No abstract

This study involved a thorough examination of attitudes and opinions of agricultural researchers toward open access publishing and data sharing. Utilizing the results of the Ithaka S+R Agriculture Research Support Services project, we reanalyzed our institutional interview transcripts and synthesized information from the project's publicly available reports. For comparison, we also searched and coded scientific and library literature. Our findings reveal common attitudes related to open access publishing and data sharing and point to potential roles for libraries to help address common impediments, such as lack of trust, time, and money. Overall, this study provides disciplinary context that can inform how librarians approach agricultural researchers about open access publishing and data sharing.

Purpose – This study aims to highlight practical considerations to be made when choosing an eBook package for an institution. Many academic libraries purchase eBooks bundled in packages, either as a time- or cost-saving measure or to build a new subject collection. Design/methodology/approach – The authors searched the Web sites of six major publishers for information on eBook packages, including subject coverage, digital rights management restrictions and usage allowances. The analysis also includes a potential overlap between related subject collections and the ability to purchase titles individually. Findings – Usage allowances, digital rights management restrictions and purchasing options vary considerably from publisher to publisher. There was title overlap between related subject packages found in some publishers. In response to user preferences and needs, many publishers are loosening restrictions on their eBook content, which make purchasing packages a more attractive option for libraries. Originality/value – The landscape of eBook publishing is rapidly changing, which can complicate purchasing decisions. The detailed comparison provided by this study can be used to assist collections developers in making purchasing decisions best suited to their library and avoiding pitfalls such as duplicate purchases.

Objective: To determine trends in research data output, reuse, and sharing of the college of veterinary medicine faculty members at a large academic research institution.Methods: This bibliographic study was conducted by examining original research articles for indication of the types of data produced, as well as evidence that the authors reused data or made provision for sharing their own data. Findings were recorded in the categories of research type, data type, data reuse, data sharing, author collaboration, and grants/funding and were analyzed to determine trends. Results:A variety of different data types were encountered in this study, even within a single article, resulting primarily from clinical and laboratory animal studies. All of the articles resulted from author collaboration, both within the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, as well as with researchers outside the institution. There was little indication that data was reused, except some instances where the authors acknowledged that data was obtained directly from a colleague. There was even less indication that the research data was shared, either as a supplementary file on the publisher's website or by submission to a repository, except in the case of genetic data.Conclusions: Veterinary researchers are prolific producers and users of a wide variety of data. Despite the large amount of collaborative research occurring in veterinary medicine, this study provided little evidence that veterinary researchers are reusing or sharing their data, except in an informal manner. Wider adoption of data management plans may serve to improve researchers' data management practices.

Objective: The study investigated veterinary medicine librarians' experience with and perceptions of research data services. Many academic libraries have begun to offer research data services in response to researchers' increased need for data management support. To date, such services have typically been generic, rather than discipline-specific, to appeal to a wide variety of researchers.Methods: An online survey was deployed to identify trends regarding research data services in veterinary medicine libraries. Participants were identified from a list of contacts from the MLA Veterinary Medical Libraries Section.Results: Although many respondents indicated that they have a professional interest in research data services, the majority of veterinary medicine librarians only rarely or occasionally provide data management support as part of their regular job responsibilities. There was little consensus as to whether research data services should be core to a library's mission despite their perceived importance to the advancement of veterinary research. Furthermore, most respondents stated that research data services are just as or somewhat less important than the other services that they provide and feel only slightly or somewhat prepared to offer such services.Conclusions: Lacking a standard definition of ''research data'' and a common understanding of precisely what research data services encompass, it is difficult for veterinary medicine librarians and libraries to define and understand their roles in research data services. Nonetheless, they appear to have an interest in learning more about and providing research data services.