Doctoral Students in New Zealand Have Low Awareness of Institutional Repository Existence, but Positive Attitudes Toward Open Access Publication of Their Work. A Review of: Stanton, K. V., & Liew, C. L. (2012). Open access theses in institutional repositories: An exploratory study of the perceptions of doctoral students. Information Research, 17(1), paper 507. Available from http://InformationR.net/ir/17-1/paper507.html

Objective – To investigate doctoral students'knowledge of and attitudes toward openaccess models of scholarly communication andinstitutional repositories, and to examine theirwillingness to comply with a mandatoryinstitutional repository (IR) submission policy. Design – Mixed method, sequentialexploratory design. Setting – A large, multi-campus New Zealanduniversity that mandates IR deposit of doctoraltheses. Subjects – Two doctoral students from each offour university colleges were interviewed. All901 doctoral students were subsequently sent asurvey, with 251 responding. Methods – Semi-structured interviews witheight subjects selected by purposive sampling,followed by a survey sent to all doctoralstudents. The authors used NVivo 8 foranalysis of interview data, along with a twophaseapproach to coding. First, they analyzedtranscripts from semi-structured interviewsline-by-line to identify themes. In the secondphase, authors employed focused coding toanalyze the most common themes and tomerge or drop peripheral themes. Themeswere mapped against Rogers' diffusion ofinnovation theory and social exchange theoryconstructs to aid interpretation. The resultswere used to develop a survey with a fixed set of response choices. Authors then analyzed survey results using Excel and SurveyMonkey, first as a single data set and then by discipline. Main Results – The authors found that general awareness of open access was high (62%), and overall support for open access publication was 86.3%. Awareness of IRs as a general concept was much lower at 48%. Those subject to a mandatory IR deposit policy for doctoral theses overwhelmingly indicated willingness to comply (92.6%), as did those matriculating prior to the policy (83.3%), although only 77.3% of all respondents agreed that deposit should be mandatory. Only 17.6% of respondents had deposited their own work in an IR, while 31.7% reported directly accessing a repository for research. The greatest perceived benefits of IR participation were removal of cost for readers, ease of sharing research, increased exposure and citing of one's work, and professional networking. The greatest perceived risks were plagiarism, loss of ability to publish elsewhere, and less prestige relative to traditional publication. The reason most given for selecting a specific publication outlet was recommendation of a doctoral supervisor. Disciplinary differences in responses were not sizable.For additional interpretation, the authors applied Rogers’s diffusion of innovations theory to determine the extent to which IRs are effective innovations.