Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Journals and repositories: an evolving relationship?

By Stephen Pinfield

Abstract

It is now widely accepted that there are two routes to open access (OA): OA repositories and OA journals. It is often assumed these are distinct alternative parallel tracks. However, it has recently become clear that there is potential for repositories and journals to interact with each other on an ongoing basis and between them to form a coherent OA scholarly communication system. This paper puts forward three possible models of interaction between repositories and journals; services such as arXiv and PubMed Central, and the work carried out by the RIOJA project, are working exemplars and pilot implementations of these models. The key issues associated with the widespread adoption of these models include repository infrastructure\ud development; changing ideas of the ‘journal’, ‘article’, and ‘publication’; version management; quality assurance; business and funding models; developing value-added features; content preservation; policy frameworks; and changing roles and cultures within the research community

Publisher: ALPSP
Year: 2009
OAI identifier: oai:eprints.nottingham.ac.uk:1092
Provided by: Nottingham ePrints

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (2006). A Wel(l)come development: research funders and open access.
  2. (2007). Author’s version vs. publisher’s version: an analysis of the copy-editing function.
  3. (2007). Can open access repositories and peer-reviewed journals coexist?
  4. Defining and certifying electronic publication in science.
  5. (2007). E-prints and journal articles in astronomy: a productive co-existence.
  6. (1998). Forces and functions in scientific communication: an analysis of their interplay.
  7. Fulfilling the promise of scholarly communication – a comparison between old and new access models. In
  8. (2005). Funding the way to open access.
  9. Interface for Overlaid Journal Archives).
  10. (2008). Journal article version nomenclature: the NISO/ALPSP recommendations.
  11. (2003). Mandated online RAE CVs linked to university eprint archives: enhancing UK research impact and assessment.
  12. My thanks are due to David Prosser for suggesting this model.
  13. (2007). Open access and accuracy: author-archived manuscripts vs. published articles.
  14. (2002). Open access archives: from scientific plutocracy to the republic of science.
  15. (2006). Open computation: beyond human readercentric views of scholarly literatures.
  16. (2004). Pathfinder Research on Web-Based Repositories: Final Report. London, Publisher and Library/Learning Solutions (PALS),
  17. Pinfield Chief Information Officer Information Services University of Nottingham King’s Meadow Campus Lenton Lane Nottingham NG7 2NR, UK Email: stephen.pinfield@nottingham.ac.uk Journals and repositories: an evolving relationship?
  18. Research Excellence Framework:
  19. (2004). review and the acceptance of new scientific ideas: discussion paper from a working party on equipping the public with an understanding of peer review. London, Sense about Science,
  20. (2005). Self-archiving publications. In
  21. (2007). The business of digital repositories. In doi
  22. (1999). The deconstructed journal: a new model for academic publishing.
  23. (2000). The journal as an overlay on preprint databases.
  24. There has been a discussion of this idea in the professional literature for some time. See Frankel,
  25. (2008). Validating research performance metrics against peer rankings. doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.