Repositories and P bli h Publishers Andrew Wray Group Publisher, - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

repositories and p bli h publishers
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Repositories and P bli h Publishers Andrew Wray Group Publisher, - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Repositories and P bli h Publishers Andrew Wray Group Publisher, IOP Publishing p , g OAI-5 Conference, CERN 19 April 2007 andrew.wray@iop.org, www.iop.org Outline Out e IOP journals and arXiv IOP journals and arXiv 1 1. Future


slide-1
SLIDE 1

Repositories and P bli h Publishers

Andrew Wray Group Publisher, IOP Publishing p , g OAI-5 Conference, CERN 19 April 2007

andrew.wray@iop.org, www.iop.org

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Outline Out e

1

IOP journals and arXiv

1.

IOP journals and arXiv

2

Future impact of repositories on journals

2.

Future impact of repositories on journals

3

How publishers and repositories might

3.

How publishers and repositories might respond

slide-3
SLIDE 3

arXiv.org a

  • g
slide-4
SLIDE 4

arXiv in relation to physics journals a e at o to p ys cs jou a s

arXiv

First 15 years: 410,000

items Journals

500 peer reviewed

h i j l items

50,000 new items in 2006 Physics is largest section

physics journals

130,000 articles per

year

Rapid growth in Maths More than journal articles Summer school lectures Growth rate: 4% pa Summer school lectures Conference papers Updates and errata Author versions long

after of publication: Einstein, physics/0510251

slide-5
SLIDE 5

arXiv in relation to physics journals a e at o to p ys cs jou a s

High energy physics and astrophysics Almost 100% of journal articles have an author’s Almost 100% of journal articles have an author s

version on arXiv

Authors are orderly about using arXiv

y g

Update with their latest version Reference the journal version

Condensed matter physics – growing, but less orderly Applied physics – little coverage at present

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Working with Repositories - IOP Policies

  • g

t epos to es O

  • c es

Authors may deposit their own versions

  • f articles at any time (“Romeo Green”)

y ( )

Submission using arXiv e-print number Invite every author to update e-print

y p p records with journal reference

References link to e-prints and journals

Campo D and Parentani R 2005 Braz. J. Phys. 35

1074 (Preprint astro-ph/0510445) CrossRef Link | Preprint at arXiv org | Inspec Abstract Preprint at arXiv.org | Inspec Abstract

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Impact on Submissions, Citations, Subscriptions pact o Sub ss o s, C tat o s, Subsc pt o s

Submissions / published articles

No apparent pattern

pp p

Citation performance / impact factor

p p

No apparent pattern

Subscriptions / licences

No apparent pattern

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Electronic Licences and Print Subscribers ect o c ce ces a d t Subsc be s

E-only licences vs Print Subscriptions

50000 60000 /subs 20000 30000 40000 licences/ Print subs All E-only licences 10000 20000 6 7 8 9 2 3 4 5

  • No. of l

1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Year

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Impact on Readership pact o eade s p

Variation not fully explained by quality,

community size or culture y

Downloads per published article

Top: Nanotechnology, Jnl of Micromechanics and

Microengineering, Physical Biology

Middle: J Phys D: Applied Physics Measurement Sci Middle: J Phys D: Applied Physics, Measurement Sci

& Tech, Superconductor Sci & Tech

Lowest: JHEP, JCAP, Classical & Quantum Gravity

R ti f T Middl L t 10 5 1

Ratio of Top: Middle: Lowest = 10 : 5 : 1

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Scatter Plot of 2006 Downloads per Article vs. Percentage of Articles in arXiv

350 400 300

Correlation = -0.44

250

006

150 200

er Article 20

100

wnloads pe

50

Dow

0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%

Percentage in arXiv.org

slide-11
SLIDE 11
  • 2. Future impact of repositories

utu e pact o epos to es

Fraction of physics on arXiv will grow Usage at journal websites may decline?

g j y

Librarians making more use of usage

statistics (e.g. COUNTER)

Publishers concerned about unfunded

mandates mandates

i.e. mandated self-archiving without funds

for OA journal publication j p

“Open access – clear benefits, hidden costs”, Rick

Anderson, Univ Nevada, Learned Publishing, 20: 83-84 (2007)

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Future impact of repositories utu e pact o epos to es

“ALPSP Survey of Librarians on Factors

in Journal Cancellation”, Mark Ware, , , ALPSP 2006

Librarians do not see repositories as a

substitute for journals, right now

But, 81% see the availability of repositories

as an important factor in cancellations in the next 5 years

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Future impact of repositories utu e pact o epos to es

“Self-archiving and Journal Subscriptions: Co-

existence or Competition?”, C Beckett & S Inger, P bli hi R h C ti 2006 Publishing Research Consortium 2006

Librarians showed an insignificant shift in preference

between any version of an article once it has been refereed y

38% believe publishers should not worry about libraries

lli b i ti b f OA it i cancelling subscriptions because of OA repositories

38% think publishers should worry 40% believe libraries are wasting money buying journals

when almost the same content is available free

41% disagree

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Future impact of repositories utu e pact o epos to es

Why will libraries continue to subscribe? Repository version is variable, whilst

p y , journals hold a static version of record

Journals add features, e.g. linking High impact factor Low price per page, article, citation

A f it i i l

Awareness of repositories is low Momentum and habit Most journals are in packages Most journals are in packages Support peer review Society or community journals fare better Society or community journals fare better

slide-15
SLIDE 15
  • 3. IOP Responses to Repositories and OA

3 O espo ses to epos to es a d O

Authors may self-archive IOP links to arXiv IOP links to arXiv Improving IOP’s publishing services: Strengthen the quality of peer review Strengthen the quality of peer review Improve indexing and linking Add multimedia data citation tracking Add multimedia, data, citation tracking Add reader services e.g. Editors’

highlights, community news highlights, community news

Engage in long-term archiving e.g.

LOCKS

slide-16
SLIDE 16

IOP Responses to Repositories and OA O espo ses to epos to es a d O

This Month’s papers free Editors’ Highlights & Featured Articles Access to developing countries (eIFL, INASP) Three pure OA titles

N J l f Ph i 1998

New Journal of Physics, 1998 Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2004 Environmental Research Letters 2006 Environmental Research Letters, 2006 Three hybrid OA titles Journal of Physics G: Nuclear & Particle JHEP (published on behalf of SISSA) JINST (co-published with SISSA)

44% f d l d t f t t

44% of downloads are to free content

slide-17
SLIDE 17

Eprintweb p t eb

Institute of Physics is a scientific

membership organisation devoted to p g increasing the understanding and application of physics

Supporting physics and physicists Supporting scientific communication Supporting peer review and ‘journals’

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Correlation = -0.44

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Eprintweb p t eb

New search and browse interface Browsable by author

y

RSS feeds March 2007 76,000 unique visitors 306,000 page views (excl. full text) Added DOI links from arXiv to journals 200,000 articles linked

7 800 000 f li k d

7,800,000 references linked Citations from other preprints and IOP

articles articles

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Correlation = -0.44

slide-21
SLIDE 21
slide-22
SLIDE 22
slide-23
SLIDE 23

Repositories and publishers epos to es a d pub s e s

Recognising complementary strengths ArXiv provides a highly valued service ArXiv provides a highly valued service Physicists value journal prestige Journals add Journals add

peer review & quality standards editing & formatting, standards of trust & accuracy, indexing & linking, archiving, filtering & community building

Both journals and arXiv continue to grow Both journals and arXiv continue to grow

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Repositories and publishers epos to es a d pub s e s

How to work together? Interoperability e g citation links Interoperability, e.g. citation links Version naming conventions e.g. NISO Linking papers to data multimedia theses Linking papers to data, multimedia, theses Adding peer review, trust, quality filters Institutions support good value journals Institutions support good value journals Publishers improve journal value Tiered pricing and better ‘big deals’ Tiered pricing and better big deals Building sustainable funding models Sharing understanding of costs Sharing understanding of costs

slide-25
SLIDE 25

Conclusion Co c us o

arXiv has impacted on the readership of arXiv has impacted on the readership of

IOP journals at the IOP website

Librarians are likely to cancel

subscriptions if repositories are comprehensive

Publishers & repositories can work

together to strengthen peer review and d l j l good value journals