Exploring Publishing Patterns at a Large Research University: Implications for Library Practice
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Objective – The research project sought to explore the value of data on publication patterns for decision-making regarding scholarly communications and collection development programs at a research-intensive post-secondary institution, the University of Utah in the United States. Methods – Publication data for prolific University of Utah authors were gathered from Scopus for the year 2009. The availability to University of Utah faculty, staff, and students of the journals in which University of Utah authors published was determined using the University of Utah Libraries’ catalogue; usage was estimated based on publisher-provided download statistics and requests through interlibrary loan; and costs were calculated from invoices, a periodicals directory, and publisher websites and communications. Indicators of value included the cost-per-use of journals to which the University of Utah Libraries subscribed, a comparison of interlibrary loan costs to subscription costs for journals to which the University of Utah Libraries did not subscribe, the relationship between publishing venue and usage, and the relationship between publishing venue and cost-per-use. Results – There were 22 University of Utah authors who published 10 or more articles in 2009. Collectively, these authors produced 275 articles in 162 journals. The University of Utah provided access through library subscriptions to 83% of the journals for which access, usage, and cost data were available, with widely varying usage and at widely varying costs. Cost-per-use and a comparison of interlibrary loan to subscription costs provided evidence of the effectiveness of collection development practices. However, at the individual journal title level, there was little overlap between the various indicators of journal value, with the highest ranked, or most valuable, journals differing depending on the indicator considered. Few of the articles studied appeared in open access journals, suggesting a possible focus area for the scholarly communications program. Conclusions – Knowledge of publication patterns provides an additional source of data to support collection development decisions and scholarly communications programming. As the estimated value of a journal is dependent on the factor being studied, gathering knowledge on a number of factors and from a variety of sources can lead to more informed decision-making. Efforts should be made to expand data considered in areas of scholarly communications and collection development beyond usage to incorporate publishing activities of institutionally affiliated authors.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,105 | 0,425 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,011 | 0,030 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,004 | 0,006 |
| Communication savante | 0,017 | 0,024 |
| Science ouverte | 0,004 | 0,007 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».