Türkiye'de Açık Dergi Sistemlerinde Yayımlanan Kütüphane ve Bilgi Bilim Dergilerinin Dijital Koruma Durumu: Fatcat Tabanlı Bir Analiz

Kemal Yayla

doi:10.33721/by.1541321

TR EN

Türkiye'de Açık Dergi Sistemlerinde Yayımlanan Kütüphane ve Bilgi Bilim Dergilerinin Dijital Koruma Durumu: Fatcat Tabanlı Bir Analiz

Abstract

Bu çalışma, Türkiye'deki Kütüphane ve Bilgi Bilim alanında Açık Dergi Sistemleri (OJS) kullanılarak yayınlanan açık erişimli dergilerin dijital koruma durumlarını ve akademik içeriklerin sürümlenmiş ve kamuya açık olarak düzenlenebilir kataloğu olan Fatcat'teki görünürlüklerini incelemektedir. Araştırmada, Türk Kütüphaneciliği (TK) ve Bilgi Dünyası (BD) dergileri karma yöntemle analiz edilmiştir. OJS sistemlerindeki içerik, Fatcat'teki verilerle nicel olarak karşılaştırılmış, dergilerin dijital koruma politikaları doküman analizi ile incelenmiştir. Bulgular, TK dergisinin dijital içeriğinin %67,44'üne, BD dergisinin ise %26'sına Internet Archive üzerinden erişilebildiğini göstermektedir. Ayrıca, TK dergisinin Fatcat'teki görünürlük oranı %55,58, BD dergisinin ise %33,33 olarak belirlenmiştir. Her iki derginin de belirlenmiş bir dijital koruma stratejisi olduğu, ancak erişilebilirlik ve sürdürülebilirlik açısından iyileştirme gerektiren alanlar bulunduğu tespit edilmiştir. Çalışma, Türkiye'deki akademik dergilerin ulusal platformlarda depolanmasının dijital koruma politikalarına olumlu katkı sağladığını, ancak uluslararası koruma sistemlerine entegrasyonun yetersiz kaldığını ortaya koymaktadır. TK ve BD dergilerinin uluslararası dijital koruma sistemlerine dahil edilmesi ve veri aktarım süreçlerinin geliştirilmesi önerilmektedir. Gelecekteki araştırmaların, diğer akademik alanlardaki dergilerin dijital koruma stratejilerini inceleyerek Türkiye’deki durumu daha kapsamlı bir şekilde değerlendirmesi önerilmektedir.

Keywords

Fatcat, Dijital Koruma Politikası, Açık Erişim Dergiler

Digital Preservation Status of Library and Information Science Journals Published in Open Journal Systems in Turkey: A Fatcat-Based Analysis

Abstract

This study examines the digital preservation status and visibility in Fatcat—a versioned and publicly editable catalog of academic content—of open-access journals published using Open Journal Systems (OJS) in Turkey's Library and Information Science field. A mixed-methods approach was employed to analyze two prominent journals: Türk Kütüphaneciliği (TK) and Bilgi Dünyası (BD). Content hosted on OJS platforms was quantitatively compared with data in Fatcat, while the journals' digital preservation policies were scrutinized through document analysis. Findings reveal that 67.44% of TK's digital content and 26% of BD's content are accessible via the Internet Archive. Additionally, the visibility rates of TK and BD in Fatcat were determined to be 55.58% and 33.33%, respectively. While both journals have established digital preservation strategies, areas requiring improvement were identified, particularly regarding accessibility and long-term sustainability. The study indicates that archiving academic journals on national platforms in Turkey positively contributes to digital preservation efforts; however, integration with international preservation systems remains insufficient. It is recommended that TK and BD be incorporated into international digital preservation systems and that data transfer processes be enhanced. Future research should aim to assess the situation in Turkey more comprehensively by examining the digital preservation strategies of journals across various academic disciplines.

Keywords

Fatcat, Digital Preservation Policies, Open-Access Journals

References

Aslan, A. (2019). TR Dizin. Acta Medica Alanya, 3(1), 1-2. https://doi.org/10.30565/medalanya.557393
Baudoin, P. (2003). Uppity bits: Coming to terms with archiving dynamic electronic journals. The Serials Librarian, 43(4), 63-72. https://doi.org/10.1300/J123v43n04_06
Becerril, A., Bosman, J., Bjørnshauge, L., Frantsvåg, J. E., Kramer, B., Langlais, P.-C., Mounier, P., Proudman, V., Redhead, C., ve Torny, D. (2021). OA Diamond Journals Study. Part 2: Recommendations. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.4562790
Beh, E., ve Smith, J. (2012). Preserving the scholarly collection: An examination of the perpetual access clauses in the Texas A&M university libraries’ major E-journal licenses. Serials Review, 38(4), 235-242. https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2012.10765472
Belenkuyu, C. ve Karadağ, E. (2024). Better than not starting? Research university project of Turkey. Studies in Higher Education, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2024.2328829
Bequet, G. (2022a). From the cradle to the digital vault: Tracking the path of e-journals. The Serials Librarian, 82(1-4), 199-204. https://doi.org/10.1080/0361526X.2022.2028498
Bequet, G. (2022b). Journals preserved or how to turn Diamond into JASPER. Insights the UKSG Journal, 35, 15. https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.591
Bilgi Dünyası. (t.y.). Arşivleme [OJS]. içinde Bilgi Dünyası. Erişim tarihi: 06 Ağustos 2024. https://bd.org.tr/index.php/bd/journalPolicy
Björk, B.-C., Shen, C., ve Laakso, M. (2016). A longitudinal study of independent scholar-published open access journals. PeerJ, 4, e1990. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.1990
Burnhill, P. (2013). Tales from the Keepers Registry: Serial issues about archiving & the web. Serials Review, 39(1), 3-20. https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2013.10765481

Carr, P. L. (2011). The commitment to securing perpetual journal access: A survey of academic research libraries. Library Resources & Technical Services, 55(1), 4-16. https://doi.org/10.5860/lrts.55n1.4
Choi, H. N., ve Park, E. G. (2007). Preserving perpetual access to electronic journals: A Korean consortial approach. Library Collections, Acquisitions, & Technical Services, 31(1), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649055.2007.10766142
Creswell, J. W. (2021). A concise introduction to mixed methods research (2. bs). Sage Publications.
Day, M. (2008). Preserving the outputs of scholarly communication for the long-term: A review of recent developments in digital preservation for electronic journal content. İçinde W. Jones (Ed.), E-Journals Access and Management (ss. 39-64). Routledge. https://www.ukoln.ac.uk/preservation/publications/2008/e-journals/draft-v01.pdf
DergiPark. (t.y.). DergiPark DOI Hizmeti. İçinde DergiPark Akademik. Erişim tarihi: 22 Ekim 2024. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/page/doi-hizmeti
DOAJ. (2014). DOAJ publishes lists of journals added and withdrawn. https://blog.doaj.org/2014/05/22/doaj-publishes-lists-of-journals-removed-and-added
DoBell, D. (2008). Chipping away at academic capitalism through open access. International Journal of the Book, 5(2), 149-156. https://doi.org/10.18848/1447-9516/CGP/v05i02/36697
Dylla, F. (2014). CHORUS–A solution for public access. Information Services & Use, 34(3-4), 195-199. https://doi.org/10.3233/ISU-140740
Enoch, T., ve Harker, K. R. (2015). Planning for the Budget-ocalypse: The Evolution of a Serials/ER Cancellation Methodology. The Serials Librarian, 68(1-4), 282-289. https://doi.org/10.1080/0361526X.2015.1025657
Eve, M. P. (2024). Digital scholarly journals are poorly preserved: A study of 7 million articles. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.31274/jlsc.16288
fatcat. (2024). Fatcat! fatcat!. https://fatcat.wiki/about
Fenton, E. G. (2008). Responding to the preservation challenge: Portico, an electronic archiving service. Journal of Library Administration, 48(1), 31-40. https://doi.org/10.1080/01930820802029169
Flecker, D. (2001). Preserving scholarly e-journals. D-Lib Magazine, 7(9), 1082-9873. https://doi.org/10.1045/september2001-flecker
Fyfe, A., Coate, K., Curry, S., Lawson, S., Moxham, N., ve Mørk Røstvik, C. (2017). Untangling academic publishing: A history of the relationship between commercial interests, academic prestige and the circulation of research. Birkbeck Institutional Research Online. https://eprints.bbk.ac.uk/id/eprint/19148/1/UntanglingAcPub.pdf
Halliday, L., ve Oppenheim, C. (2001). Developments in digital journals. Journal of Documentation, 57(2), 260-283. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000007102
Kenney, A. R., Entlich, R., Hirtle, P. B., McGovern, N. Y., ve Buckley, E. L. (2006). E-Journal Archiving Metes and Bounds. Council on Library and Information Resources. https://www.clir.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/9/pub138.pdf
Kiefer, R. S. (2015). Digital preservation of scholarly content, focusing on the example of the CLOCKSS Archive. Insights the UKSG Journal, 28(1), 91-96. https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.215
Kim, S., ve Choi, H. (2019). Status of digital standards, licensing types, and archiving policies in Asian open access journals registered in Directory of Open Access Journals. Science Editing, 6(1), 41-46. https://doi.org/10.6087/kcse.154
Kirchhoff, A. J. (2008). Digital preservation: Challenges and implementation. Learned Publishing, 21(4), 285-294. https://doi.org/10.1087/095315108X356716
Kirchhoff, A. J. (2009). Expanding the preservation network: Lessons from Portico. Library Trends, 57(3), 476-489. https://doi.org/10.1353/lib.0.0048
Laakso, M., Matthias, L., ve Jahn, N. (2021). Open is not forever: A study of vanished open access journals. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 72(9), 1099-1112. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24460
Laakso, M., Welling, P., Bukvova, H., Nyman, L., Björk, B.-C., ve Hedlund, T. (2011). The development of open access journal publishing from 1993 to 2009. PLoS ONE, 6(6), e20961. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0020961
Lawson, S., Gray, J., ve Mauri, M. (2016). Opening the black box of scholarly communication funding: A public data infrastructure for financial flows in academic publishing. Open Library of Humanities, 2(1), e10. https://doi.org/10.16995/olh.72
Lightfoot, E. A. (2016). The persistence of open access electronic journals. New Library World, 117(11/12), 746-755. https://doi.org/10.1108/NLW-08-2016-0056
Maniatis, P., Roussopoulos, M., Giuli, T. J., Rosenthal, D. S. H., ve Baker, M. (2005). The LOCKSS peer-to-peer digital preservation system. ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, 23(1), 2-50. https://doi.org/10.1145/1047915.1047917
Marijanović, B., ve Stančić, H. (2023). Digital archiving policies of central european journals registered in the directory of open access journals. Libri, 73(1), 11-23. https://doi.org/10.1515/libri-2021-0034
McGuigan, G. S. (2004). Publishing perils in academe: The serials crisis and the economics of the academic journal publishing industry. Journal of Business & Finance Librarianship, 10(1), 13-26. https://doi.org/10.1300/J109v10n01_03
McGuigan, G. S., ve Russell, R. D. (2008). The business of academic publishing: A strategic analysis of the academic journal publishing industry and its impact on the future of scholarly publishing. Electronic Journal of Academic and Special Librarianship, 9(3). http://southernlibrarianship.icaap.org/content/v09n03/mcguigan_g01.html
Mering, M. (2015). Preserving electronic scholarship for the future: An overview of LOCKSS, CLOCKSS, Portico, CHORUS, and the Keepers Registry. Serials Review, 41(4), 260-265. https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2015.1099397
Morrison, H. (2016). Small scholar‐led scholarly journals: Can they survive and thrive in an open access future? Learned Publishing, 29(2), 83-88. https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1015
Moulaison, H. L., ve Million, A. J. (2015). E-publishing in libraries: The [digital] preservation imperative. OCLC Systems & Services: International digital library perspectives, 31(2), 87-98. https://doi.org/10.1108/OCLC-02-2014-0009
Ndungu, M. W. (2020). Publishing with open journal systems (OJS): A Librarian’s perspective. Serials Review, 46(1), 21-25. https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2020.1732717
Niu, Y., ve Li, H. (2017). Progress report on the role of digital resource preservation and utilization for libraries in China. Publishing Research Quarterly, 33(4), 483-492. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12109-017-9544-1
Olivarez, J., Bales, S., Sare, L., ve van Duinkerken, W. (2018). Format aside: Applying beall’s criteria to assess the predatory nature of both OA and non-OA library and information science journals. College & Research Libraries, 79(1). https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.79.1.52
Oppenheim, C., Greenhalgh, C., ve Rowland, F. (2000). The future of scholarly journal publishing. Journal of Documentation, 56(4), 361-398. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000007119
Potts, J., Hartley, J., Montgomery, L., Neylon, C., ve Rennie, E. (2017). A journal is a club: A new economic model for scholarly publishing. Prometheus, 35(1), 75-92. https://doi.org/10.1080/08109028.2017.1386949
Ratner, H., Dylla, H. F., ve Crotty, D. (2014). CHORUS – providing a scalable solution for public access to scholarly research. Insights: the UKSG journal, 27(1), 68-74. https://doi.org/10.1629/2048-7754.129
Regan, S. (2016). Strategies for expanding e-journal preservation. The Serials Librarian, 70(1-4), 89-99. https://doi.org/10.1080/0361526X.2016.1144159
Reich, V. (2008). CLOCKSS—it takes a community. The Serials Librarian, 54(1-2), 135-139. https://doi.org/10.1080/03615260801973968
Reich, V., ve Rosenthal, D. S. (2001). LOCKSS: A permanent web publishing and access system. D-Lib Magazine, 7(6). https://doi.org/10.1045/june2001-reich
Rosenthal, D. S., Vargas, D. L., Lipkis, T. A., ve Griffin, C. T. (2015). Enhancing the LOCKSS digital preservation technology. D-Lib Magazine, 21(9/10), 1-39. https://doi.org/10.1045/september2015-rosenthal
Roussopoulos, M., ve Bungale, P. (2010). Stealth modification versus nuisance attacks in the LOCKSS peer-to-peer digital preservation system. Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications, 3(4), 265-276. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12083-009-0055-5
Seadle, M. (2006). A social model for archiving digital serials: LOCKSS. Serials Review, 32(2), 73-77. https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2006.10765034
Seadle, M. (2011). Archiving in the networked world: By the numbers. Library Hi Tech, 29(1), 189-197. https://doi.org/10.1108/07378831111117001
Shah, U. U., ve Gul, S. (2019). LOCKSS, CLOCKSS & PORTICO: A look into digital preservation policies. Library Philosophy and Practice, 2481. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/libphilprac/2481
Smith, K. (2008). Institutional repositories and E-journal archiving: What are we learning? The Journal of Electronic Publishing, 11(1). https://doi.org/10.3998/3336451.0011.107
Sprout, B., ve Jordan, M. (2018). Distributed digital preservation: Preserving open journal systems content in the PKP PN. Digital Library Perspectives, 34(4), 246-261. https://doi.org/10.1108/DLP-11-2017-0043
Stemper, J., ve Barribeau, S. (2006). Perpetual access to electronic journals. Library Resources & Technical Services, 50(2), 91-109. https://doi.org/10.5860/lrts.50n2.91
Tavernier, W., Westervelt, T., ve Carlson, A. J. (2021). Where do we keep that? The new keepers registry and the digital content in your collection. The Serials Librarian, 80(1-4), 155-160. https://doi.org/10.1080/0361526X.2021.1865020
Teddlie, C., ve Tashakkori, A. (2011). Mixed methods research. içinde N. K. Denzin ve Y. S. Lincoln (Ed.), The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research (C. 4, ss. 285-300). Sage Publications.
Türk Kütüphaneciliği. (2024). Etik ilkeler ve yayın politikası. Türk Kütüphaneciliği. https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/tk/policy
Waller, A., ve Bird, G. (2006). “We own it”: Dealing with “perpetual access” in big deals. The Serials Librarian, 50(1-2), 179-196. https://doi.org/10.1300/J123v50n01_17
Willinsky, J. (2005). The unacknowledged convergence of open source, open access, and open science. First Monday. https://doi.org/2013
Wittenberg, K., Glasser, S., Kirchhoff, A., Morrissey, S., ve Orphan, S. (2018). Challenges and opportunities in the evolving digital preservation landscape: Reflections from Portico. Insights the UKSG Journal, 31, 28. https://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.421
Zhang, M., ve Eschenfelder, K. R. (2014). License analysis of e-journal perpetual access. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 40(1), 62-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2013.11.002

Details

Primary Language

Turkish

Subjects

Archive, Digital Curation and Preservation, Informetrics

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Kemal Yayla ^*
0000-0001-9064-611X
Türkiye

Publication Date

December 31, 2024

Submission Date

August 31, 2024

Acceptance Date

November 14, 2024

Published in Issue

Year 2024 Volume: 7 Number: 2

DOI

https://doi.org/10.33721/by.1541321

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA43MN42BN

APA

Yayla, K. (2024). Türkiye’de Açık Dergi Sistemlerinde Yayımlanan Kütüphane ve Bilgi Bilim Dergilerinin Dijital Koruma Durumu: Fatcat Tabanlı Bir Analiz. Bilgi Yönetimi, 7(2), 252-271. https://doi.org/10.33721/by.1541321

AMA

1.Yayla K. Türkiye’de Açık Dergi Sistemlerinde Yayımlanan Kütüphane ve Bilgi Bilim Dergilerinin Dijital Koruma Durumu: Fatcat Tabanlı Bir Analiz. IM. 2024;7(2):252-271. doi:10.33721/by.1541321

Chicago

Yayla, Kemal. 2024. “Türkiye’de Açık Dergi Sistemlerinde Yayımlanan Kütüphane Ve Bilgi Bilim Dergilerinin Dijital Koruma Durumu: Fatcat Tabanlı Bir Analiz”. Bilgi Yönetimi 7 (2): 252-71. https://doi.org/10.33721/by.1541321.

EndNote

Yayla K (December 1, 2024) Türkiye’de Açık Dergi Sistemlerinde Yayımlanan Kütüphane ve Bilgi Bilim Dergilerinin Dijital Koruma Durumu: Fatcat Tabanlı Bir Analiz. Bilgi Yönetimi 7 2 252–271.

IEEE

[1]K. Yayla, “Türkiye’de Açık Dergi Sistemlerinde Yayımlanan Kütüphane ve Bilgi Bilim Dergilerinin Dijital Koruma Durumu: Fatcat Tabanlı Bir Analiz”, IM, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 252–271, Dec. 2024, doi: 10.33721/by.1541321.

ISNAD

Yayla, Kemal. “Türkiye’de Açık Dergi Sistemlerinde Yayımlanan Kütüphane Ve Bilgi Bilim Dergilerinin Dijital Koruma Durumu: Fatcat Tabanlı Bir Analiz”. Bilgi Yönetimi 7/2 (December 1, 2024): 252-271. https://doi.org/10.33721/by.1541321.

JAMA

1.Yayla K. Türkiye’de Açık Dergi Sistemlerinde Yayımlanan Kütüphane ve Bilgi Bilim Dergilerinin Dijital Koruma Durumu: Fatcat Tabanlı Bir Analiz. IM. 2024;7:252–271.

MLA

Yayla, Kemal. “Türkiye’de Açık Dergi Sistemlerinde Yayımlanan Kütüphane Ve Bilgi Bilim Dergilerinin Dijital Koruma Durumu: Fatcat Tabanlı Bir Analiz”. Bilgi Yönetimi, vol. 7, no. 2, Dec. 2024, pp. 252-71, doi:10.33721/by.1541321.

Vancouver

1.Kemal Yayla. Türkiye’de Açık Dergi Sistemlerinde Yayımlanan Kütüphane ve Bilgi Bilim Dergilerinin Dijital Koruma Durumu: Fatcat Tabanlı Bir Analiz. IM. 2024 Dec. 1;7(2):252-71. doi:10.33721/by.1541321

Türkiye'de Açık Dergi Sistemlerinde Yayımlanan Kütüphane ve Bilgi Bilim Dergilerinin Dijital Koruma Durumu: Fatcat Tabanlı Bir Analiz

Abstract

Keywords

Digital Preservation Status of Library and Information Science Journals Published in Open Journal Systems in Turkey: A Fatcat-Based Analysis

Abstract

Keywords

References

Details

Primary Language

Subjects

Journal Section

Authors

Publication Date

Submission Date

Acceptance Date

Published in Issue

DOI

IZ

Cite