MODULE TWO:Supply-side Grey Literature

GreyWorks 2010 Transparency Governs the Grey Landscape

Motive for Publishing - Question • In general, What are your objectives when

publishing your research output ?

Ranking Motive of Publishing Rate(%)

1 Requirements of their affiliations

65.2%

2 For their academic reputation 61.2%

3 To communicate results to my peers

52.0%

4 To obtain the direct financial reward

19.2%

Hwang et al., GL7 - Publishing

Author Survey 2005Author Survey 2005

Also via a Commercial PublisherPublished on other topics than GL

Farace et al., GL7 – Author/Researcher

Implementing DAI in The NetherlandsDigital Author Identifier

• Co-operation of all Dutch universities, KNAW and NWO

• Creating a thesaurus of author names with corresponding DAI within the OCLC-PICA system

• Matching DAI and author names in all three research related information systems (NOD; EASY; repositories)

• 40,000 unique author names with DAI’s

4

Dijk et al., GL9 – Author (Stakeholder)

Consistent

branding across all

series

Green, GL7 – Corporate Author

Publishing Recommendations Sent to GESAMP

• Emphasize the acronym GESAMP• Establish a standardized name for the series• Ensure that each title is consistently applied• Obtain a new ISSN with each name change• Always include an ISBN, along with the ISSN• Distribute reports widely• Send copies of reports to indexing agencies

McDonald et al., DAL GL5 - Publishing

Publishing Recommendations Sent to GESAMP (cont.)

• Outline the peer review process in each report

• Consider establishing two series

• Give greater attention to translation of the reports

• Keep the website up to date

• Continue creating digital versions of older reports

• Centralize publication and distribution of the reports

McDonald et al., DAL GL5 - Publishing

Value chain

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1. author 2. publisher3. reviewer4. publisher

5. Agent 6. university7. Library 8. Reader

1:2:3:4:

5:6:7:8:

reviewer publisher

agentuniversitylibraryreader

Roosendaal, (UTwente) GL5 - Publishing

Ideally?

1 8

1. author

8. reader

1:2:3:4:

5:6:7:8:

authorpublisherreviewer publisher

agentuniversitylibraryreader

Roosendaal, (UTwente) GL5 - Publishing

Conclusions

• develop and test new value chains– university should take initiative

• international development in education – new conditions

• main issue: how can we get this done?– not technological, but organisational issue– high level strategy

Roosendaal, (UTwente) GL5 - Publishing

The role of grey literature• Each activity in the processes is associated with the production

and consumption of grey literature

– Plans

– Deliverables

– Technical Reports

– Formal project management documents

– …

• Data generated in science is also “GL”

– Need to maintain metadata

– Establish links to publications

Lambert et al., GL7 - Production

65.4%

89.3% Produce Grey Information

n=56

80.8%

76.9%

Proceedings

Trip/Cave Reports

Information Type %

Conference Proceedings/Papers 80.8

Trip & Cave Reports 76.9

Speeches or Invited Talks 65.4

Images 65.4

Maps 61.5

Research Proposals 57.7

Theses/Dissertations 53.8

Association/Organization Publications

48.1

Newsletters 46.2

Cave Entrance Databases 44.2

Grant Applications 44.2

Most Commonly Produced Grey Information Types

Top Four Grey Information Sources

Karst Information Portal

Images

Speeches/Invited Talks

+

Chavez et al., GL8 - Publication

Grey to white

85%

15%

Published in white one to four years later

No direct relation to white publications

grey

white

Schopfel, GL9 – Publication (Language)

Language of white and grey

95% 5% 64%36%

English

Flemish, French English

White literatureGrey literature

Schopfel, GL9 – Publication (Language)

Features of grey literature• Timeliness:

Up to 4 years before white publication

• Uniqueness: Up to 85% not published in white

• Community: One third in Flemish or French

• Quality: More than 60% evaluated before publishing

• Open repositories: Need future development

Schopfel, GL9 – Publication (Language)

Who writes in English and why?• Sources : Introductions, Acknowledgements, title pages, Curriculum

vitae

• Difficult language, e.g. Finnish• Foreign student

– Thesis submitted to 2 universities– Accessible to readers in both countries

• Search conducted in a foreign country or participation in an international project

• Certain scientific domains : Physics, Biology, MedicineStock,

GL9 – Publication (Language)

Standardization

Supply-side

• Productione.g. review process, typographical layout

• Processing e.g. metadata, value added information and data

• Access and Distributione.g. search engines, document delivery, point of sales

Farace – General

GREY LITERATURE:Old virtues and new look to enter the realm of science!

Unique contentOriginal information Not for profit production

Pleasant layout Online availability

Easy retrieval

(content)

(form)

OLD VIRTUES

NEW LOOK

De Castro et al., GL7 - Standards

Analysis of GL in the changing context (3)

How can the profile of GL be raised?

in Europe NANCY STYLEin USA ANSI/NISO standard Z39.18-2005

adhering to well-developed production standards:

HOW?

INTERNAL advance among GL producers

enhancing public awareness of GL

EXTERNAL advance in the information landscape

HOW?

De Castro et al., GL8 - Standards

Accomplished by taxonomic structure

• Refine reasoning abilities

• Develop stronger arguments

• Communicate complex cases

• Produce better documents

• Make better decisions

Gelfand, GL8 - Classification

Applications for taxonomies

• Web directories • Taxonomies to support automatic indexing • Taxonomies created by automatic

categorization • Front end filters for corporate taxonomies

Gelfand, GL8 - Classification

OECD Metadata is the key

• Task 1: analyse the current WPs (Working Papers) to identify metadata fields on current papers

• Task 2: add additional fields as needed (- we finished with 19!)

• Task 3: Sign off metadata fields so a database can be built

• Task 4: QA existing metadata, get numbering sorted!• Task 5: Fill the database with metadata• Task 6: QA the filled database

Green, GL7 - Metadata

Specific metadata

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

no specific GL metadata specific GL metadata

66% of all archives

Schopfel et al., GL10 - Metadata

Global political economy of the distribution of information

Free marketDemand and supplyIntellectual propertyCommodity

Common good

education health info Basic rights

Large scale productionMonopoliesExternalitiesParticipation“The mind industry has become the key

industry of the twentieth century” (Enzensberger, 1976)

Britz et al., GL5 – Ownership

Indigenous Knowledge (IK)

private property; goods produced for sale – not personal use; surplus production; economic growth; currency system; competition, nature reviewed as resource

Incompatible

No private ownership; goods produce for use value; substance goal; no concept of economic growth; barter system-concrete value, collective production; humans seenas part of nature

Britz et al., GL5 – Ownership

Conclusion

IK can make a valuable contribution to the body of knowledge in the world

Currently: white, grey, black

Change: paradigm shift, education, distribution

Guided by justice

Britz et al., GL5 – Ownership

Copyright PoliciesIf a working paper is published in a journal—either in the same form

or, more commonly, in revised form—many journals allow the

working paper to continue to be made available, especially when it

is for educational/scholarly noncommercial use. Unfortunately, some

journals do require that the working paper be removed. Others grant

exceptions for something like the eScholarship Repository; they just

need to be asked. It is up to the faculty member to check the terms

of their agreement with the journal to see what is allowed. Individual

journal policies vary widely. The RoMEO Project (Rights MEtadata

for Open archiving) has compiled a list of many journals' "Copyright

Policies" about "self-archiving."Gelfand, GL6 - Copyright

• Copyright Holder• Who do you think is the most desirable copyright holder

for your research output. Please check the priority.

Entity 1st 2nd 3rd 4th others

Researcher 170(68.0%) 50 (20.0%) 20(8.0%) 4(1.6%) 6(2.4%)

Organization 60(24.0%) 116(46.4%) 53(21.2%) 9(3.6%) 12(1.2%)

Sponsor 23(9.2%) 67(26.8%) 126(50.4%) 9(3.6%) 25(1.0%)

Publisher 5(2.0%) 8(3.2%) 23(9.2%) 154(61.6%) 60(24.0%)

Hwang et al., GL7 - Copyright

(11) Grey literature is always

subject to a Review Process

6.7%

39.4%

9.6%

44.2%

YesDependsNoNA

The Content LevelThe Content Level

Boekhorst et al., GL6 – Review Process

Collapse of Distinction Between Grey and Non-Grey Literature?

• Envisioning the Future:

– Continuum of scholarship rather than a hierarchy

– Grey literature just as valued as peer-reviewed materials

– Peer-review ratifies rather than validates scholarship

– Core of scholarship is contained in the grey literature

Banks, GL7 – Review Process