Guide to Ensuring Access to the Publications and Data of Federally Funded Transportation Research (2020)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

CHAPTER 6. Managing Research Publications Determining Essential Requirements Eligibility Research Publications and Reports Eligible Under Essential Requirements As described in Chapter 2, research publications are defined by the U.S. DOT Public Access Plan as follows: • Any intramural technical or final reports; • Any federally funded scientific extramural research project’s written deliverables (e.g., technical/final reports); • Written deliverables that are published by the U.S. DOT, with no embargo period; • Written deliverables published externally by U.S. DOT scientists or extramural U.S. DOT– funded scientists, with an embargo period; • Any final peer-reviewed manuscript accepted for publication. 6. M A N A G IN G R E S E A R C H P U B LIC A T IO N S In This Section » Determining Essential Requirements Eligibility » Research Publications and Reports Eligible Under Essential Requirements » Research Publications and Reports Not Eligible Under Essential Requirements » Tracking and Identifying Eligible Research Products » Technical and Final Research Project Reports » Peer-Reviewed Scholarly Publications » Tracking Eligible Publications Retroactively » U.S. DOT Registries and Repositories » Going Beyond Essential Compliance: Including All Research Products » Understanding Publication Preservation Basics » Understanding Metadata Standards and Practices » Understanding Legal and Copyright Strategies » Chapter Checklist Embargo refers to a period of time, usually not more than a year, during which access to the article or other published material is restricted by the publisher to subscribers of the journal or other publication. After the embargo period expires, the manuscript for the article or other material is made publicly available by the publisher or through an open-access repository such as the one provided by the National Transportation Library (NTL). ? ? ? 43

44 6. Managing ReseaRch Publications In a nutshell, this means any final written records of the research results are eligible for essential compliance. The Guide breaks the eligible products into two basic categories: (1) formally published and peer-reviewed research publications and (2) final project and technical reports. The distinction between the two is important for understanding how to track and where to submit to ensure essential compliance. Research Publications and Reports Not Eligible Under Essential Requirements The Public Access Plan does not apply to the following items: • Written deliverables or data submitted for publication prior to the plan’s effective date or digital data generated prior to December 16, 2015 (the effective date of the U.S. DOT’s final plan); • Preliminary analyses, drafts of scientific papers, plans for future research, peer reviews, communications with colleagues, or physical objects (e.g., laboratory samples) associated with conducting research; • Classified research; and • Sensitive or personally identifiable information. Tracking and Identifying Eligible Research Products Technical and Final Research Project Reports The majority of research products resulting from federally funded transportation-related research will be final project reports and technical reports. These are typically referred to as “gray literature,” as they are made available outside of traditional commercial or academic publishers. Academic libraries have established policies and practices for managing peer-reviewed, published research results such as journal articles, books, chapters, or series. In contrast, gray literature is largely managed by the researchers who produce it or technical libraries charged to collect it. Practices for managing gray literature vary across organizations and within the information management domain. The U.S. DOT and TRB have provided easy-to-follow methods for submitting these reports. In collaboration, they also apply consistent and effective information management practices to ensure discovery, availability, and access — including the creation of metadata (discussed in detail later in this chapter). Research final reports and technical reports may be more likely than peer-reviewed publications to contain sensitive or personally identifiable information, since these issues are likely to be caught in the peer-review process. Where there is no peer-review process, research organizations must take responsibility for ensuring that classified, Research final reports and technical reports are more likely than publications to contain sensitive or personally identifiable information. ? ? ?

45 6. Managing ReseaRch Publications RESEARCHER RESEARCH FUNDS MANAGER INFORMATION PROFESSIONAL internal project records institutional review board records product and metadata to ROSA P accepted for publication no tify send manuscript update submit Figure 5. Communication Network sensitive, or personal identification information is not made publicly available. Where final project and technical reports are classified, established practices may allow public sharing of metadata but only allow authorized or permissioned access to the publication and data. This also involves the securing of any explanatory materials such as a data dictionary or code book, using encryption methods to deliver or transfer content to authorized users, and ensuring that the research publication and sensitive content are not stored in a publicly accessible repository. Generally, these materials should not be submitted for public access. Peer-Reviewed Scholarly Publications State DOTs and research institutions are responsible for tracking and submitting those scholarly peer-reviewed publications that result from research projects that are eligible under the U.S. DOT Public Access Plan (see Chapter 2). Research publications that are deliverables of the project must be submitted within 1 year of the project closeout. Ideally, research institutions will establish proactive methods for tracking and submitting publications as they are produced. The best strategy involves establishing good communication pipelines between researchers and research fund managers and information professionals. Librarians and information professionals have professional relationships with NTL and can help to track publications. When an article, chapter, or book is accepted for publication, the researcher should either submit the publication to NTL themselves or work with a librarian to ensure it is submitted according to guidelines. Depending on the research organization’s internal roles, responsibilities, and processes, the research funds manager or institutional review board liaison may also be included in the communications. A supported communication model is illustrated below. ? ? ? The best strategy involves establishing good communication pipelines between researchers and research fund managers and information professionals.

46 6. Managing ReseaRch Publications Tracking Eligible Publications Retroactively Research-funding organizations face significant challenges tracking eligible publications when they are not submitted in a timely manner by researchers or other designated individuals. Retroactive discovery of eligible publications is particularly challenging because scholarly publications frequently do not include funding source information. Retroactive tracking of eligible publications is a complex and labor- intensive process when performed in the open web or against commercial databases, and many research-funding organizations do not have the resources to support such an effort. Funding organizations may consider two important sources that provide quality-controlled access to funding information: Crossref (http://search.crossref.org/) and its Funders Registry (https://www.crossref.org/services/funder- registry/). Crossref and its Funders Registry, which work together as a collaborative project of scholarly publishers and funding agencies, support a standard way of reporting funding sources for published scholarly research and, thus, tracking that research back to its source (and associated requirements for public access). U.S. DOT Registries and Repositories The U.S. DOT essential requirements for submitting written research products are simple and easy to follow: þ Send a single email addressed to three recipients, including the U.S. DOT Research Hub (Research.Hub@dot.gov), NTL (NTLDigitalSubmissions@dot.gov), and TRB (TRIS-TRB@nas.edu). þ The email should include the following information: þ Final Report URL(s) or PDFs for any resulting publications, þ URL(s) and associated descriptive metadata for any final data sets arising from the research project, þ The funding agreement number of the project, þ The Research Hub (RH) Display ID for the project (from the TRB Research in Progress (RiP) database entry created at the start of the project), þ Open Researcher and Contributor ID (ORCID) identifiers (unique researcher IDs) for all publication author(s) and contributor(s), and þ Any documented project outputs or outcomes resulting from the research project. þ Append to the email any final peer-reviewed manuscripts and final project or final technical reports. Remember, the Repository and Open Science Access Portal (ROSA P) serves as a persistent archive for publications, so it is important to provide a copy of the report or manuscript to support this goal. þ Ensure that the email includes the URLs for the eligible final research data. ? ? ? Essential Submitting written research products ? ? ? Funding sources for published research: http://search. crossref.org https://www.crossref. org/services/ funder-registry

47 6. Managing ReseaRch Publications Sending a single message to the three recipients listed above will allow the U.S. DOT and TRB to coordinate the tracking and management of the research products. The U.S. DOT supports both the Research Hub (RH) and NTL’s ROSA P. The RH is a searchable database of past and current U.S. DOT–sponsored research, development, and technology project records. ROSA P is a final report repository and data registry for U.S. DOT–funded and –created research. TRB manages the Transport Research International Documentation (TRID) database, which serves as a registry for all final project and technical reports. TRB also maintains a mirror version of the RH, which stores an archival copy of the final project and technical reports. Links for technical reports listed in the RH are also visible for copies deposited in NTL’s archive. NTL’s ROSA P and TRB’s TRID both provide searchable access for all written research projects. Going forward, the Public Access Plan calls on NTL to host a searchable database of data management plans (DMPs). This will take the form of a collection within ROSA P called U.S. DOT Public Access Data Management Plans. Reports housed or accessible through NTL are available without charge. For public access, NTL’s functionality will be expanded to include the capability for managing the embargo and compliance processes required by this Public Access Plan. ROSA P does the following: • Supports nonproprietary preservation standards and archival formats for publications and their associated content to help make research products more accessible to future generations. • Provides practical backup, migration, and technology- refreshing strategies to ensure sustainable access to scientific research. • Enables sharing of publication archives across the federal, academic, and business communities. Going Beyond Essential Compliance: Including All Research Products Going beyond essential compliance provides state DOTs and other research institutions with an opportunity to expand availability and access to a broader range of research products. Today, essential compliance pertains only to final research publications, technical reports, and final project reports that result from federally funded research projects. Organizations conducting the research may generate research products that extend beyond those funded by the U.S. DOT. As noted earlier, these products include those from unfunded research, research funded by internal sources, and research that is funded by private sources or foundations. A logical next step — and one that supports the Open Science vision — would be ? ? ? Beyond minimum Managing all research products, including gray literature

48 6. Managing ReseaRch Publications for research institutions to consider managing all of their research products in a way that aligns with the good practices and vision set forth by the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) memo. Some benefits of this to state DOTs include • Improved access to and tracking of all of the research publications of the state DOT for state DOT use; • Less redundancy of research projects funded and more efficient use of results already supported; • Greater impact of state DOT research on the broader transportation community; • Increasing expectations of funding organizations for more rigorous management and access to research results; • Increasing expectations for access and reuse by researchers, research communities, private-sector businesses and industries, and the general public; and • Increasing publishers’ expectations that supporting research data will be submitted as part of the peer-review process. Going beyond to increase the scope and coverage of research means that state DOTs and research institutions must assume some of the responsibility for the services that are provided by NTL and TRB. This means identifying or establishing a local registry to track publications and final project and technical reports and identifying or building a repository solution to store written research products. Research institutions that are affiliated with a university will have access to research library services and sources. For these institutions, going beyond means understanding • Preservation basics for written research products and engaging archivists and preservation experts to ensure long-term preservation options are supported and are appropriate for gray literature products. • Metadata standards and practices and ensuring that cataloging and metadata librarians are familiar with metadata schemes and practices that support subject domains or full project life cycles (e.g., going beyond metadata standards for publications). • Collection development policies to reflect new scope and coverage of gray literature. • The information management life cycle and providing life-cycle information management training for metadata and cataloging librarians accustomed to working with formal publications. ? ? ? Beyond minimum for research organizations

49 6. Managing ReseaRch Publications Research institutions in state DOTs, though, may not have access to either library services or sources. For a state DOT, going beyond means • Understanding metadata schemas, • Understanding how to create metadata, • Having a registry or library catalog to maintain metadata, • Having a policy in place for choice of persistent identifiers, and • Understanding how to generate a persistent identifier for written research products. Pursuing this knowledge requires a deeper dive than this Guide can provide, but the next section gives an introduction to publication preservation to help with further study. Understanding Publication Preservation Basics Digital preservation takes active management to ensure that content is usable and understandable over time. Successfully preserving digital content is more than just finding a hard drive to store it. This means that, for textual publications, open formats (e.g., Open Office) and PDF (preferably PDF/A) are highly preferred over nonproprietary binary formats that may be difficult to render in the future. The Library of Congress maintains a Recommended Formats list (https://www.loc .gov/preservation/resources/rfs/) that can help in selecting the optimal long-term preservation format for publications. Another component of preservation involves the accounting for and tracking of any changes made to the digital content over time. Researchers need to be able to trust that the content was not altered deliberately or accidentally since the content was published, released, or otherwise deemed to be complete. Understanding Metadata Standards and Practices Metadata plays a number of important roles in sharing and preserving information: • Identifying the object and distinguishing it from others by describing who created it, what it is called, when it was created, who published it, the format in which it is offered, its version or edition, report number, contract number, size or length, the language in which it is written, and so forth. • Describing the nature of the content, including its subject or topic, its geographical relevance, and the type of content (e.g., report, chapter, article). ? ? ? Selecting optimal long-term preservation formats: https://www.loc.gov/ preservation/resources/ rfs/ ? ? ? Beyond minimum for state DOTs

50 6. Managing ReseaRch Publications • Supporting discovery of the object, including searching or browsing for it in a repository or other digital library. • Providing information to support or constrain access, including where the publication can be found, its copyright status, its security classification, its disclosure policy and status, and detailed information on who can access it. • Chronicling its preservation and management history, including the records retention and disposition schedule that pertains, any transformations or format conversions that have been completed, and any redactions that have been made to the content. Metadata creation is a professional task. A recommended best practice is for research organizations to assign the role of metadata creator and publication submitter to an information professional who is familiar with metadata standards, the authoritative reference sources that support them, and the submission process. This individual will create metadata and/or review metadata created by researchers. In addition to ensuring that the research organization is in compliance with the U.S. DOT’s Project Open Data requirements, information professionals can ensure that publications and their associated data sets are registered in organizational or domain-specific sources. Information professionals should also be kept informed of changes to publications to ensure that the metadata descriptions are accurate and relevant. There are many different metadata standards and schemas. For essential requirements, researchers should include a JSON metadata file with their final reports submitted to NTL, TRID, and RH. The JSON file should follow the Project Open Data Metadata Schema (Table 4). This is a good standard to consider for going beyond. However, research organizations should consult with their researchers on the metadata standards that support their research communities. Research organizations should strive to provide good quality metadata to manage their written research products. A good quality metadata record • Has accurate, consistent, and complete values for all required metadata fields; • Has complete and sufficient values to support discovery by other researchers and any member of the public who may wish to find or access it; • Complies with specifications for metadata values where they are available [i.e., distinct subfields for repeatable fields (multiple authors), full and standard date format for publication date]; • Conforms with data entry instructions (e.g., last name, first name, middle name versus single string of first name, middle name, and last name); A recommended best practice is to assign the role of metadata creator and publication submitter to an information professional. ? ? ? ? ? ? Project Open Data Metadata Schema: https://project- open-data.cio.gov/

51 6. Managing ReseaRch Publications Table 4. Project Open Data Metadata Schema Field Label Definition Required title Title Human-readable name of the asset. Always description Description Human-readable description (e.g., an abstract) with sufficient detail to enable a user to quickly understand whether the asset is of interest. Always keyword Tags Tags (or keywords) help users discover the data set. Always modified Last Update Most recent date on which the data set was changed, updated, or modified. Always publisher Publisher The publishing entity and, optionally, its parent organization(s). Always contactPoint Contact Name and Email Contact person’s name and email for the asset. Always identifier Unique Identifier A unique identifier for the data set or application programming interface (API) as maintained within an agency catalog or database. Always accessLevel Public Access Level The degree to which this data set could be made publicly available, regardless of whether it has been made available. Choices: public (data asset is or could be made publicly available to all without restrictions), restricted public (data asset is available under certain use restrictions), or nonpublic (data asset is not available to members of the public). Always • Leverages metadata values from authoritative reference sources and standard vocabularies wherever they exist — to support quality and to represent the language of the potential audience; • Includes the metadata that must be submitted to NTL, TRID, and RH; • Contains actionable authorization values (i.e., limiting access to authorized individuals or groups);

52 6. Managing ReseaRch Publications • Contains actionable values that define the legal ownership and liability constraints associated with using the content; and • Contains actionable values pertaining to any distribution constraints and liabilities. Understanding Legal and Copyright Strategies To go beyond essential requirements, research organizations should have defined and clearly communicated policies and practices for legal and copyright strategies. Research institutions affiliated with academic institutions will have guidance and practices to draw from. An expansion of scope and coverage, though, may introduce new challenges for existing policies and should be reviewed by legal experts. Additionally, librarians and information professionals will be good sources of guidance on copyright strategies. State DOTs and research institutions not affiliated with a library or copyright office should consult with their legal teams. Chapter Checklist From this chapter you should be able to þ Identify eligible written research products, þ Distinguish formal publications and manuscripts and final project and technical reports, þ Understand how to submit written research products to NTL and TRB, þ Understand what information to provide to NTL and TRB, þ Understand when to submit to NTL and TRB, þ Understand the metadata services provided by NTL and TRB, and þ Understand what going beyond means for state DOTs and research institutions.