2007年以来国外机构存储库研究进展

作为一种重要的开放存取资源,机构存储库的建设与发展对于促进资源共享、缓和学术交流危机具有重要价值.自2007年以来,随着机构存储库建设的深入,国外学者有关机构存储库的研究显得更为具体、细化,研究重点主要集中在与机构存储库密切相关的科研人员存储意愿、存储系统建设、存储建设模式、存储资源的长期保存以及发展评价等方面.注重研究科研人员的存储意愿、关注机构存储库的长期保存以及探究机构存储库的未来发展是此时期国外有关机构存储库研究的突出特点.     

实施机构存储库的需求性分析

机构存储库是大学智力产出的数字收藏库，包括大学里的所有学术性的智力产出。它集聚、保存了大学研究人员生成的知识，并且使这些知识可为他人所获取。本文描述了机构存储库的含义和优势，进而分析了实施机构存储库的需求性。     

机构存储在图书馆中的应用研究

阐述了机构存储的产生背景及机构存储库的涵义。在此基础上对机构存储的提出的意义进行分析,对机构存储的功能特点进行介绍,并介绍了机构存储的实际应用。     

科学数据存储库的发展态势与推进策略

[目的/意义]基于Re3data平台元数据对科学数据存储库的发展态势进行多维度分析和讨论,在分析结果的基础上提出推进策略,为开放科学环境下科学数据存储基础设施的进一步发展提供决策参考。[方法/过程]通过API接口采集Re3data平台2 767条元数据并进行数据清洗和构建数据集,在此基础上对国内外存储库发展从基本情况、存储库管理、存储库服务3个层面进行多维度宏观观测和扫描,并辅以微观层面上相应存储库典型代表的个案描述,从而归纳出当前数据存储库面临的挑战,并提出推进策略。[结果/结论]科学数据存储库总量呈持续增长态势;科学数据存储库内容格式、存储库类型划分更加多样;存储库技术框架、元数据标准、数据服务形式呈现出多元形式并存的局面。这些多样性和多元化的发展态势同时也带来了一定的挑战。需要构建良性循环的数据共享激励生态体系;增强异构数据存储库平台的互操作性能;推动存储库学科层面元数据标准的规范化;加强存储库数据管理人员的培训和指导,以应对多元化态势带来的挑战。     

学术存储库互操作研究——以Pathways原型系统为例

学术存储库是一种特殊的数字图书馆存在形态。以学术存储库互操作作为研究对象,从设计策略、组织架构、核心服务等角度分析了Pathways系统的先进性,指出Path- ways系统的互操作主要是通过提供三种基本支持来实现:支持跨学术存储库数字对象的数据模型,支持通过代理维持数字对象与数据模型的一致性,支持一系列核心服务和接口。学术存储库互操作将向支持Live Clipboard、规定一个读/写服务的最小集、提供溯源信息、生成知识结构树、创建引文链接等方向发展,力求为促进e-plus或e-only环境下的学术存储库建设提供理论借鉴。     

高校图书馆低利用率文献合作存储库研究

高校图书馆馆舍空间匮乏与低利用率文献不断增加的矛盾越来越突出,建立低利用率文献合作存储库势在必行。低利用率文献合作存储库应建立于与参建图书馆距离较近且交通便利的地点,并建立馆藏电子联合目录以支撑储存库的合作运行,建立均衡机制以有效协调合作存储库中各成员馆之间的利益关系。低利用率文献合作存储库各成员馆应制订选择进入低利用率文献合作存储库的文献的标准,确定各成员馆出资比例并委托专业物业托管公司负责低利用率文献合作存储库的日常运作。     

智能型光盘存储库在档案馆的应用

2010年,台州市档案馆率先在全市应用目前较先进的智能型光盘存储库,通过对馆藏光盘的整合编目,依托光盘存储库的管理软件建成光盘档案数据库,对带盒光盘进行智能化管理,实现了光盘的集中保存、便捷管理和快速查询利用.     

研究数据使用统计新标准及其应用案例研究

[目的/意义]介绍Make Data Count与COUNTER联合推出的《研究数据使用统计实施规范》，为数据级别计量提供新指标与新视角。[方法/过程]通过对标准文本的分析，介绍该规范的提出背景、目标、范围、相关概念及核心内容，通过案例剖析Dash、DataONE、Zenodo及其他7个数据存储库对《规范》的应用情况。[结果/结论]研究数据的使用统计具有其独特之处，《规范》的推出可对数据引用及数据替代计量形成补充进而描述完整的科研学术影响力。目前遵循该规范的数据存储库还不多，为推动数据使用计量的应用，需要标准组织、科研人员、机构库及数据存储库、出版商、科研机构及资助机构、图书馆等不同利益相关者在数据产生、管理、传播与利用等环节的相互合作。     

基于文献出版视角的文献代码关联发布现状研究

[目的/意义]代码是研究数据的一种,但不同于文献中用到的研究数据集,文献中涉及的代码的价值还未受到足够的重视,针对代码的相关发布政策和规范也尚未统一和完善。[方法/过程]以计算机科学领域为例,概述代码共享的意义和价值,对相关概念进行辨析并概述本文研究框架,从提交、审核和发布3个环节归纳计算机科学领域权威出版商及旗下期刊和会议对文献代码关联发布的规范政策。从代码发布所依托的预印本、学术合作网络、赛事汇总网站、综合数据存储库及专业代码存储库等不同来源入手,分析文献关联代码的存储状况并进行评价。最后对国内外相关现状进行总结,并对未来文献关联代码发布规范的制定和存储库建设提出建议。[结果/结论]对于文献关联代码资源,目前国际上对文献代码资源的提交、审核和发布等不同环节已经有相当的重视,尤其针对初始的提交环节,多数国际权威出版商都从硬性要求、存储库推荐、代码资源引用等方面进行了规范。在文献代码资源建设上,多数代码资源作为附属研究数据随同文献存储于综合数据存储库、赛事汇总网站等存储库中,以文献代码为中心的专业文献代码存储网站也随着重视程度的增加在逐步建立。国内对文献代码资源的重视程度不足,在文献代码资源的建设上仍处于初期,仅有极少数期刊会对文献代码资源的提交进行规定,在资源存储上也少有尝试。针对目前文献代码资源建设的不足,本文从完善文献代码资源提交至发布全流程规定、统一代码存储库推荐、挖掘文献代码资源更多适用功能和场景等方面提出相关建议。     

国内外学术期刊出版数据政策研究

科学的发现依赖于可靠的研究数据,期刊数据政策的制定对科学研究可重复性的提高有重要的促进作用.本研究采用网络调研的方式对国际和国内学术出版机构与部分高质量期刊的数据政策进行调研,从数据提交、数据评审、数据开放与存储、数据保护四个方面归纳,得出相关结论:国际大型出版机构积极鼓励作者提交数据,少数顶尖期刊要求必须提交数据,并且严格把控数据的质量和可用性,积极倡导作者共享数据,特别是鼓励使用公共存储库;国际期刊严格遵守相关法律和行业准则,但数据版权归属问题仍有待规范;国内期刊数据政策发展刚刚起步,相关要求与说明还不成体系.     

高校图书馆在机构知识库建设中的作用

介绍了机构知识库的发展概况。阐述了高校图书馆在建设机构知识库中的优势,对高等院校图书馆在机构知识库的建设中的作用及建设过程中遇到的问题进行了探讨,提出了对高校图书馆建设机构知识库的设想。     

Motivations of Faculty Self-archiving in Institutional Repositories

Professors contribute to Institutional Repositories (IRs) to make their materials widely accessible in keeping with the benefits of Open Access. However, universities' commitment to IRs depends on building trust with faculty and solving copyright concerns. Digital preservation and copyright management in IRs should be strengthened to increase faculty participation.     

IR:现状、体系结构与发展趋势

简要介绍了IR的概念和现状,在此基础上对IR的体系框架、功能及主要技术进行详细的论述,最后分析了IR的发展趋势。     

基于资源目录网站的机构库分布研究

文章通过对机构库资源目录网站的统计分析,获得了机构库分布情况的信息,并对机构库资源目录网站所实现功能进行了研究.     

世界机构知识库网络计量学排名影响因素研究

基于最新的西班牙网络计量学实验室推出的世界机构知识库排名数据,利用相关分析原理及SPSS19分析了世界机构知识库排名的评价指标对排名的影响.研究结果显示能见度、学术论文数与世界排名相关性比较强,而网站规模、丰富文件数与世界排名呈现弱相关.依据分析结果,对我国大陆地区的机构知识库建设提出了有益建议.     

机构仓储的前景预测

简要介绍机构仓储的概念及相关软件的应用比例。在分析机构仓储的研究现状及应用的基础上,采用图论、完全信息博弈原理和KMRW定理等运筹学理论的综合分析方法,对研究人员运用机构仓储获取知识的总体效益成本、信息化条件下科研机构之间通过机构仓储相互学习的均衡区间和机构仓储为其科研机构带来声望等方面进行综合分析,指出机构仓储具有良好的发展前景,并论证创建机构仓储的重要意义。     

Assessing Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use of Institutional Repositories by Lecturers in Nigerian Universities

Abstract

Institutional repositories (IRs) present platform to disseminate research findings to complement the traditional scholarly communication model. The use of IRs is beneficial to authors, host institutions, libraries and society at large. Despite the numerous benefits of IRs, there is low deposit of scholarly works by lecturers and the investment on IRs seems to be a waste. This study examined determinants of perceived ease of use (PEOU) of IRs by lecturers in Nigerian universities. A survey of lecturers received 857 respondents. Awareness, anchor and adjustment factors were found to be determinants of PEOU of Institutional repositories by lecturers in Nigerian Universities.     

Institutional Repositories: Benefits and incentives

The Information Age is characterized by new ways of information generation, managing, and dissemination because of the use of information and communication technology (ICT) (Moahi, 2003; Paul, 2007). Institutional Repositories (IRs) play a fundamental role in centralizing, preserving, and making accessible institution's intellectual capital and, at the same time, they form part of a global system of distributed and interoperable repositories that provide the foundation for a new disaggregated model of scholarly publishing (Johnson, 2002; Nagahban, 2010). A study of nine libraries in the National Capital Region of India was conducted to: identify benefits of IRs, learn the satisfaction level of users with respect to IR facilities, identify the incentives for publication in IRs, and identify the appropriate policies to be adopted by institutions for implementing IRs. The results of the responses from the 496 respondents indicate that: 1) Most Faculty members and Research scholars in this study indicated that they do not publish their research in IRs. 2) Opinions about benefits of IRs are user-specific. For instance, a substantially large percentage of those Faculty members and Research scholars in the study who do use IRs are Most satisfied with potential benefits of IR while a relatively higher percentage of Students fall in the Satisfied category. 3) The benefits of IRs ranked most highly, although this varied by the different user groups was wider readership. Students ranked this and "quality aspect" – the opportunity to improve the quality of one's work through the provision of feedback from other researchers. 4) A serious concern about publishing in IRs is the potential for plagiarism and overall lower control over one's work. A second concern is the potential loss of content in IRs, which are often not archived as well as scholarly journals are. The findings suggest that institutions need to give due attention to policies related to two aspects of publication, especially those related to quality and copyright issues and to the academic value of research output. Other policy-related topics include citation in other publication with due acknowledgement, inclusion in indexing systems for retrieval, interoperability with other IRs, and Permanent storage.     

Institutional Repositories: Benefits and incentives

The Information Age is characterized by new ways of information generation, managing, and dissemination because of the use of information and communication technology (ICT) (Moahi, 2003; Paul, 2007). Institutional Repositories (IRs) play a fundamental role in centralizing, preserving, and making accessible institution's intellectual capital and, at the same time, they form part of a global system of distributed and interoperable repositories that provide the foundation for a new disaggregated model of scholarly publishing (Johnson, 2002; Nagahban, 2010). A study of nine libraries in the National Capital Region of India was conducted to: identify benefits of IRs, learn the satisfaction level of users with respect to IR facilities, identify the incentives for publication in IRs, and identify the appropriate policies to be adopted by institutions for implementing IRs. The results of the responses from the 496 respondents indicate that: 1) Most Faculty members and Research scholars in this study indicated that they do not publish their research in IRs. 2) Opinions about benefits of IRs are user-specific. For instance, a substantially large percentage of those Faculty members and Research scholars in the study who do use IRs are Most satisfied with potential benefits of IR while a relatively higher percentage of Students fall in the Satisfied category. 3) The benefits of IRs ranked most highly, although this varied by the different user groups was wider readership. Students ranked this and "quality aspect" – the opportunity to improve the quality of one's work through the provision of feedback from other researchers. 4) A serious concern about publishing in IRs is the potential for plagiarism and overall lower control over one's work. A second concern is the potential loss of content in IRs, which are often not archived as well as scholarly journals are. The findings suggest that institutions need to give due attention to policies related to two aspects of publication, especially those related to quality and copyright issues and to the academic value of research output. Other policy-related topics include citation in other publication with due acknowledgement, inclusion in indexing systems for retrieval, interoperability with other IRs, and Permanent storage.     

国际学术出版开放式访问(OA):Ⅰ.实践与前沿问题研究进展

综述当前国际学术出版界开放式访问(Open Access,OA)运动实践和理论研究的部分热点问题.主要讨论OA期刊和OA知识库的概念、实施方式,提高OA文献的可见性和可获取性的若干措施,OA带来的学术文献引用影响力的提高和一些发展趋势.