Open access books through open data sources: assessing prevalence, providers, and preservation

IF 1.7 3区管理学 Q2 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE

Journal of Documentation Pub Date : 2023-06-13 DOI:10.1108/jd-02-2023-0016

Mikael Laakso

{"title":"Open access books through open data sources: assessing prevalence, providers, and preservation","authors":"Mikael Laakso","doi":"10.1108/jd-02-2023-0016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeScience policy and practice for open access (OA) books is a rapidly evolving area in the scholarly domain. However, there is much that remains unknown, including how many OA books there are and to what degree they are included in preservation coverage. The purpose of this study is to contribute towards filling this knowledge gap in order to advance both research and practice in the domain of OA books.Design/methodology/approachThis study utilized open bibliometric data sources to aggregate a harmonized dataset of metadata records for OA books (data sources: the Directory of Open Access Books, OpenAIRE, OpenAlex, Scielo Books, The Lens, and WorldCat). This dataset was then cross-matched based on unique identifiers and book titles to openly available content listings of trusted preservation services (data sources: Cariniana Network, CLOCKSS, Global LOCKSS Network, and Portico). The web domains of the OA books were determined by querying the web addresses or digital object identifiers provided in the metadata of the bibliometric database entries.FindingsIn total, 396,995 unique records were identified from the OA book bibliometric sources, of which 19% were found to be included in at least one of the preservation services. The results suggest reason for concern for the long tail of OA books distributed at thousands of different web domains as these include volatile cloud storage or sometimes no longer contained the files at all.Research limitations/implicationsData quality issues, varying definitions of OA across services and inconsistent implementation of unique identifiers were discovered as key challenges. The study includes recommendations for publishers, libraries, data providers and preservation services for improving monitoring and practices for OA book preservation.Originality/valueThis study provides methodological and empirical findings for advancing the practices of OA book publishing, preservation and research.","PeriodicalId":47969,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Documentation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Documentation","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jd-02-2023-0016","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 2

Abstract

PurposeScience policy and practice for open access (OA) books is a rapidly evolving area in the scholarly domain. However, there is much that remains unknown, including how many OA books there are and to what degree they are included in preservation coverage. The purpose of this study is to contribute towards filling this knowledge gap in order to advance both research and practice in the domain of OA books.Design/methodology/approachThis study utilized open bibliometric data sources to aggregate a harmonized dataset of metadata records for OA books (data sources: the Directory of Open Access Books, OpenAIRE, OpenAlex, Scielo Books, The Lens, and WorldCat). This dataset was then cross-matched based on unique identifiers and book titles to openly available content listings of trusted preservation services (data sources: Cariniana Network, CLOCKSS, Global LOCKSS Network, and Portico). The web domains of the OA books were determined by querying the web addresses or digital object identifiers provided in the metadata of the bibliometric database entries.FindingsIn total, 396,995 unique records were identified from the OA book bibliometric sources, of which 19% were found to be included in at least one of the preservation services. The results suggest reason for concern for the long tail of OA books distributed at thousands of different web domains as these include volatile cloud storage or sometimes no longer contained the files at all.Research limitations/implicationsData quality issues, varying definitions of OA across services and inconsistent implementation of unique identifiers were discovered as key challenges. The study includes recommendations for publishers, libraries, data providers and preservation services for improving monitoring and practices for OA book preservation.Originality/valueThis study provides methodological and empirical findings for advancing the practices of OA book publishing, preservation and research.

查看原文本刊更多论文

通过开放数据源开放获取书籍：评估流行率、提供者和保存

目的开放获取（OA）书籍的科学政策和实践是学术领域中一个快速发展的领域。然而，还有很多未知之处，包括有多少OA书籍，以及它们在多大程度上被纳入保护范围。本研究的目的是填补这一知识空白，以推进OA图书领域的研究和实践。设计/方法/方法本研究利用开放的文献计量数据源来聚合OA书籍的元数据记录的统一数据集（数据源：开放获取图书目录、OpenAIRE、OpenAlex、Scielo books、the Lens和WorldCat）。然后，根据唯一标识符和书名，将该数据集与可信保存服务的公开内容列表进行交叉匹配（数据来源：Cariana Network、CLOCKSS、Global LOCKSS Network和Portico）。OA书籍的网域是通过查询在文献计量数据库条目的元数据中提供的网址或数字对象标识符来确定的。发现从OA图书文献计量来源中总共发现了396995个独特的记录，其中19%被发现包含在至少一个保存服务中。研究结果表明，人们有理由担心分布在数千个不同域名的OA书籍的长尾，因为这些域名包括易失性的云存储，或者有时根本不包含这些文件。研究局限性/含义数据质量问题、不同服务的OA定义以及唯一标识符的不一致实施被发现是关键挑战。该研究包括对出版商、图书馆、数据提供商和保存服务机构的建议，以改进OA图书保存的监测和实践。原创性/价值本研究为推进OA图书出版、保存和研究的实践提供了方法论和实证研究结果。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Documentation INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-

CiteScore

4.20

自引率

14.30%

发文量

期刊介绍： The scope of the Journal of Documentation is broadly information sciences, encompassing all of the academic and professional disciplines which deal with recorded information. These include, but are certainly not limited to: ■Information science, librarianship and related disciplines ■Information and knowledge management ■Information and knowledge organisation ■Information seeking and retrieval, and human information behaviour ■Information and digital literacies