Anna Maria Tammaro Pietro Gozetti Academic staff expectations on DSpace services: results of a survey at the University of Parma's Art and Humanities Faculty DSpace Federation 2nd User Group meeting, 7th July 2005

Outline and its developing phases Aims, context and methodology of the survey in the Arts and Humanities Faculty Results of the survey Conclusions and recommendations

Project started in November 2003, financed and organized by Commission for University of Parma Libraries. Two phases: 1. Pilot phase (November June 2004) developing the repository in the first few communities; 2. Developing phase (from July 2004) expanding the repository to the whole Faculty. Future: network of italian OAI based repositories.

The survey objectives Knowledge, inclination and disponibility towards e-publication by humanistic academic authors; Academic authors’ preferential channels for disseminating their e-publications; Behaviour and sensitiveness about preservation, copyright, peer-review and open access; Perception, attitudes and use of open access repositories in a humanistic area; Conditions to make authors participate to DSpace; Kinds of materials more suitable for being included in DSpace; Academic authors’ disponibility towards self-archiving.

Context and methodology Ten departments in the Arts and Humanities Faculty (125 professors and researchers) Questionnaire available for filling for 23 days (22nd March – 14th April 2004) Questionnaire sended through mail and Response rate has been 52,8% Quantitative data gathered were related to two variables (reference department and qualification).

Questionnaire structure 3 questions related to variables (department, qualification and course held by respondents) 5 questions related to objectives: 1. Use of e-publishing; 2. Preferences about online publishing places; 3. Attitude towards particular conditions of use; 4. Preferences as regards kinds of resources to be included in DSpace; 5. Disponibility to self-archiving.

Relationship authors/e-publication 35% have made available on the web their research or learning materials 32% of them are researchers 20% of them are related to the Cultural Heritage Department 65% have never published online 39% of them are researchers as well 17% of them are related to the History Department

Where authors prefer to publish online Department site 36,8% Personal site 18,4% Disciplinary electronic archives 15,8% (mostly Department of Philosophy) Open access e-journals 15,8% (mostly researchers with 25%) Other 7,9% Open access conferences 5,3%

Conditions to partecipate to Dspace 1 Protection from alteration 83,3% Protection from plagiarism 75,7% (especially researchers with 91,6%) Possibility to continue publishing on traditional supports 74,2% (especially ordinary professors with 72,2% and Department of Cultural Heritage with 22,5%) Access restriction to particular users 33,3%

Conditions to partecipate to Dspace 2 Permanent preservation 27,2% (especially Departments of Psicology and Foreign Languages and Literature with 26,5%) No evaluation through peer-review 13,6% Evaluation through peer-review 7,6% Other 6% No conditions 3 %

Kinds of materials Articles 83,3% Courses programmes 77,3% Learning materials 72,7% Lecture notes 40,9% Books 34,8% Books’ chapters 34,8% Datasets 34,8% Images 34,8% Pre-print 33,3% Theses 28,8% Presentations 27,3% Maps 18,2% Working papers 15,2% Software 9,1% Technical reports 7,6% 3D Images 6% Oral recordings 6% Printed music 4,5% Sound recordings 4,5% Video 4,5% Music recordings 3%

Non textual materials History and Cultural Heritage departments ask for images (81,8% and 66,7%) Department of History asks for maps (72,2%)

Attitude to self-archiving 63% is favourable (especially researchers with 70,8% and Cultural Heritage Department with 77,8%) 32% is unfavourable (especially Geographic Sciences Department with 66,6%) 5% didn’t respond Authors feel unable to manage self-archiving under a technical point of view

Conclusions Academic authors are favourable to publish online but only a third of them do it already; Academic authors’ preferential channels for disseminating their e-publications are “near” sites, as department site: they seem to consider Dspace as a learning tool rather than a way for disseminating their research results (as demonstrates poor consideration of peer-review and preservation); Academic authors fear plagiarism and alteration for their works on DSpace; They are mostly for totally open access; Academic authors generally don’t consider non-textual kinds of materials, which are useful for learning; Academic authors’ disponibility towards self-archiving is excellent, but conditioned by training.