NDLTD Prior Publications Working Group Gail McMillan, Marisa Ramirez, Joan Dalton, Ann Hanlon, Heather Smith, Chelsea Kern 15th International ETD Symposium Lima, Peru Sept.

Download Report

Transcript NDLTD Prior Publications Working Group Gail McMillan, Marisa Ramirez, Joan Dalton, Ann Hanlon, Heather Smith, Chelsea Kern 15th International ETD Symposium Lima, Peru Sept.

NDLTD Prior Publications Working Group
Gail McMillan, Marisa Ramirez, Joan Dalton, Ann Hanlon, Heather Smith, Chelsea Kern
15th International ETD Symposium
Lima, Peru
Sept. 17, 2012
 Publishers previously surveyed a decade ago.
 Questions continue to arise.
 ETD-L
 Chronicle of Higher Education
 Perceptions, not data, are usually reported.
 LSU ETD by Ursula Goldsmith
 VT ETD author surveys


VT Authors are restricting access to the ETDs.
Faculty are advising students to restrict access.
If you restricted access to your VT ETD, on
what did you base your decision?
Please select all that apply.





VT graduate student alumni survey (2000)
Ohio U ETD by Angla McCutcheon (2010)
NDLTD Board’s encouragement
SoSci/Hum publishers survey (2011)
ProQuest
 Thompson Reuter’s Journal Performance
Indicators (JPI), 2005-2009




16,455 journals in 171 subject categories
Relative Impact Factor (RPI): top 5
723 science journals
290 journal editors surveyed (40%)
 Cal Poly Human Subjects Committee
approved (IRB—Institutional Review
Board)
 Which of the following statements best reflects the editorial
policy or practice governing your enterprise?
Manuscripts which are revisions derived from openly accessible
electronic theses and dissertations (ETDs) are…
Always welcome for submission.
Considered on a case-by-case basis.
Considered ONLY IF the contents and conclusions in the
manuscript are substantially different from the ETD.
Considered ONLY IF the ETD has access limited to the campus
or institution where it was completed.
Not considered under any circumstances.
Other (please elaborate)
 Emails to schedule phone calls
 Calls with 8 editors June 2012
 Questions:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Clear question?
Appropriate target audience?
Timing?
Strategies to encourage participation?
Incentives or endorsements?
 SurveyMonkey
 Free Web survey tool
 Emailed 290 journal editors
 Aug. 9-27, 2012: survey period
 Aug. 14 and 21: Reminder emails
 Sept. 7-14: Follow-up phone calls by LIS
students to non-respondents




45%
35%
7.5%
12.5%
Commercial publishing company
Academic society
University press
Other








54.5% Editor-in-Chief
11.4% Editorial Board
6.8% Professional Organization/Society
6.8% Publications Committee
4.5% Publisher
2.3% Editorial Director
4.5% Don’t know
9.1% Other (combinations)





71.4%
11.9%
7.1%
2.4%
7.1%
Editors-in-chief
Managing Editors
Members of Editorial Boards
Assistant Editors
Others (publishers)
 In what country is the journal based?
 76% US; UK, Netherlands, Germany,
Australia, Denmark
 What is the primary language of the
journal?
 English
 Comments, observations on the primary
research question.
 18.3% responded to the Science survey
 2 follow-up emails
 Follow-up phone interviews Sept. 7-14, 2012
 17.0% responded to the 2011 Hum/SoSci
survey
 1 follow-up email
“An important consideration is whether the electronic
thesis has been assigned a citable DOI, citations to which
may reduce citations to the version published in the
journal.”
“It is our job to archive and publish the best research.
Thus we are quite happy to publish material which
otherwise would sit languishing on an online archive.”
‘Delayed open access to ETDs would help in making the
submission more attractive. However, ETDs are not
referenced by the usual data services (webofscience,
scifinder, etc.) and that's the service journals provide.’ [Sci Pre-test]
“Work which has not been published in archival peer
reviewed journals is considered appropriate for submission,
even if it is accessible elsewhere.” [Sci Open-ended]
 “Easy to determine who the author is and thus
undermines the strength and reliability of peer review.
This could, ultimately, disadvantage young scholars.”
 “My first thought on this matter, and I never thought
about it until just now, was “why should anything
derived from a dissertation be excluded?”—but thinking
further—if dissertations can be as readily accessed by
computer as is becoming the case with journals—then
perhaps I need to consider some form of restriction...”
“Some depts. require a number of publications prior to awarding
a PhD, so they are already publishing papers, journal articles,
from their dissertation work.” [Sci Pre-Test]
“We would prefer that students work with their major
advisors to design thesis chapters for submission as
research articles and review papers as part of the
dissertation process to ensure a good fit with the journal.
Ideally, the dissertation when completed will contain
chapters that have already been published or accepted for
publication so that the journal does not have to compete
with content that is already freely available.” [2011 open-ended]
“…the dissertation/thesis would have to be changed ANYWAY
to fit the guidelines and format of the journal, so of course it
would be accepted, even if the content does mirror that in the
ETD.” [Sci Pre-Test]
“All essays go through extensive review and revision process, so
even if the starting point is out there, the final product is not.” [2011
open-ended]
“The editorial review and publication process entails substantial
refinement and revision of works that originate as part of
doctoral work and thus we do not consider raw dissertations as
competing with the works eventually published under our
imprint.” [2011 open-ended]
Submit works based on ETDs.
>90% editors will consider them.
 Adapt them for a new audience.
 Quality is the editors’ main concern.
 Peer review is radically different.

Gail McMillan [email protected]
Joan Dalton [email protected]
Ann Hanlon [email protected]
Marisa L. Ramirez [email protected]
Heather Smith [email protected]