1. RESULTS FROM THE DOAB USER NEEDS STUDY Janneke Adema (DOAB) OASPA conference 19-21 September, Budapest

2. www.doabooks.org

3. User Needs Research Overview of the online DOAB discussion First results of the DOAB user needs survey “The aim of the DOAB (Directory of Open Access Books) User Needs Research is to evaluate users’ experiences of DOAB (as it is currently set up in its beta-version), and to collect data on user needs and expectations with respect to a directory of Open Access books.”

4. http://listserv.gwdg.de/pipermail/doab/

5. http://doabooks.wordpress.com/

6. Main Focus Points of the Discussion What is an Open Access Book? What are suitable (requirements for) funding schemes/business models for Open Access books? How do we establish the quality of Open Access Books?

7. What is an Open Access Book?

8. Read-Only access or Read/Write access (Gratis vs Libre) Read-Only - Authors’ needs - Access is the key issue - Different rights for different materials? Read/Write Access - Compare with free software - Open Access definitions and declarations: Gratis + Libre - Publishing/scholarship is a collaborative effort

9. ‘Clearly, making works free to read has a huge impact on the dissemination of knowledge.’ - Rupert Gatti

10. Read-Only access or Read/Write access (Gratis vs Libre) Read-Only - Authors’ needs - Access is the key issue - Different rights for different materials? Read/Write Access - Compare with free software - Open Access definitions and declarations: Gratis + Libre - Publishing/scholarship is a collaborative effort

11. Not a simple dichotomy Reluctance amongst book publishers to use less restrictive Open Access licenses. Rethink our institutions Scholar’s needs Text and Data mining

12. ‘I think there is much need for OA in the arts, humanities, and social sciences, but, from my experience, for the project to really catch on widely among the academic body in those disciplines, it has to have strong intellectual underpinnings’ - Joanna Zylinska

13. Not a simple dichotomy Reluctance amongst book publishers to use less restrictive Open Access licenses. Rethink our institutions Scholar’s needs Text and Data mining

14. What are suitable (requirements for)funding schemes/business models for Open Access books?

15. Access New collaborative production processes Enhanced content and formats Licenses Funding/research grants Alternative business models Funder’s responsibility

16. ‘I’ve been known to buy print copies of books that I’ve discovered in Open Access digital format’ - Malcolm Heath

17. Access New collaborative production processes Enhanced content and formats Licenses Funding/research grants Alternative business models Funder’s responsibility

18. ‘(…) for now I would be inclined to at least require re-use licenses as a common standard for funded projects.’ - Angela Holzer

19. How do we establish the quality of Open Access Books?

20. Evaluation procedure visible within the book Peer review, OA and ebooks Publisher Seal of Approval How to enforce? Differences in peer review Quality control or quality enhancement? Flexible standards

21. ‘ My view is that decisions about whether a new publisher is following appropriate quality-control practices should be decided by senior scholars in the discipline in which the publisher operates, possibly in conjunction with established publishers. OASPA, the Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association, is a great start in this direction and worth supporting.’ - Heather Morrison

22. Evaluation procedure visible within the book Peer review, OA and ebooks Publisher Seal of Approval How to enforce? Differences in peer review Quality control or quality enhancement? Flexible standards

23. ‘In moving to OA book publishing, should we force all publishers everywhere to adopt the same strict peer review procedures? Or should we identify a number of adequate forms of quality control and screen OA publishers on the type of quality control they are conducting? Or should we primarily aim to make the quality control transparent and expect publishers to improve their reviewing procedures as they are made public?’ - Eelco Ferwerda

24. Evaluation procedure visible within the book Peer review, OA and ebooks Publisher Seal of Approval How to enforce? Differences in peer review Quality control or quality enhancement? Flexible standards

25. ‘One reason to avoid delineating which quality control mechanisms to use is that this could stifle what I see as needed innovation in this area, such as open approaches to peer review and the more open approaches to writing such as liquid peer review’ - Heather Morrison

26. DOAB Survey 15 th August – 15 th September 202 people filled out the survey, from all over the world 91 librarians 55 academics 23 DOAB publishers 24 non-DOAB publishers 9 funders/university representatives

28. Copyright

29. Academics

30. Quality Control

31. Thank You For more information, comments or questions: ademaj@uni.coventry.ac.uk www.openreflections.wordpress.com @openreflections