"Will An Institutional Repository Hurt My SSRN Ranking? Calming the Faculty Fear"

James M. Donovan and Carol A. Watson have published "Will An Institutional Repository Hurt My SSRN Ranking? Calming the Faculty Fear" in the latest issue of AALL Spectrum.

Here's an excerpt:

Plans for a new IR project within the law school, however, can quickly find such worthy motives swept aside as faculty members invariably voice some version of the following comments: "Won't posting my articles elsewhere steal downloads away from SSRN? That would lower my rankings in SSRN and perhaps reduce my professional stature."

One can regret that law academics today reflexively cower at the thought of appearing to perform poorly on any new ranking system that crosses their path, no matter how dubious. Even so, there can be no denying that SSRN, or the Social Science Research Network, has earned a respectable cachet among the professoriate.

| Institutional Repository and ETD Bibliography 2011 | Digital Scholarship |

"Trends from the Canadian IR/ETD Survey 2012"

Nancy Stuart and Katy Nelson have self-archived "Trends from the Canadian IR/ETD Survey 2012" in UVicSPACE.

Here's an excerpt:

The purpose of the 2012 Canadian IR/ETD Survey was two-fold. The first was to show the growth of Institutional Repositories (IRs) across Canada. The second was to illustrate the state of the electronic theses and dissertations (ETD) submission programs at Canadian institutions granting graduate degrees, where a thesis or dissertation is a requirement for graduation.

| Institutional Repository and ETD Bibliography 2011 | Digital Scholarship |

"The Effects of Open Access Mandates on Institutional Repositories in the UK and Germany"

Sabine Elisabeth Puskas has self-archived her Master's dissertation, "The Effects of Open Access Mandates on Institutional Repositories in the UK and Germany," in the Loughborough University Institutional Repository.

Here's an excerpt:

There is evidence that institutional mandates do have effects on institutional repositories in different ways, e.g. on content deposited and service provision. The effects vary according to the characteristics of repositories and the approach taken by institutions. The research results also indicate that the experiences of institutions with a mandate and the expectations of institutions without one are almost identical across both the UK and Germany, although the developmental context of institutional repositories and institutional mandates in these two countries are very different.

| Institutional Repository and ETD Bibliography 2011 | Digital Scholarship |

Open Access: PEER Economics Report [Final Report]

PEER (Publishing and the Ecology of European Research) has released the final version of the PEER Economics Report.

Here's an excerpt:

This study considers the effect of large-scale deposit on scholarly research publication and dissemination (sharing of research outputs), beginning with the analysis of publishers and institutions managing repositories and their sustainability. The study associates costs with specific activities, performed by key actors involved in research registration, certification, dissemination and digital management: authors, the scholarly community, editors, publishers, libraries, readers and funding agencies. Contrary to most of the existing literature, the study analyses cost structures of individual organizations. The focus of this study is therefore to provide context for the costs to specific organizations and to their choices in terms of scale and scope. . . .

This study analyses 22 organizations involved with journal article publication and dissemination. Data were gathered via literature and public document analysis, as well as through individual in-depth interviews in order to assess the cost structure of publishers, OA journal publishers and institutions managing repositories and the conditions for their sustainability.

| Digital Scholarship's Digital Bibliographies | Digital Scholarship |

Survey of Academic Attitudes to Open Access and Institutional Repositories—An RSP and UKCoRR Initiative

The Repositories Support Project has released the Survey of Academic Attitudes to Open Access and Institutional Repositories—An RSP and UKCoRR Initiative.

Here's an excerpt:

Feelings about principles of OA: Participants were asked how they felt about the principles of OA. 1629 participants answered this question, and results showed that 63% (1026) were strongly in favour, 22% (358) were mildly in favour, 8% (132) were neutral, 3%(47) were mildly against, 2% (35) were strongly against, and 2% (31) did not know how they felt. . . .

Feelings about using OA repositories: Participants were also asked how they felt about using OA repositories. 1634 participants answered this question, and results showed that 56% (913) were strongly in favour, 24% (391) were mildly in favour,12% (197) were neutral, 3% (52) were mildly against, 2% (30) were strongly against, and 3% (51) did not know how they felt. . . .

If we collapse across those that responded they were strongly in favour with those that were mildly in favour, we find that the majority, 80% (1304), were in favour of using OA repositories.

| Digital Scholarship's Digital/Print Books | Digital Scholarship |

Open University Releases Full-Text Search Engine for UK Repositories

The Open University has released a full-text search engine for UK Repositories called CORE.

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

Open access research is now more accessible as JISC has developed a new search engine to help academics, students and the general public navigate papers held in the UK's open access repositories.

JISC has funded the Open University's Knowledge Media Institute (KMi) to create an innovative new search facility which searches not just the abstract but the full text of the article.

When researchers use current systems like Google Scholar to search academic papers they can find themselves denied access to the full article, particularly when subscription fees are required. They also typically have to search across a number of open access repositories or use searches that harvest data from different sources.

But now, using the Connecting Repositories tool or CORE, people can search the full text of items held in all 142 approved Open Access repositories.

Once they've found what they're looking for, the CORE system stores these downloads, so that people can still get access to the papers they have found useful even if the original repository is offline. . . .

Search CORE with your research question.

| New: Institutional Repository and ETD Bibliography 2011 | Digital Scholarship |

Institutional Repository and ETD Bibliography 2011

Digital Scholarship has released the Institutional Repository and ETD Bibliography 2011. This 96-page book presents over 600 English-language articles, books, technical reports, and other works that are useful in understanding institutional repositories and ETDs. It covers institutional repository (IR) country and regional surveys, multiple-institution repositories, specific IRs, IR digital preservation issues, IR library issues, IR metadata strategies, institutional open access mandates and policies, IR R&D projects, IR research studies, IR open source software, and electronic theses and dissertations. Most sources have been published from 2000 through June 30, 2011; however, a limited number of key sources published prior to 2000 are also included. Many references have links to freely available copies of included works.

The Institutional Repository and ETD Bibliography 2011 is available as a $9.95 paperback (ISBN: 146377429X) and an open access PDF file. All versions of the bibliography are available under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.

For further information about Digital Scholarship publications, see the "Digital Scholarship Publications Overview" and "Reviews of Digital Scholarship Publications."

Institutional Repository and ETD Bibliography 2011 Cover cover

| Digital Scholarship |

New Open Access Journal: Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication

The Pacific University Libraries and the Robert E. Kennedy Library at California Polytechnic University San Luis Obispo have launched the Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication.

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

A joint publishing partnership between the libraries at Pacific University (Ore.) and California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo has announced a new open access, peer-reviewed journal dedicated to library-led scholarly communication initiatives, online publishing and digital projects.

The Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication will provide a focused forum for library practitioners to share ideas, strategies, research and pragmatic explorations of library-led initiatives related to such areas as institutional repository and digital collection management, library publishing/hosting services and authors' rights advocacy efforts. As technology, scholarly communication, the economics of publishing, and the roles of libraries all continue to evolve, the work shared in JLSC will inform practices that strengthen librarianship.

Marisa Ramirez (Cal Poly) and Isaac Gilman (Pacific University) will co-edit the journal in collaboration with an editorial board composed of experienced and respected library practitioners.

Founding board members include Allyson Mower (University of Utah), Amy Buckland (McGill University), Ann Lally (University of Washington), Faye Chadwell (Oregon State University), JQ Johnson (University of Oregon), Katherine Johnson (California Institute of Technology), Lisa Schiff (California Digital Library), Michael Boock (Oregon State University), Pamela Bluh (University of Maryland, School of Law), Paul Royster (University of Nebraska), Rebecca Kennison (Columbia University), Sarah Shreeves (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign), Shawn Martin (University of Pennsylvania), Susan Wells Parham (Georgia Institute of Technology) and Terry Owen (University of Maryland).

| Digital Curation and Preservation Bibliography 2010 | Institutional Repository Bibliography | Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography | Scholarly Electronic Publishing Bibliography 2010 |

Setting Institutional Repositories on the Path to Digital Preservation: Final Project Report from the JISC KeepIt Project

JISC has released Setting Institutional Repositories on the Path to Digital Preservation: Final Project Report from the JISC KeepIt Project.

Here's an excerpt:

Digital preservation starts with detailed knowledge and awareness of your own content. The scope for content of institutional repositories has grown from research papers to presenting data supporting the research, also covering teaching materials, and artistic creativity. Four repositories representing each content type—the exemplars—joined the KeepIt project to investigate how effectively each could support the goals of a general repository: trustworthy storage, and preservation. This final report from the project reveals the results, outcomes and implications of the work.

| Digital Curation and Preservation Bibliography 2010 | Institutional Repository Bibliography | Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography | Scholarly Electronic Publishing Bibliography 2010 |

Institutional Repository Bibliography, Version 4

Version four of the Institutional Repository Bibliography is now available from Digital Scholarship. This selective bibliography presents over 500 articles, books, technical reports, and other scholarly textual sources that are useful in understanding institutional repositories (see the scope note for details). All included works are in English. It is available under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.

The bibliography has the following sections (all sections have been updated except "3 Multiple-Institution Repositories"):

1 General
2 Country and Regional Surveys
3 Multiple-Institution Repositories
4 Specific Institutional Repositories
5 Digital Preservation
6 Library Issues
7 Metadata
8 Institutional Open Access Mandates and Policies
9 R&D Projects
10 Research Studies
11 Software
12 Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Appendix A. Related Bibliographies
Appendix B. About the Author

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Reviews of Digital Scholarship Publications |

"Evaluating Repository Annual Metrics for SCONUL"

Gareth James Johnson has self-archived "Evaluating Repository Annual Metrics for SCONUL" in the Leicester Research Archive.

Here's an excerpt:

This report is a summarisation of the responses to a recent survey of the UKCoRR membership concerning the use of full-text downloads as a repository performance metric within the SCONUL annual statistical survey. It hopes to present a representative snapshot of the current opinions in this area from repository managers.

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Institutional Repository Bibliography |

"Bibliometrics: A New Feature for Institutional Repositories"

Merceur Frederic, Le Gall Morgane, Salaun Annick have self-archived "Bibliometrics: A New Feature for Institutional Repositories" in Archimer.

Here's an excerpt:

In addition to its promotion and conservation objectives, Archimer, Ifremer’s institutional repository, offers a wide range of bibliometric tools described in this document.

As early as the recording stage, numerous automatic operations homogenize the information (author’s name, research body, department…), thus proving the quality of the bibliometric analyses.

Now, Archimer enables, among others, the automatic calculation of several indicators defined by Ifremer and the different ministries in charge in the framework of its four-year contract. It also offers various criteria aimed at analysing its document production (eg. distribution of the value of the journals' impact factors, evolution of the number of quotations in other publications, presentation of international collaborations…).

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Institutional Repository Bibliography |

Over 80% of Association of American Universities Members Now Have Institutional Repositories

The Association of American Universities is a highly selective nonprofit organization of "leading public and private research universities in the United States and Canada" whose US members "award more than one-half of all U.S. doctoral degrees and 55 percent of those in the sciences and engineering."

This post examines whether AAU institutions have operational institutional repositories. Over 80% of the 62 AAU members now have such a repository (see the below list).

Institutions that do not have an institutional repository typically have an extensive digital library of curated digital materials (including works digitized by the library), and they may also have specialized digital repositories, such as departmental digital repositories (e.g., eprints and other digital research materials) or an ETD repository. Such digital libraries and repositories are not included here.

Institutional repositories were identified by OpenDOAR, ROAR, and, in some cases, Google and institutional website searches.

  1. Brandeis University, Brandeis Institutional Repository
  2. Brown University, Brown Digital Repository
  3. California Institute of Technology, CaltechAUTHORS
  4. Carnegie Mellon University, Research Showcase
  5. Case Western Reserve University, Digital Case
  6. Columbia University, Academic Commons
  7. Cornell University, eCommons@Cornell
  8. Duke University, DukeSpace
  9. Georgia Institute of Technology, SMARTech Repository
  10. Harvard University, DASH
  11. Indiana University, IUScholarWorks
  12. The Johns Hopkins University, JScholarship
  13. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, DSpace@MIT
  14. McGill University, eScholarship@McGill
  15. New York University, Faculty Digital Archive
  16. The Ohio State University, Knowledge Bank
  17. Purdue University, ePubs
  18. Rice University, Rice University Digital Scholarship Archive
  19. Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, RUCore
  20. Stanford University, Stanford Digital Repository
  21. Stony Brook University-State University of New York, State University of New York Digital Repository
  22. Syracuse University, SURFACE
  23. Texas A&M University, Texas A&M Digital Repository
  24. The University of Arizona, UAiR
  25. University at Buffalo, The State University of New York, UB Institutional Repository
  26. University of California, Berkeley, eScholarship
  27. University of California, Davis, eScholarship
  28. University of California, Irvine, eScholarship
  29. University of California, Los Angeles, eScholarship
  30. University of California, San Diego, eScholarship
  31. University of California, Santa Barbara, eScholarship
  32. University of Colorado at Boulder
  33. University of Florida, IR @ UF
  34. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, IDEALS
  35. The University of Iowa, Iowa Research Online
  36. The University of Kansas, KU ScholarWorks
  37. University of Maryland, College Park, DRUM
  38. University of Michigan, Deep Blue
  39. University of Minnesota, Twin Cities, digitalconservancy
  40. University of Missouri-Columbia, MOspace
  41. The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Carolina Digital Repository
  42. University of Oregon, Scholars' Bank
  43. University of Pennsylvania, ScholarlyCommons Repository
  44. University of Pittsburgh, D-Scholarship@Pitt
  45. University of Rochester, UR Research
  46. The University of Texas at Austin, University of Texas Digital Repository
  47. University of Toronto, T-Space
  48. University of Virginia, Libra
  49. University of Washington, ResearchWorks
  50. The University of Wisconsin-Madison, MINDS@UW
  51. Vanderbilt University, DiscoverArchive

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography |

"Preserving Repository Content: Practical Tools for Repository Managers"

Miggie Pickton, Debra Morris, Stephanie Meece, Simon Coles, and Steve Hitchcock have published "Preserving Repository Content: Practical Tools for Repository Managers" in the latest issue of the Journal of Digital Information.

Here's an excerpt:

The stated aim of many repositories is to provide permanent open access to their content. However, relatively few repositories have implemented practical action plans towards permanence. Repository managers often lack time and confidence to tackle the important but scary problem of preservation.

Written by, and aimed at, repository managers, this paper describes how the JISC-funded KeepIt project has been bringing together existing preservation tools and services with appropriate training and advice to enable repository managers to formulate practical and achievable preservation plans.

Three elements of the KeepIt project are described:

  1. The initial, exploratory phase in which repository managers and a preservation specialist established the current status of each repository and its preservation objectives;
  2. The repository-specific KeepIt preservation training course which covered the organisational and financial framework of repository preservation; metadata; the new preservation tools; and issues of trust between repository, users and services;
  3. The application of tools and lessons learned from the training course to four exemplar repositories and the impact that this has made.

The paper concludes by recommending practical steps that all repository managers may take to ensure their repositories are preservation-ready.

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Institutional Repository Bibliography |

University of Virginia Library Launches Libra Institutional Repository

The University of Virginia Library has launched its Libra institutional repository.

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

Save your work in perpetuity with a new tool called Libra. A joint project between ITC and the University Library System, and requested by the Faculty Senate, Libra allows any employee of the University who produces scholarly works to store their papers, and in the near future, theses and datasets, in a secure location. Libra was developed specifically as a repository for peer-reviewed, scholarly articles, although other works such as books may also be deposited, as long as sufficient rights have been retained by the authors.

Read more about it at "LIBRA: University of Virginia's Hydra-based Fedora Repository for Open Access Materials."

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography |

Institutional Repository Project Summary Report Sept 2007-Sept 2010

Cal Poly Library Services has released Institutional Repository Project Summary Report Sept 2007-Sept 2010.

Here's an excerpt:

This final project report to the Provost summarizes the work of the Digital Repository Librarian and Digital Repository Assistant (LAII) during the three-year Provost-funded DigitalCommons@CalPoly service, during Academic Year (AY) 2007-2010. It is based on the subtask and annual reports that have been established during the project. Recommendations for future activities are also included.

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography |

"STM Statement on Negotiating Rights for Institutional Repository Postings and Author Rights"

STM has released the "STM Statement on Negotiating Rights for Institutional Repository Postings and Author Rights."

Here's an excerpt:

Recently some advocates for institutional repositories have noted that, in connection with the responsibilities that academic and research libraries may have for coordinating the scholarly output of author-researchers at their institutions, there are efficiencies to be gained in negotiating at an institutional level with journal publishers. . . .

STM publishers are of the view that content license negotiations deal appropriately with questions about the scope of content that will be accessible for each institutional subscriber as well as the scope of usage rights and relative costs for such accessibility and rights. These negotiations are often complex, especially given that in recent years efforts have been made to manage negotiations through procurement processes of different kinds. We hold the view that conflating author rights issues and institutional content licenses serves only to add greater complexity and possible legal uncertainty to such licenses without adding meaningful benefits for authors.

SPARC, SPARC Europe and COAR have issued a "Public Response on Behalf of SPARC, SPARC Europe and COAR Regarding Publishers Self-Deposit Policies."

Here's an excerpt:

We have recently noted that some journal publishers have sought to negotiate individually with universities and research institutes, seeking to increase embargo periods for authors depositing pre-prints of their articles into repositories, and requesting embargo periods that go beyond what is already stated in the publishers' own policies.

We strongly urge institutions not to enter into individual agreements with publishers that supersede the existing policies of the publisher or any previous licensing agreements.

We also call on the publishers not to further hinder the deposit—and accessibility—of pre-prints with additional restrictions, regulations and policies. Proliferation of this practice will result in an environment that is confusing to navigate for end users, and increasingly difficult for individual institutions to effectively maintain.

Read more about it at "Double Talk."

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography |

Heading for the Open Road: Costs And Benefits of Transitions in Scholarly Communications

The Research Information Network has released Heading for the Open Road: Costs And Benefits of Transitions in Scholarly Communications (annexes).

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

This new report investigates the drivers, costs and benefits of potential ways to increase access to scholarly journals. It identifies five different routes for achieving that end over the next five years, and compares and evaluates the benefits as well as the costs and risks for the UK.

The report suggests that policymakers who are seeking to promote increases in access should encourage the use of existing subject and institutional repositories, but avoid pushing for reductions in embargo periods, which might put at risk the sustainability of the underlying scholarly publishing system. They should also promote and facilitate a transition to open access publishing (Gold open access) while seeking to ensure that the average level of charges for publication does not exceed c.£2000; that the rate in the UK of open access publication is broadly in step with the rate in the rest of the world; and that total payments to journal publishers from UK universities and their funders do not rise as a consequence.

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview | Transforming Scholarly Publishing through Open Access: A Bibliography |

"Eprints Institutional Repository Software: A Review"

Mike Beazley has published "Eprints Institutional Repository Software: A Review" in latest issue of Partnership: the Canadian Journal of Library and Information Practice and Research.

Here's an excerpt:

Setting up an institutional repository (IR) can be a daunting task. There are many software packages out there, some commercial, some open source, all of which offer different features and functionality. This article will provide some thoughts about one of these software packages: Eprints. Eprints is open-source, and the software is easy to modify. This presents clear advantages for institutions will smaller budgets and that have programmers on staff.

Installation and initial configuration are straightforward and once the IR is up and running, users can easily upload documents by filling out a simple web form. Eprints is an excellent choice for any institution looking to get an IR up and running quickly and easily, although it is less clear that an institution with an existing IR based on another software package should migrate to Eprints.

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview |

Over 1,000 DSpace Repositories in about 100 Countries Registered

There are now over 1,000 known DSpace repositories.

Here's an excerpt from the DuraSpace announcement

The DSpace user community has reached a major milestone. There are now over 1000 known instances of DSpace installed in almost 100 different countries worldwide. DSpace continues to be the most popular repository solution, with well over a third of the known institutional repositories using the DSpace software. Each month over the last year, the DSpace registry has added between 20-30 new repositories. Check out "Who's Using DSpace" to see the complete list. . . .

Over the last year, DSpace repositories were launched in 25 new countries, including: Bulgaria, Cameroon, Cyprus, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Lebanon, Lithuania, Malawi, Malta, Mozambique, Nepal, Poland, Puerto Rico, Qatar, Romania, Senegal, Serbia, Sri Lanka, Tansania, Uruguay, Zambia.

The countries that had the largest increase in the number of DSpace repositories were: Japan +33, Taiwan +28, USA +16, Spain +13, Brazil +12, Ecuador +11, China +10, Portugal +10, Ukraine +10, South Africa +8, Thailand +7, Vietnam +7.

Also of interest is the number of highly ranked DSpace repositories listed in the January 2011 edition of the Ranking Web of World Repositories.

Here's an excerpt from the DuraSpace announcement

In overall, DSpace’s presence among the top 100 listed repositories has grown tremendously, with 51 repositories listed now, compared to 41 in July 2010, 45 in January 2010 and 43 in January 2009.

| Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Publications Overview |

Presentations from the SPARC 2010 Digital Repositories Meeting

Presentations from the SPARC 2010 Digital Repositories Meeting are now available.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

"Reputation management systems," "new spin on Open Access," "stretching knowledge bases," "exposing reality," and "valuing knowledge exchange at the institutional level" were just a few of the ways participants in the SPARC 2010 Digital Repositories Meeting expressed their vision for advancing repository advocacy into the fuller fabric of the Open Access movement. The sentiment is one outcome of the gathering, jointly hosted by SPARC, SPARC Japan/NII, and SPARC Europe, in Baltimore on November 8 & 9, 2010. SPARC has today released summaries, slides, and video from the event.

The SPARC digital repositories meetings have played an integral part in advancing the potential of open online repositories to expand the dissemination of scholarship and transform scholarly communication. First held in 2004, the meeting is regularly hosted in the UK or Europe, Japan, and North America, draws hundreds of participants from around the globe, and has helped set the stage for key developments over the past six years. This time, participants indicated the need for a broader meeting and discussion, which highlight repositories in the full Open Access context.

"Repositories are core components of the Open Access movement," said Heather Joseph, Executive Director of SPARC. "They’re deeply integrated with policy moves and at the forefront of managing Open Access to materials above and beyond the scholarly literature—not to mention author rights management and other aspects. It just makes sense that conversations about repository advocacy take place alongside moves to create policies. SPARC's next biennial meeting, in 2012, will aim to meet this need, and we look forward to working with our members to figure out the best approach."

The 2010 meeting set forth to explore four key trends: Repository-based publishing strategies, Global repository networks, Open data, and Making the case for financial sustainability. These panel discussions were supplemented with an Innovation Fair, where new technologies, strategies, and approaches were highlighted, and a Sponsor Showcase.

| Digital Scholarship |

"MePrints: Building User Centred Repositories"

David E. Millard et al. have self-archived "MePrints: Building User Centred Repositories" in the ECS EPrints Repository.

Here's an excerpt:

Teaching and Learning Repositories learning from the best practices of Web 2.0. Over this time we have successfully deployed a number of innovative repositories, including Southampton University EdShare, The Language Box, The HumBox, Open University’s LORO and Worcester Learning Box. A key part of this work has been the development of an extension for the EPrints repository platform, called MePrints, that enables configurable profile pages, and works alongside existing extensions such as IRStats and SNEEP in order to give users live feeds about repository events that matter to them. Through these deployments we have discovered that more sophisticated profile pages give users a home within a repository, act as a focus for their work, and help them feel more ownership of the work that they deposit. This increases the visibility of the repository and encourages more deposits.

| Digital Scholarship |

Institutional Repository Bibliography, Version 3

An institutional repository is a digital repository specific to a single institution that contains diverse types of digital works that deal with the disciplines associated with that institution.

Version three of the Institutional Repository Bibliography is now available from Digital Scholarship as an XHTML website with live links to many included works. It primarily includes published articles, books, and technical reports. A limited number of conference papers and unpublished e-prints are also included. All included works are in English. It is available under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.

The bibliography has the following sections (all sections have been updated):

1 General
2 Country and Regional Institutional Repository Surveys
3 Multiple-Institution Repositories
4 Specific Institutional Repositories
5 Institutional Repository Digital Preservation Issues
6 Institutional Repository Library Issues
7 Institutional Repository Metadata Issues
8 Institutional Repository Open Access Policies
9 Institutional Repository R&D Projects
10 Institutional Repository Research Studies
11 Institutional Repository Software
12 Electronic Theses and Dissertations in Institutional Repositories
Appendix A. Related Bibliographies
Appendix B. About the Author

The following recent Digital Scholarship publication may also be of interest:

See also: Reviews of Digital Scholarship Publications.

Institutional Repository Software: IR+ 2.0 Released

The University of Rochester has released IR+ 2.0.

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

The new version has many new features and updates. These include:

  • OAI-PMH harvestable
  • Dublin Core mapping features for Identifiers and contributors
  • Improved batch metadata manipulation – automated re-indexing enhancements (changing control lists forces re-indexing of all items that use changed data)
  • Sponsor browsing / statistics
  • Paging and Sorting for contributor pages
  • Improved Search Engine Optimization(SEO) for better indexing of researcher pages and content within the repository
  • Researcher page interface enhancements
  • Content type listing and filtering at the repository and collection levels
  • Content type counts at the repository and collection levels
  • Increased download information and removal options for more accurate download counts
  • Updated Help, Installation and User manuals
  • RSS feeds for Collections/Contributor Pages
  • Upgraded pdf/word/excel/power point text extraction libraries
  • Updated user account management features
  • Submission performance enhancements
  • Improved home page module placement
  • Improved change tracking

| Digital Scholarship |

Special OA Issue of New Review of Academic Librarianship on Dissemination Models in Scholarly Communication

The New Review of Academic Librarianship has published a special issue on dissemination models in scholarly communication. All of the articles are open access.

Here's a selection of articles

| Digital Scholarship |