two studies on scholarly communication

I saw these in a post on hangingtogether, the OCLC RLG Programs blog. Both are worth a look.

1. A comparison of repository types and the affect on scholarly communication

Comparing Repository Types: Challenges and Barriers for Subject-Based Repositories, Research Repositories, National Repository Systems and Institutional Repositories in Serving Scholarly Communication by Chris Armbruster Research Network 1989 Laurent Romary INRIA November 23, 2009
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1506905

Four kinds of publication repository are described: subject-based, research, national system and institutional. Two shifts in the role of repositories may be noted. For content, a well-defined and high quality corpus is essential. For service, high value to specific scholarly communities is essential.

Challenges and barriers to repository development are laid out in three dimensions:
a) identification and deposit of content
b) access and use of services
c) preservation of content and sustainability of service

2. A case-study-based look at how researchers work and how they relate to policies and services from information service providers and employers.

Patterns of information use and exchange: case studies of researchers in the life sciences: A report of research patterns in life sciences revealing that researcher practices diverge from policies promoted by funders and information service providers by the RIN and the British Library.
http://www.rin.ac.uk/our-work/using-and-accessing-information-resources/disciplinary-case-studies-life-sciences

The report concludes that ‘one-size-fits-all’ information and data sharing policies do not achieve scientifically productive and cost-efficient information use in life sciences.