Supporting data files for: "Scholarly communication competencies: An analysis of confidence among Australasian library staff"

For the purposes of this study, we define scholarly communication roles as roles which include: Institutional repository management, Publishing services, Research practice, Copyright services, Open access policies and the scholarly communication landscape, Data management services, and Assessment & impact metrics. The focus of this research is on aspects of the level of confidence that librarians working in scholarly communication have in their current competencies. The focus is on questions of confidence in the core competencies of scholarly communication and the education and training background of the respondents, the latter in order to understand how respondents develop confidence in these core competencies. The research team undertook a comparative analysis of the NASIG and COAR (Confederation of Open Access Repositories) competencies to inform their assessment of the competencies for inclusion in this study. Our analysis of the comparison is online https://openresearch-repository.anu.edu.au/handle/1885/251609. The survey used Qualtrics software. The ANU ethics panel required that no question would be compulsory, thus not all respondents answered all questions. As a result, a pre-analysis was undertaken for each of the questions to determine the number of responses for each question. Participants were recruited through communication mediums used by the target cohort. The first completed response was received on 21 October 2020; the last was submitted on 3 December 2020. One hundred and sixty valid responses were received and analyzed using Excel and descriptive statistics for the quantitative questions, and NVivo and manual thematic coding for the qualitative questions. Each member of the team took responsibility for analysis of different quantitative questions and coding of the qualitative questions, after which the team came together and confirmed each other’s work. Initial analysis of the Confidence in Competency Areas included a set of specific Tasks for each Competency Area from matrix questions. The results from these questions were initially individually analyzed for each Competency Area. These charts demonstrated the depth of information available from these sections of the survey. We analyzed the level of confidence the responses showed across a Competency Area by adding together all of the Tasks listed in each Competency Area and then charting the total Confidence for each Competency Area.为本研究之目的，我们将学术传播（scholarly communication）角色定义为包含以下内容的角色：机构知识库管理、出版服务、研究实践、版权服务、开放获取（Open Access）政策与学术传播生态、数据管理服务以及评估与影响力指标。 本研究的核心聚焦于从事学术传播工作的图书馆员对其现有履职能力的信心程度相关维度。研究重点围绕学术传播核心能力信心问题，以及受访者的教育与培训背景展开；后者旨在探究受访者是如何逐步建立起对这些核心能力的信心的。研究团队对NASIG与COAR（开放获取知识库联盟，Confederation of Open Access Repositories）的能力框架开展了比较分析，以此为本次研究中纳入的能力评估提供参考。本次比较分析的结果已公开于：https://openresearch-repository.anu.edu.au/handle/1885/251609。 本调研采用Qualtrics软件开展。澳大利亚国立大学（ANU）伦理审查委员会要求所有问题均不得设为必答项，因此并非所有受访者都会回答全部问题。据此，研究团队针对每个问题开展了预分析，以统计各问题的有效回复数量。 本次研究的受访者通过面向目标群体的传播渠道招募获得。首份完整回复于2020年10月21日收到，最后一份回复则于2020年12月3日提交。研究共回收160份有效回复，针对量化问题采用Excel与描述性统计方法开展分析，针对质性问题则采用NVivo软件与人工主题编码法进行分析。研究团队成员分别负责不同量化问题的分析以及质性问题的编码工作，随后全体成员共同开展交叉复核，确认彼此的分析结果。针对「能力领域信心度」的初始分析，基于矩阵题型中每个能力领域下的一系列具体任务展开。首先针对每个能力领域的相关问题结果分别开展独立分析，这些图表直观展现了调研该板块可获取的信息深度。我们通过将每个能力领域下所列全部任务的信心评分进行加总，以此计算该能力领域的总体信心水平，并据此绘制相应图表。