Scholarly communication through institutional repositories: proposing a practical model

Abstract

Purpose -Recognizing that the nature of research and scholarly communication is changing rapidly, an institutional repository (IR) is a tool for collecting, storing, accessing and disseminating scholarly communication within and without the institutions. The primary reason for establishing an IR is to increase the visibility of the institution's research output by making it an open access with regard to copyright issues. This paper aims to propose a conceptualmodel for scholarly communication through IRs to provide an opportunity to integrate and facilitate knowledge sharing so as to enrich knowledge content and enhance global access. Design/methodology/approach -This paper proceeds in three phases. In the first phase, the published literature on IRs and scholarly communication has been reviewed critically considering their empirical applications. Next, based on the understanding gained from the previous stage, a conceptual model for scholarly communication through IRs has been proposed. In the third phase, the proposed model has been developed and finalized toward its maturity. Findings -Based on the literature, the authors have developed a conceptual model for understanding the factors that characterize not only the design but also the development of IRs practically. An IR appears theoretically sound, but it is a difficult task in practice because of some complexities. This paper attempts to set a theoretical model for IRs as a foundation to address the gap in the current literature for researchers, experts and librarians who create, maintain and use IRs, though it does not claim to be comprehensive. Originality/value -A few attempts have been made to investigate scholarly communication through IRs, but this is the one of its first kind that provides a theoretical model for it. It serves as a useful starting point for those interested in knowledge management and IRs.

Digital preservation in institutional repositories: a systematic literature review

“…Authors like (Koler-Povh et al , 2015; Marsh, 2015; Nemati-Anaraki and Tavassoli-Farahi, 2019) or (Bulock, 2016) have illustrated how institutional repositories (IRs) have become an essential element of the scholarly communication ecosystem.…”

The repository, the researcher, and the REF: “It's just compliance, compliance, compliance”

“…Later on, as work demonstrated a citation advantage to publishing open access (Sullo, 2016) it appeared that at least some of these promises could be fulfilled. Other scholars promoted the IR as a new mode for scholarly communication (Nemati-Anaraki & Tavassoli-Farahi, 2018). However, usage and impact can only be measured if the IR's work is itself being measured.…”

Conceptual framework for scholarly communication guidance by the academic library: The case of Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology

“…This reasoning is strengthened by the fact that research is largely funded by the government or sponsored by public funds. It is therefore justified to make research public via open access or by institutional repository as a mechanism for capturing, archiving, managing and enhancing the collective digital research outputs of an institution (Marsh, 2015; Nemati-Anaraki and Tavassoli-Farahi, 2018).…”