Important Notice regarding the OpenGrey Repository

“Inist-CNRS has given notice that as of November 30th 2020, they will cease hosting the <http://www.opengrey.eu/> OpenGrey Repository.

All of <http://www.opengrey.eu/search/request?q=greynet> GreyNet’s content in OpenGrey including its full-text documents, PowerPoint slides, and accompanying (meta)data – have already migrated to other system providers, who are fully open access compliant: namely, the <http://greyguiderep.isti.cnr.it/> GreyGuide Repository, <https://easy.dans.knaw.nl/ui/?wicket:bookmarkablePage=:nl.knaw.dans.easy.web.search.pages.PublicSearchResultPage&q=greynet> DANS Easy Archive, and the <https://av.tib.eu/search?f=publisher%3Bhttp://av.tib.eu/resource/GreyNet_International,stock%3Bhttp://schema.org/OnlineOnly> TIB-AV Portal.

If a new host for the OpenGrey Repository has not been identified before November 30th 2020, the remaining data that is primarily bibliographic, will be preserved in a closed archive.

GreyNet International having partnered with the OpenGrey Repository, since its launch 12 years ago under the name OpenSIGLE, remains truly grateful to Inist-CNRS for the opportunity to have collaborated on this open access initiative in the field of grey literature.”

The Research Field – ScienceComm.Science

This study of Science Communication Research (SCR) triangulates a bibliometric and content analysis of approx. 3,000 journal papers with a multi-stage panel study and a review of grey literature spanning four decades. Quantitative findings from the journal analysis (e.g. about disciplinary contexts or topics, research methods, data analysis techniques used) were considered by a panel of 36 science communication researchers in a multi-stage series of qualitative interviews. These experts represent the international and disciplinary diversity of the research field, including past and present editors of the most relevant journals of science communication, and the majority of the most often cited science communication scholars.

We are planning to do further deep-dives into specific aspects of this hugely comprehensive material, which includes dozens of expert interviews and thousands of publications content-analysed. For any suggestions about such specific research questions, please don’t hesitate to get in touch.

The institutional repository landscape in medical schools and academic health centers: a 2018 snapshot view and analysis

Abstract:  Objective

This study uses survey research methods to gain a deeper understanding of the institutional repository (IR) landscape in medical schools and academic health centers.

Methods

Members of the Association of Academic Health Sciences Libraries (AAHSL) were surveyed about their IRs. The authors used a mixed-methods approach of a survey and qualitative content analysis to identify common themes.

Results

Survey results indicate that a large majority of responding medical schools and academic health centers have or are implementing an IR (35 out of 50, 70%). Of these, 60% (21 institutions) participate in an institution-wide IR rather than administer their own repositories. Much of the archived content is grey literature that has not already been published, but the percentage of original content varies greatly among institutions. The majority (57.1%) of respondent institutions are not considering an open access policy or mandate. Most institutions (71.4%) reported that repository staff are depositing materials on behalf of users. DSpace and bepress Digital Commons are the most popular repository platforms in this community. The planned enhancements that were most frequently reported were implementing a discovery layer and ORCID integration. The majority of respondents (54.3%) do not plan to migrate to a different platform in the foreseeable future. Analysis of respondent comments identified the following themes: integration, redundancy, and reporting; alternatives and exploration; uniqueness; participation; and funding and operations.

Conclusions

The study results capture a view of the IR landscape in medical schools and academic health centers and help readers understand what services their peers have in place as well as their plans for future developments.

The institutional repository landscape in medical schools and academic health centers: a 2018 snapshot view and analysis

Abstract:  Objective

This study uses survey research methods to gain a deeper understanding of the institutional repository (IR) landscape in medical schools and academic health centers.

Methods

Members of the Association of Academic Health Sciences Libraries (AAHSL) were surveyed about their IRs. The authors used a mixed-methods approach of a survey and qualitative content analysis to identify common themes.

Results

Survey results indicate that a large majority of responding medical schools and academic health centers have or are implementing an IR (35 out of 50, 70%). Of these, 60% (21 institutions) participate in an institution-wide IR rather than administer their own repositories. Much of the archived content is grey literature that has not already been published, but the percentage of original content varies greatly among institutions. The majority (57.1%) of respondent institutions are not considering an open access policy or mandate. Most institutions (71.4%) reported that repository staff are depositing materials on behalf of users. DSpace and bepress Digital Commons are the most popular repository platforms in this community. The planned enhancements that were most frequently reported were implementing a discovery layer and ORCID integration. The majority of respondents (54.3%) do not plan to migrate to a different platform in the foreseeable future. Analysis of respondent comments identified the following themes: integration, redundancy, and reporting; alternatives and exploration; uniqueness; participation; and funding and operations.

Conclusions

The study results capture a view of the IR landscape in medical schools and academic health centers and help readers understand what services their peers have in place as well as their plans for future developments.

Making grey literature slightly less grey – TIB-Blog

“[Q] Finally, let us come back to the 21st International Conference on Grey Literature, which is being held in Hannover. On the subject of open access, demands for free access to scientific information are increasing. The topics of open access and grey literature will both be addressed at the conference. How do you assess the importance of open access in grey literature, and what needs to be done to increase the proportion of open access grey literature?

[A] In light of the Pisa Declaration, I believe the best way to establish open access more firmly is to introduce compulsory fees and to provide research funding. Moreover, open access enables academics to make their results known to other experts in a quick, barrier-free way. So it would be particularly helpful if more right holders were to publish their findings under CC licences….”

OPEN DATA, GREY DATA, AND STEWARDSHIP: UNIVERSITIES AT THE PRIVACY FRONTIER

Abstract:  As universities recognize the inherent value in the data they collect and hold, they encounter unforeseen challenges in stewarding those data in ways that balance accountability, transparency, and protection of privacy, academic freedom, and intellectual property. Two parallel developments in academic data collection are converging: (1) open access requirements, whereby researchers must provide access to their data as a condition of obtaining grant funding or publishing results in journals; and (2) the vast accumulation of “grey data” about individuals in their daily activities of research, teaching, learning, services, and administration. The boundaries between research and grey data are blurring, making it more difficult to assess the risks and responsibilities associated with any data collection. Many sets of data, both research and grey, fall outside privacy regulations such as HIPAA, FERPA, and PII. Universities are exploiting these data for research, learning analytics, faculty evaluation, strategic decisions, and other sensitive matters. Commercial entities are besieging universities with requests for access to data or for partnerships to mine them. The privacy frontier facing research universities spans open access practices, uses and misuses of data, public records requests, cyber risk, and curating data for privacy protection. This Article explores the competing values inherent in data stewardship and makes recommendations for practice by drawing on the pioneering work of the University of California in privacy and information security, data governance, and cyber risk.

APO | Analysis and Policy Observatory

“Analysis & Policy Observatory (APO) is an award-winning, open access knowledge hub and information service providing easy access to policy and practice research and resources. 

APO makes policy research visible, discoverable and usable. 

Established in 2002 at Swinburne University of Technology in Melbourne, APO is a not-for-profit collaborative knowledge infrastructure and web platform working with partners from universities and organisations across Australia, New Zealand and beyond.”

Open Folklore

“A partnership of the American Folklore Society and the Indiana University Libraries, Open Folklore is a scholarly resource devoted to increasing the number and variety of open access resources, published and unpublished, that are available for the field of folklore studies and the communities with whom folklore scholars partner….”