Information on the frequency and patterns of document usage on open access repositories may give feedback about a) the value of a document for users b) the importance of research for the authors c) the impact of a document (that enhances citation based impact metrics) Additionally usage information gathered on the repository level may give feedback about a) how visitors are using a repository (in terms of penetration or navigation) b) how effectively a repository is connected to other retrieval systems c) how repository managers may improve their repositories This presentation discusses a) the opportunities to utilize usage information as impact scores b) the opportunities to analyze repository services by usage information c) an infrastructure to gather interoperable usage information from distributed open access repositories. This infrastructure was implemented in the project OpenAccess Statistics, http://www.dini.de/projekte/oa-statistik/english/ (funded by the German Research Foundation, DFG http://www.dfg.de). Additionally the results of three surveys focussing on repository services based on ussage information are presented. Lit: Bollen, J., Van de Sompel, H., Hagberg, A., Chute, R.: A principal component analysis of 39 scientific impact measures. PLoS ONE 4 (6), art. no. e6022 Bollen, J., Van De Sompel, H., Rodriguez, M.A.: Towards usage-based impact metrics: First results from the MESUR project. Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Digital Libraries, pp. 231-240 Nicholas, D., Clark, D., Rowlands, I., Jamali, H.R.: Online use and information seeking behaviour: Institutional and subject comparisons of UK researchers. Journal of Information Science 35 (6), pp. 660-676 Herb, U., Scholze, F.: Nutzungsstatistiken elektronischer Publikationen. Zeitschrift fur Bibliothekswesen und Bibliographie 54 (4-5), pp. 234-237

1. Statistiken für Repositories

5. Relevanz eines Dokuments

6. Ranking

7. Ranking

11. Sind alle Auswertungen sinnvoll? Tom Cochrane, University of Queensland. Mandates: an Australian example of the Queensland University of Technology, CERN Workshop in Innovations in Scholarly Communication (OAI6)

14. Impact eines Dokuments „ Our results indicate that the notion of scientific impact is a multi-dimensional construct that can not be adequately measured by any single indicator, although some measures are more suitable than others. The commonly used citation Impact Factor is not positioned at the core of this construct, but at its periphery, and should thus be used with caution. “ „ Usage-based measures such as Usage Closeness centrality may in fact be better ‚consensus‘ measures .“ Bollen, J.; Van De Sompel, H.; Hagberg, A.; Chute, R.: A principal component analysis of 39 scientific impact measures. In: PloS one 4 (2009), Issue 6, e6022. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0006022.

15. Einige Umfrageergebnisse

17. Experteninterviews

19. Onlinebefragung unter Repositorynutzern

20. Onlinebefragung unter Repositorynutzern 10-12/2009 Teilnehmer: 253 Personen 5,5 % 14 Sozialwissenschaften 6,3 % 16 Dienstleistungssektor 12,6 % 32 Naturwissenschaften 13,4 % 34 EDV/Informatik 46,6 % 118 Bibliothekswesen

28. Mailbefragung unter Repository-Betreibern

37. Standards? COUNTER PIRUS LogEc IFABC AWStats Mesur

42. Repository-Ansicht

43. Repository-Ansicht

49. Vielen Dank für Ihre Aufmerksamkeit!