Information Services and Use

Some findings are reported from the three-year Researchers of Tomorrow study of research behaviour among doctoral students in ‘Generation Y’. Commissioned by the British Library and UK Joint Information Systems Committee, it is the most intensive study of its kind to date. Generation Y doctoral students are sophisticated information-seekers and users of complex information sources, highly competent in but not dazzled by technology and acutely aware of authority and authenticity issues in research. The study indicates heavy dependence on secondary, published resources as the basis for original research, which may have implications for research quality and the ‘research apprenticeship’ experience. eJournals dominate across all subject disciplines; authentication of access to and licensing limitations on subscription-based resources are a source of frustration. There is widespread lack of understanding about open access. Generation Y doctoral students are not keen users of new technology applications in their research and prefer those that do not challenge existing research work practices. The majority work alone, not in research teams, sharing research outputs only with peers. Despite potential benefits of greater openness and sharing they are constrained by lack of confidence in their research work and the need for them to demonstrate originality in research findings.

For 80 years, Annual Reviews has been synthesizing the literature to help scientists keep up with the wealth of scientific research that is published each year. Our content has traditionally been delivered online and in print as long-form review articles, but with scientists more pressured than ever, we have looked into mobile platforms for new ways to fit information into readers' workflows. We asked ourselves, How are our users changing? How do their needs or habits differ? What is important to them? By leveraging our core role and strengths, Annual Reviews strives to be innovative in our approach to solving readers' future problems. This article looks at our product development and innovation processes and experiences, with examples of lessons learned and hints on where we are going next.

The goal of this paper is to describe selected leading indicators of global competitiveness. This will be accomplished by reviewing several selected sources that focus on various metrics. The reported data was determined to be the most recent at the time of a presentation of this material to NFAIS in February 2012. The goal of this paper is to be objective and informational. Each of the selected indicators will be described in a high-level with a brief review of significant results. This paper will illustrate that there is no one “global leader” across the various categories that are reviewed. The data will show that well established economies, such as the US and EU countries continued to maintain significant levels of funding and achievement, yet these data will also demonstrate how leading positions are being eroded by rapid advances among emerging economies led by China. The Regionally Developing Economies (RDEs) are visibly increasing their positions in various rankings. The data also shows that some of the smaller, yet more established economies, such as Switzerland achieved top positions when a variety of input and output pillars and sub-pillars are utilized within the assessment methodology. Switzerland has long been considered to be a wealthy economy. Finally, the presentation will review, at a high-level the status of STM publishing within an increasingly global market. The paper will summarize recent activities and point to selected RDE markets where local STM market forces are emerging, either in the form of incumbent global publishers who are establishing presence via local partnerships or country-specific publishing operations. In addition, the emerging markets feature notable in-country participants.

This paper presents the content of my closing address given at the Academic Publishing in Europe 2012 Conference. I share my perspective of the public access debate, as CEO of American Institute of Physics, a medium-size scientific publisher and my observations on our industry's most important customers – the libraries. The origin of the often contentious public access debate can be traced back to a worthy goal shared by all stakeholders: the expansion of access to and broad use of scholarly publications. Starting with principles and recommendations set forth in the 2010 Scholarly Publishing Roundtable Report, I outline a productive and pragmatic path forward and identify appropriate and cost-effective options for expanding access. Furthermore, I review the major elements of public access policy development in the US since 2005, leading up to January 2012, a year after President Obama signed into public law the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010. This essay has been expanded to include additional information, covering the issue through September 2012 (submission date of this article), and addresses related government initiatives that appeared in the UK and the European Union.

Content users in businesses, academic institutions, government agencies and other sectors need digital reuse rights to be able to lawfully share copyrighted materials with others. Advances in licensing are creating new opportunities for publishers and other rightsholders to address current and future needs of content users by streamlining, simplifying and integrating licensing solutions within the user's workflow. Options for publishers to meet content users' needs include the use of technology to automate permission request processes. In addition, publishers can also use the services of collective licensing organizations, which aggregate rights from many different rightsholders. One specific collective licensing option is repertory licenses that offer a solution for users at academic, corporate or government organizations who reuse and share portions of thousands of works on a regular basis.