1. NDLTD Prior Publications Working Group Gail McMillan, Marisa Ramirez, Joan Dalton, Ann Hanlon, Heather Smith, Chelsea Kern 15 th International ETD Symposium Lima, Peru Sept. 17, 2012

2.  Publishers previously surveyed a decade ago.previously surveyed  Questions continue to arise.  ETD-L  Chronicle of Higher Education  Perceptions, not data, are usually reported.  LSU ETD by Ursula GoldsmithETD  VT ETD author surveysauthor surveys  VT Authors are restricting access to the ETDs.  Faculty are advising students to restrict access.

3. If you restricted access to your VT ETD, on what did you base your decision? Please select all that apply.

4.  VT graduate student alumni survey (2000)  Ohio U ETD by Angla McCutcheon (2010)  NDLTD Board’s encouragement  SoSci/Hum publishers survey (2011)  ProQuest

5.  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)

6.  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)

7.  Emails to schedule phone calls  Calls with 8 editors June 2012  Questions: 1.Clear question? 2.Appropriate target audience? 3.Timing? 4.Strategies to encourage participation? 5.Incentives or endorsements?

8.  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

9.  45% Commercial publishing company  35% Academic society  7.5% University press  12.5%Other

10.  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)

11.  71.4% Editors-in-chief  11.9%Managing Editors  7.1%Members of Editorial Boards  2.4%Assistant Editors  7.1%Others (publishers)

12.  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.

13.  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

20. “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.”

21. ‘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]

22.  “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...”

23. “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]

24. “…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]

25. 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.

26. Gail McMillan gailmac@vt.edugailmac@vt.edu Joan Dalton jdalton@uwindsor.cajdalton@uwindsor.ca Ann Hanlon hanlon@uwm.eduhanlon@uwm.edu Marisa L. Ramirez mramir14@calpoly.edumramir14@calpoly.edu Heather Smith hsmith@calpoly.edu@calpoly.edu