_Study_2009.pdf

Seglen, P.O. (1997). Citations and journal impact factors: Questionable indicators of research quality. Allergy, 52(11), 1050-1056. doi:10.1111/j.1398-9995.1997.tb00175.x

Sieber, J.E. (2006). Quality and value: How can we research peer review? Nature, doi:10.1038/nature05006

OED Online. (2012). Spontaneous. Oxford University Press. Retrieved from

Suber, P. (2010.) Thoughts on prestige, quality, and open access. Logos: The Journal of the World Book Community 21(1-2), 115-128. doi:

Suber, P. (2011). Knowledge as a public good. Retrieved from http://www.arl.org/sparc/publications/articles/knowledge-public-good.shtml

Swan, A. & Brown, S. (2005). Open access self-archiving: An author study. Truro, England: Key Perspectives. Retrieved from

Swan, A. (2010). The open access citation advantage: Studies and results to date. Retrieved from http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/18516/

van Rooyen, S., Godlee, F., Evans, S., Smith, R. & Black, N. (1998). Effect of blinding and unmasking on the quality of peer review. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association, 280(3), 234-237. doi:10.1001/jama.280.3.234

Wagner, A.B. (2010). Open access citation advantage: An annotated bibliography. Issues in Science & Technology Librarianship, 60, 2-2. doi:10.5062/F4Q81B0W

Ware, M. (2008). Peer review: Benefits, perceptions and alternatives. Summary Paper 4. London: Publishing Research Consortium. Retrieved from

Willinsky, J. (2010.) Open access and academic reputation. Annals of Library and Information Studies 57 (3), 296-302. Retrieved from http://nopr.niscair.res.in/handle/123456789/10242

Xia, J. (2011). An anthropological emic-etic perspective on open access practices. Journal of Documentation, 67(1), 75-94. doi:10.1108/00220411111105461
All items in Spectrum are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved. The use of items is governed by Spectrum's terms of access.

Repository Staff Only: item control page

Downloads per month over past year

Research related to the current document (at the CORE website)
- Research related to the current document (at the CORE website)
Back to top Back to top