1. UCL LIBRARY SERVICES Repository Interface for Overlaid Journal Archives (RIOJA) Panayiota Polydoratou e-mail: lib-rioja@ucl.ac.uk

2. UCL LIBRARY SERVICES Outline of the presentation  RIOJA – background information  Overlay journal model  RIOJA aims and methods  Some outcomes (community surveys)  Observations and further work

3. UCL LIBRARY SERVICES  RIOJA - Repository Interface for Overlaid Journal Archives (http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ls/rioja)  Funded by the JISC - Joint Information Systems Committee (http://www.jisc.ac.uk) under the Repositories and Preservation Programme  A 16 months partnership – July 2008  Researchers from UCL, Cambridge, Glasgow and Imperial  UCL Library Services  Technical staff from Cornell University  Astrophysics and Cosmology our subject domain RIOJA – project’s information

4. UCL LIBRARY SERVICES RIOJA – the context  Impetus came from academic staff and researchers in Astrophysics and Cosmology  Perceptions:  arXiv subject repository is highly important  journals are little-used  and why do subscriptions cost so much?  adding a quality stamp to arXiv deposits would cut out the need for formal publication in journals

5. UCL LIBRARY SERVICES Overlay journal model – a definition  Term “overlay journal” attributed to Ginsparg (1996), contribution and discussion by Smith (1999)  For RIOJA, an overlay journal model refers to:  journals built on content deposited to and stored in one or more repositories  Quality-assured  Open access  Sustainable

6. UCL LIBRARY SERVICES RIOJA - aims...  Build the RIOJA toolkit  A set of APIs  some for implementation by a repository, some by a journal  some required (e.g. author validation, metadata extraction); others optional (e.g. trackback support)  Construct a demonstrator overlay journal  an implementation of the RIOJA toolkit  arXiv repository  OJS journal software

7. UCL LIBRARY SERVICES RIOJA – aims…  Sustainability  Estimate the running costs for an arXiv-overlay journal  Identify and appraise cost-recovery options for an arXiv-overlay journal  Recommend a Digital Preservation strategy for content accepted by an arXiv-overlay journal

8. UCL LIBRARY SERVICES RIOJA - methods  Questionnaire survey to 4,000+ researchers  Selected from top 100 universities and other institutions (THES World Rankings 2006), and a domain specific discussion list  Interviews with members of editorial boards and publishers  PhysMathCentral,  Public Library of Science (PLoS),  Oxford University Press (OUP), and  members of the editorial boards of the journals Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society (MNRAS) and Journal of Cosmology and Astroparticle Physics (JCAP)

9. UCL LIBRARY SERVICES Community surveys – Some administrative/demographics info (1)  Questionnaire survey run between June 8 th - July 15 th, 2007  Contacted 4012 scientists in astrophysics and cosmology - response from 683 (17% response rate)  Scientists in fields astrophysics and cosmology – hazy boundaries (need for subject specific journals or broad subject coverage?)

10. UCL LIBRARY SERVICES Questionnaire survey – Some administrative/demographics info (2)  A spread of roles, 24% by professors, 20% by research fellows, lecturers, readers, research assistants/associates  Experienced researchers (46% more than 10 years)  90% denoted research as their primary responsibility  Publishers/members of editorial boards, in general positive towards a new model

11. UCL LIBRARY SERVICES Questionnaire survey – Publishing research  An average of 13 papers over 2-year period  97% write their research in the form of papers for peer reviewed journals  Funding processes and RAE influence publication  3 most preferred journals for publication in top -10 – ISI impact factor

12. UCL LIBRARY SERVICES

15. Questionnaire survey – arXiv use and expectations of overlay journal model  80% use the arXiv as first point when looking for new research papers & 53% visit the arXiv on a daily basis  53% said yes to a new publishing journal model  However: quality, peer review, long term archiving  Money matters  YES: Journal website & archive of back issues, paying scientific editors  NO: print version of journal, paying referees, publisher profits

16. UCL LIBRARY SERVICES

19. Some observations  In general both scientists and publishers contacted were disposed favourably towards the overlay journal model.  Scientific community acceptance  Quality assurance  Peer review process  Sustainability and long term archiving  Traditional copy-editing function remains important to researchers  Visibility of research in indexing services  Not so important factors  Print version of journal  Journals with high rejection rate  Journal endorsed by the professional society

20. UCL LIBRARY SERVICES Further work  Exploring sustainability issues, business model and potential implementations  Analysing the results from interviews with members of editorial boards/publishers  Costs associated with publishing processes - is there a business model?  RIOJA meeting – 7 July 2008 (http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ls/rioja/meeting)http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ls/rioja/meeting

21. UCL LIBRARY SERVICES Further information  Project team: lib-rioja@ucl.ac.uk  Web site: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/ls/riojahttp://www.ucl.ac.uk/ls/rioja

22. UCL LIBRARY SERVICES Thank you!

23. UCL LIBRARY SERVICES References  Ginsparg, P. (1996). Winners and Losers in the Global Research Village. Invited contribution, UNESCO Conference HQ, Paris, 19-23 Feb 1996. Available at: http://xxx.lanl.gov/blurb/pg96unesco.htmlhttp://xxx.lanl.gov/blurb/pg96unesco.html  Smith, J W T. (1999). The deconstructed journal: a new model for academic publishing. Learned Publishing, Vol. 12 (2), pp. 79-91