‘There are a lot of details here but put simply, ReadCube was designed by researchers for researchers as a literature organization and discovery platform. ReadCube’s development has and always will be driven by the needs of working researchers. I feel it’s important to stress that because sometimes, in these conversations, the one voice that isn’t heard is the most important one.
Play either Charleston demo video or Sinisa’s original demo video
Show University of Utah landing page and play video
Needs better screenshots of just the middle part.
Charleston ReadCube Access
Labtiva readcube A content delivery platformand reference manager for scholarly articles
The History Of ReadCube• Labtiva formed in a Harvard dorm room in 2007• ReadCube was originally written as a simple tool to organize a researcher’s PDF library• Investment from Digital Science in 2011• First version of ReadCube released in October 2011• The ‘Web Reader’ launched as a platform extension on nature.com in November 2011 Siniša Hrvatin and Rob McGrath (founders)• ReadCube grows into a fully functional reference manager during 2012 and is now used in 5,000 institutions• ReadCube Access, an e-commerce system for individual and group purchases of single articles launched in September 2012• ReadCube is to be launched on multiple publisher platforms by the end of this year and beyond• More publishers have agreed to participate in ReadCube Access
An Introduction To ReadCube An intuitive interface for the entire lifecylce of an article Automateddiscovery toolsenable users tofind RELEVANTcontent quickly
Addressing the growingpains of the single-article economy
From The Publisher Viewpoint • Scholarly output doubles every 20 years • This is in-line with: 1. Research output 2. Number of papers published• The proportion of university funds spent on the library is falling• Publishers provide value• This is a about how institutions choose to spend their money
The Library Viewpoint Serial Expenditures in ARL Libraries (n=107) 300% Costs continue 250% to rise linearly AP introduces 200% Big DealChange since 1986 150% Serial (Unit cost) Serial Expenditure 100% Serials Purchased The Big Deal 50% improved access 0% 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 -50%• The rate of increase of costs is still 5-9% and would outstrip library budgets even if they weren’t falling• Irrespective of value, subscriptions are increasingly unsustainable
What Happens When A Researcher Visits A ‘Paywall’ Earlier this year, we polled our users and asked them • The Pie Chart shows all responses to paywall events • Respondents only report purchasing content on 3.6% of occasions • 25% of events result in an ILL request • Users use file sharing 40% of the time • 27% of the time, users gave up or foundResults consistent with Access to content in a different journalScholarly content: Gaps andBarriers, JiSC/RiN Dec-2011
Where Are Researchers Getting Articles? Friends with access Interlibrary Twitter loan #icanhazpdf OArepositories Bulletin Boards/ Forums* Author website/email Google Scholar* One single unnamed website responsible for $1.4m in lostrevenue during 2008 Int J Med Informatics, 5, 1 (2009)
The Benefits Of A Sustainable Article EconomyFor Publishers For Libraries• Significant incremental • Reduce costs associated revenue with inter-library loan• Wider dissemination of • Provide instant access to content more content• Help define and meet • Measure demand and expectations of the inform collection market management• Reduction of file sharing • Maintain engagement risk to sustainability with patrons• A disorderly transition from one dissemination model to another is in nobody’s interest• It is important to discuss these issues and find mutually sustainable models
Why Don’t Researchers Buy Articles?• Researchers perceive the price point to be too high• Generally, researches are unwilling to use their own money• Many funding agencies prohibit the use of research funds to buy content – NIH is one such example• PPV requires a Credit Card. Institutions often require purchase orders and invoices As a result, researchers use slow, poor- quality methods to obtain content
Removing The Barriers: Library Supported PurchasesPurchasing articles through ReadCube Access is more convenient than file sharing • Easy to use • Instant delivery • ‘Free’ to the user • Library creates pre- paid fund • Designed by researchers to fit into the researcher workflow
Trial At The University Of Utah• Objective – Establish whether ReadCube Access represents a sustainable purchasing mechanism – Assess whether researchers prefer ReadCube access to other ways of obtaining individual articles• Method – ReadCube Access was offered on a subset of serials from nature.com (29 serials) – Promotion was limited to approx. 1,090 faculty and post- doctoral fellows (~25% of campus) – Number of purchases was compared to the average number of ILL requests• Preliminary Results – Number of ReadCube Access purchases ~50% higher than expected when compared to ILL
Provisional Trial Conclusion‘ReadCube Access represents good valuefor money and a sustainable model’ -Rick Anderson, Interim Dean, Marriot Library, Utah
The Individual Article Option• A simple 3-step purchasing system makes buying single articles easy• Articles can be purchased in two places 1. The Web Reader, linked from the article page 2. The ReadCube desktop reference manager
Summary• ReadCube’s objective is to improve access to scholarly literature for scientists, in collaboration with libraries and publishers• ReadCube was designed by researchers around the researcher workflow• Disorderly disruption of scholarly communication should be avoided• Demand-Driven Acquisition is one part of a multi- access environment including subscriptions, big deals and open access• Initial trials of ReadCube Access show it to be sustainable and good value for money
A particular slide catching your eye?
Clipping is a handy way to collect important slides you want to go back to later.