This dissertation addresses a specific aspect of the broad area of communication systems used among researchers. This research has undertaken to establish a broader view of the communication practices of scholars to understand the motivations behind their publication choices. Open access offers a solution to issues with the scholarly publication system such as delays in publication and restricted visibility of research due to high subscription costs. The principle of open access is to enable maximum access to findings from publicly funded research to maximise social returns on public investments. Despite the apparent benefits of open access, the uptake has been limited. ¶ This thesis research takes a holistic view of the researcher as a communicator to uncover the reasons why researchers are making the publishing decisions they are. In-depth interviews were conducted with 43 researchers in three disciplines at two institutions, the Australian National University and the University of New South Wales. The disciplines, Chemistry, Sociology and Computer Science, were known to have different publication practices, The questions asked about all aspects of researcher communication including researching, authoring, informal communication, article submission, refereeing, mentoring and data storage. ¶ The findings show that traditional arguments for open access are ineffective. The Reward function of scholarly publishing is central to managing academic careers and supports traditional publishing systems. While having work openly accessible increases an academic’s exposure and possibly therefore their citation counts, unless alternative internet-based forms of metrics are adopted, the open access option will not directly appeal to researchers. ¶ Information-seeking behaviour demonstrates how disciplinary differences affect researcher’s interaction with technology. The disciplines showed marked differences in almost all the areas explored, and the behavioural norms expressed in each discipline have direct bearing on the likelihood of members of that discipline embracing open access. The ‘institutional/disciplinary divide’ means that researchers must publish in ways that run counter to their disciplinary norms in order to satisfy institutional and grant funding requirements. ¶ Until governments, and particularly university administrations, recognise the need to consider the discipline and the need to consider the individual and respond to these needs, and until there is a realisation that different disciplines may require radically different approaches, there will not be a large-scale adoption by individual researchers of the current open access tools. Either institutional repositories need to adapt dramatically to offer work practice benefits or the broader academic population will only use institutional repositories under duress, which is not the situation envisaged by open access advocates. The alternative is for communities to develop their own subject-based repositories, a development that again is likely to be highly dependent on communication norms in different disciplines.

This presentation was one of several presentations delivered at the First International Open Access Day event held on October 14, 2008 at UBC. In support of the open access movement, the UBC Library joined with SPARC, PLoS (Public Library of Science), and Students for FreeCulture along with 65 other institutions in celebration of this worldwide event.

This presentation was one of several presentations delivered at the First International Open Access Day event held on October 14, 2008 at UBC. In support of the open access movement, the UBC Library joined with SPARC, PLoS (Public Library of Science), and Students for FreeCulture along with 65 other institutions in celebration of this worldwide event.

This presentation was one of several presentations delivered at the First International Open Access Day event held on October 14, 2008 at UBC. In support of the open access movement, the UBC Library joined with SPARC, PLoS (Public Library of Science), and Students for FreeCulture along with 65 other institutions in celebration of this worldwide event.

This presentation was one of several presentations delivered at the First International Open Access Day event held on October 14, 2008 at UBC. In support of the open access movement, the UBC Library joined with SPARC, PLoS (Public Library of Science), and Students for FreeCulture along with 65 other institutions in celebration of this worldwide event.

This research explores the annotation and note-taking practices of graduate students and reports on the sets of activities, habits, objects, tools and methods that define the practice. In particular, this empirical study focuses on understanding the integration of annotation practices within larger scholarly processes. This study therefore aims to describe and analyze annotation not only as material externalities of the research process, but also as crucial epistemic practices allowing students to progress from one research activity to the other. Interviews are supplemented by document collection and analyzed using a multi-perspectival framework. The findings describe an annotation lifecycle and suggest a new model of the scholarly process using annotation practices as units of analysis. The study further discusses annotation as a primitive epistemic practice and examines the productive tensions fostering the student’s progress towards her goals. This research finally proposes requirements for future tools supporting scholarly practice.

This research explores the annotation and note-taking practices of graduate students and reports on the sets of activities, habits, objects, tools and methods that define the practice. In particular, this empirical study focuses on understanding the integration of annotation practices within larger scholarly processes. This study therefore aims to describe and analyze annotation not only as material externalities of the research process, but also as crucial epistemic practices allowing students to progress from one research activity to the other. Interviews are supplemented by document collection and analyzed using a multi-perspectival framework. The findings describe an annotation lifecycle and suggest a new model of the scholarly process using annotation practices as units of analysis. The study further discusses annotation as a primitive epistemic practice and examines the productive tensions fostering the student’s progress towards her goals. This research finally proposes requirements for future tools supporting scholarly practice.

Based on informal discussions with a range of scholars across the African continent, it was felt that there was a need for a scholarly publisher located in Africa, focusing on African content, and targeting an African audience. It had also been expressed by a number of researchers, and was of wider potential interest – given the author’s institutional situation and context at the time, as well as management imperatives – that the Africa Institute of South Africa (AISA) could use its existing capacity and strengths in the area of African studies, specifically from a social science and development perspective, and its networks on the African continent, to form a possible institutional base for such a press, through the expansion of its publishing division. But there was no certainty as to whether this was in fact a viable business idea. Thus, this study carries out a feasibility study, to investigate and evaluate whether a scholarly press focusing on African material would be viable in the current South African, continental and international context. The study takes the form of a literature survey, questionnaire-based empirical survey, and business planning exercise. The key research question that is investigated is: Given the limitations of and challenges currently facing the South African (and wider African) scholarly publishing industry, could a scholarly publisher working according to the above vision be viably set up, and how could this be achieved? Broad support is found for the notion of a new scholarly publisher, and a business plan is developed to show how such a press could be set up, working within certain constraints and assumptions. / Dissertation (MIS)--University of Pretoria, 2007. / Information Science / MIS / Unrestricted

No description available.

This presentation by the Director of the ARL Office of Scholarly Communication was given at the UBC Library on March 5, 2009, as part of the BC Research Libraries Group Lecture Series. The topic was a field study that she initiated involving the investigation of a range of new models of scholarly publishing and communication valued by scholars. There was a particular focus on works that push the boundaries of traditional formats and are considered innovative by the faculty who use them. The findings were published in November 2008 and titled: Current Models of Digital Scholarly Communication - Results of an Investigation Conducted by Ithaka for the Association of Research Libraries and can be found at http://www.arl.org/bm~doc/current-models-report.pdf.