Increasing Institutional Repository Content with "email eprint" Button (fwd)

[Stevan Harnad <harnad@ecs.soton.ac.uk>]

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 10 Apr 2006 13:41:50 +0100
From: Timothy Miles-Board <tmb@ecs.soton.ac.uk>
To: AmSci Forum <american-scientist-open-access-forum@amsci.org>

               ** Apologies for Cross-Posting **

A new feature has been built into the GNU EPrints (free) software 
for creating Institutional Repositories (IRs). We hope it will 
dramatically increase the growth rate of open access (OA) content 
deposited in IRs while -- perversely it may seem -- allowing 
authors to opt out of providing OA! It's extremely simple, and if 
implemented carefully by the repository can produce immediate 
results without additional cost or resource implications.

http://www.eprints.org/news/features/request_button.php

(Eloy Rodrigues, the dynamic OA activist at University of Minho 
in Portugal https://repositorium.sdum.uminho.pt/ has kindly 
implemented the feature in Dspace too, and will be announcing its 
availability for testing very shortly.)

This new feature is called the "Request eprint" button. It works 
like this:

To deposit a work using EPrints an author creates a record for 
the eprint by filling metadata fields in the repository deposit 
interface. Ideally we would of course like the eprint to be both 
deposited *and* made OA. However, not all authors are yet 
comfortable with this, so rather than have authors refrain from 
depositing their eprints altogether, EPrints offers authors the 
option of either:

      (1) making the eprint OA, or

      (2) restricting full-text visibility to designated viewers, with
      only its metadata visible publicly, or

      (3) making the full-text completely invisible, with only its
      metadata visible publicly (although the full-text is still stored
      in the system).

There are a number of reasons for allowing this flexibility. One 
of the main hesitations authors have about providing OA -- even 
though 93% of journals have already given it their official green 
light http://romeo.eprints.org/stats.php -- is author worries 
about infringing their copyright agreement with the remaining 7% 
of journals. Institutions contemplating adopting self-archiving 
mandates have similar concerns.

So far, none of this is new.

The key need of the repository in terms of growing content is to 
persuade authors (or their designees) to perform the requisite 
keystrokes, i.e. to simply *deposit* the metadata and the eprint, 
without prejudice as to what else might be done with it. Once 
those all-important data are deposited, we can start to work with 
the author to maximise its usefulness and usage.

This is where the "Request eprint" button comes in. Whenever 
record of a stored eprint tells a would-be user that an OA 
version of the full text copy is not accessible, a dialogue box 
appears inviting the user to paste in their email address and 
send a request to the author for a copy of the paper. This 
request is emailed automatically to the author, offering three 
choices in return: to email the requested eprint, to reject the 
request, or to make the eprint OA in the repository.

Since the requested eprint is already in the repository, and 
merely invisible, a simple process enables the author to make a 
selection and activate that choice with a single click.

This is simple for requesters, authors, repository implementers 
and policy makers as it allows them a full range of choices 
without any implications for the usual worries that otherwise 
deter or delay this type of dissemination. In particular, there 
are no implications for copyright.

This furthers the objectives of increasing deposit and 
dissemination through the repository by reducing barriers and 
fears. It also gives authors valuable feedback on the degree of 
interest in their work (requests are counted, just as downloads 
of OA eprints are counted, and the statistics made available to 
the author).

How might this affect growth of your repository? It is generally 
estimated that institutional repositories are capturing 15% of 
the annual articles that could be made OA today. There is thus an 
85% gap to fill. There have been many hypotheses about the 
reasons for the slowness of authors in filling this gap. The 
"Request eprint" button enables us to overcome most of these 
concerns. It gives even authors who are wary of self-archiving 
the chance to begin depositing in their institutional repository, 
it improves access - even if it is not immediately OA it is 
better than no record at all - and it offers the prospect of 
conversion to OA when authors realise the level of interest in 
their work.

This feature also makes it possible to implement the "weaker" 
model for an official Open Access Policy, both

institutionally:
      http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/71-guid.html

and nationally:
      http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Temp/weaker-OApolicy.htm

----

This message was adapted from Steve Hitchcock's text at:

      http://www.eprints.org/news/features/request_button.php