Long Papers
Audit Team Communication and Risk in Trustworthy Digital Repository Certification
Rebecca D. Frank,
Jessica Wylie,
Corresponding Author
Rebecca D. Frank
University of Tennessee, USA
Einstein Center Digital Future, Germany
Search for more papers by this authorRebecca D. Frank,
Jessica Wylie,
Corresponding Author
Rebecca D. Frank
University of Tennessee, USA
Einstein Center Digital Future, Germany
Search for more papers by this authorFirst published: 22 October 2023
ABSTRACT
This paper aims to investigate the Trustworthy Repositories Audit & Certification (TRAC) process by examining the communication practices and risk communication dynamics among auditors during the audit. Through an in-depth, qualitative analysis of the audit process and the interactions between auditors, this paper provides valuable insights into the importance of diverse backgrounds, effective communication, and consensus building in the assessment of TRAC checklist requirements. Furthermore, the paper highlights potential areas of improvement within the audit process, addressing concerns related to disagreements, reliance on leadership, and the comprehensiveness of risk identification and communication.
REFERENCES
- Arvai, J. L. (2007). Rethinking of Risk Communication: Lessons from the Decision Sciences. Tree Genetics & Genomes, 3(2), 173–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11295-006-0068-7
- Bak, G. (2016). Trusted by Whom? TDRs, Standards Culture and the Nature of Trust. Archival Science, 16(4), 373–402. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10502-015-9257-1
- Barons, M., Bhatia, S., Double, J., Fonseca, T., Green, A., Krol, S., … Underdown, D. H. (2021). Safeguarding the nation's digital memory: Towards a Bayesian model of digital preservation risk. Archives and Records, 42(1), 58–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/23257962.2021.1873121
10.1080/23257962.2021.1873121 Google Scholar
- Berman, F., Kozbial, A., McDonald, R. H., & Schottlaender, B. E. C. (2008). The Need to Formalize Trust Relationships in Digital Repositories. Educause Review, 43(3), 11–12.
- Bernard, H. R. (2013). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches ( 2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
- Bettivia, R. S. (2016). The Power of Imaginary Users: Designated Communities in the OAIS Reference Model. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 53(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.2016.14505301038
10.1002/pra2.2016.14505301038 Google Scholar
- Bostrom, A. (1997). Risk Perceptions: Experts vs. Lay People. Duke Environmental Law & Policy Forum, 8, 101.
- Boyd, C. (2021). Understanding Research Data Repositories as Infrastructures. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 58(1), 25–35. https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.433
10.1002/pra2.433 Google Scholar
- Center for Research Libraries. (n.d.). TRAC Metrics. CRL: Center for Research Libraries Global Resources Network. Retrieved March 7, 2023, from. https://www.crl.edu/archiving-preservation/digital-archives/metrics-assessing-and-certifying/trac
- Center for Research Libraries. (2010). CRL Certification Report on Portico Audit Findings. Center for Research Libraries. https://www.crl.edu/sites/default/files/reports/CRL%20Report%20on%20Portico%20Audit%202010.pdf
- Center for Research Libraries. (2011). CRL Certification Report on the HathiTrust Digital Repository. Center for Research Libraries. https://www.crl.edu/sites/default/files/reports/CRL%20HathiTrust%202011.pdf
- Center for Research Libraries. (2012). CRL Certification Report on Chronopolis Audit Findings. Center for Research Libraries. https://www.crl.edu/sites/default/files/reports/Chron_Report_2012_final_0.pdf
- Center for Research Libraries. (2013). CRL Certification Report on Scholars Portal Audit Findings. Center for Research Libraries. http://www.crl.edu/sites/default/files/attachments/pages/ScholarsPortal_Report_2013_%C6%92.pdf
- Center for Research Libraries. (2014). CRL Certification Report on CLOCKSS Audit Findings. Center for Research Libraries. http://www.crl.edu/archiving-preservation/digital-archives/certification-and-assessment-digital-repositories/clockss-report
- Center for Research Libraries. (2015). CRL Certification Report on the Canadiana.org Digital Repository. Center for Research Libraries. https://www.crl.edu/sites/default/files/reports/CANADIANA_AUDIT%20REPORT_2015.pdf
- Center for Research Libraries. (2018). 2018 Updated Certification Report on CLOCKSS. Center for Research Libraries. https://www.crl.edu/sites/default/files/reports/CLOCKSS_Report_2018_0.pdf
-
H. Cho, T. Reimer, & K. McComas (Eds.). (2015). The Sage Handbook of Risk Communication. SAGE.
10.4135/9781483387918 Google Scholar
- CLOCKSS. (2014, July 28). CLOCKSS Archive Certified as Trusted Digital Repository; Garners top score in Technologies… [Nonprofit]. CLOCKSS News. https://www.clockss.org/clockss/News
- Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems. (2012a). Audit and Certification of Trustworthy Digital Repositories (Standard ISO 16363:2012 [CCSDS 652-R-1]; Space Data and Information Transfer Systems). Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems.
- Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems. (2012b). Reference Model for an Open Archival Information System (OAIS) (Magenta Book CCSDS 650.0-M-2; p. 135). Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems.
- Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems. (2014). Requirement for Bodies Providing Audit and Certification of Candidate Trustworthy Digital Repositories (Standard ISO/DIS 16919; Space Data and Information Transfer Systems). Consultative Committee for Space Data Systems.
- Conway, P. (1996). Preservation in the Digital World. Commission on Preservation and Access.
- CoreTrustSeal. (2023). Administrative Fee. CoreTrustSeal. https://www.coretrustseal.org/apply/administrative-fee/
- CoreTrustSeal Standards and Certification Board. (2022). CoreTrustSeal Requirements 2023–2025. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7051012
- Craig, R. T. (1981). Generalization of Scott's Index of Intercoder Agreement. Public Opinion Quarterly, 45(2), 260–264. https://doi.org/10.1086/268657
- Dillo, I., & De Leeuw, L. (2018). CoreTrustSeal. Mitteilungen Der Vereinigung Österreichischer Bibliothekarinnen Und Bibliothekare, 71(1), 162–170. https://doi.org/10.31263/voebm.v71i1.1981
10.31263/voebm.v71i1.1981 Google Scholar
- Donaldson, D. R. (2020). Certification Information on Trustworthy Digital Repository Websites: A Content Analysis. PLoS One, 15(12), e0242525. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0242525
- Donaldson, D. R., & Conway, P. (2015). User Conceptions of Trustworthiness for Digital Archival Documents. Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 66(12), 2427–2444. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23330
- Donaldson, D. R., & Russell, S. V. (2021). Towards a Taxonomy of Trustworthy Digital Repository Impacts. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 58(1), 430–434. https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.473
10.1002/pra2.473 Google Scholar
-
Donaldson, D. R., & Russell, S. V. (2023). Trustworthy Digital Repository Certification: A Longitudinal Study. In I. Sserwanga, A. Goulding, H. Moulaison-Sandy, J. T. Du, A. L. Soares, V. Hessami, & R. D. Frank (Eds.), Information for a Better World: Normality, Virtuality, Physicality, Inclusivity (Vol. 13972, pp. 552–562). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-28032-0_42
10.1007/978-3-031-28032-0_42 Google Scholar
- Dryden, J. (2011). Measuring Trust: Standards for Trusted Digital Repositories. Journal of Archival Organization, 9(2), 127–130.
10.1080/15332748.2011.590744 Google Scholar
- Faundeen, J. (2017). Developing Criteria to Establish Trusted Digital Repositories. Data Science Journal, 16, 22. https://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2017-022
10.5334/dsj-2017-022 Google Scholar
- Fischhoff, B., Hope, C., & Watson, S. R. (1990). Defining Risk. In T. S. Glickman & M. Gough (Eds.), Readings in Risk. Resources for the Future.
- Frank, R. D. (2022). Risk in Trustworthy Digital Repository Audit and Certification. Archival Science, 22(1), 43–73. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10502-021-09366-z
- Frank, R. D., & Rothfritz, L. (2023). Designated Community: Uncertainty and risk. Journal of Documentation, 79(4), 880–897. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-07-2022-0161
- Frank, R. D., & Yakel, E. (2013). Disaster Planning for Digital Repositories. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 50, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1002/meet.14505001058
10.1002/meet.14505001058 Google Scholar
- Garrett, J., & Waters, D. J. (1996). Preserving Digital Information: Report of the Task Force on Archiving of Digital Information (9781887334501 1887334505; p. 68). The Commission on Preservation and Access & Research Libraries Group. https://www.clir.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/pub63watersgarrett.pdf
- Giaretta, D., LaPlant, L., Shiers, J., Tieman, J., Pennock, M., & Zuberi, I. (2019). Dawn of Digital Repositories Certification under ISO 16363 Exploring the Horizon and Beyond. In Proceedings of IPRES 2019. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: iPRES 2019. https://doi.org/10.17605/osf.io/py5ah
- Houghton, B. (2015). Trustworthiness: Self-assessment of an Institutional Repository against ISO 16363-2012. D-Lib Magazine, 21(3/4). https://doi.org/10.1045/march2015-houghton
- Kasperson, R. E., & Kasperson, J. X. (1996). The Social Amplification and Attenuation of Risk. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 545, 95–105.
- Kirchhoff, A., Fenton, E., Orphan, S., & Morrissey, S. (2010). Becoming a Certified Trustworthy Digital Repository: The Portico Experience. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Preservation of Digital Objects (pp. 87–94). https://phaidra.univie.ac.at/o:185497
- Konheim, C. S. (1988). Risk Communication in the Real World. Risk Analysis, 8(3), 367–373. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1988.tb00499.x
-
Krahmer, A., Andrews, P., Tarver, H., Phillips, M. E., & Alemneh, D. (2017). Documenting Institutional Knowledge Through TRAC Self-Audit: A Case Study. Knowledge Discovery and Data Design Innovation, 335–348. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789813234482_0018
10.1142/9789813234482_0018 Google Scholar
-
Kriesberg, A., & Kowall, J. (2020). Scientific data management in the federal government: A case study of NOAA and responsibility for preserving digital data. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 57(1). https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.266
10.1002/pra2.266 Google Scholar
- Lachlan, K. A., Burke, J., Spence, P. R., & Griffin, D. (2009). Risk Perceptions, Race, and Hurricane Katrina. Howard Journal of Communications, 20(3), 295–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/10646170903070035
10.1080/10646170903070035 Google Scholar
- L'Hours, H., Kleemola, M., & De Leeuw, L. (2019). CoreTrustSeal: From Academic Collaboration to Sustainable Services. IASSIST Quarterly, 43(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.29173/iq936
10.29173/iq936 Google Scholar
- Lindlar, M., & Schwab, F. (2018, September 24). All that Work… For What? Return on Investment for Trustworthy Archive Certification Processes – a Case Study. In Proceedings of the 15th International Conference of Digital Preservation. Boston, MA: iPres. https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/8A3SC
- Maemura, E., Moles, N., & Becker, C. (2017). Organizational assessment frameworks for digital preservation: A literature review and mapping. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68(7), 1619–1637. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23807
- Moles, N. (2022). Preservation for Diverse Users: Digital Preservation and the “Designated Community” at the Ontario Jewish Archives. Journal of Documentation, 78(3), 613–630. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-02-2021-0041
- Nelkin, D. (1989). Communicating Technological Risk: The Social Construction of Risk Perception. Annual Review of Public Health, 10(1), 95–113. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.pu.10.050189.000523
- nestor Certification Working Group. (2013). Explanatory Notes on the nestor Seal for Trustworthy Digital Archives (nestor-materials 17). Deutsche Nationalbibliothek. http://files.d-nb.de/nestor/materialien/nestor_mat_17_eng.pdf
- PTAB - Primary Trustworthy Digital Repository Authorisation Body Ltd. (2021). Certified clients. PTAB - Primary Trustworthy Digital Repository Authorisation Body Ltd. http://www.iso16363.org/iso-certification/certified-clients/
- PTAB – Primary Trustworthy Digital Repository Authorisation Body Ltd. (2023). Audit Costs. PTAB - Primary Trustworthy Digital Repository Authorisation Body Ltd. http://www.iso16363.org/iso-certification/audit-costs/
- Renn, O. (1991). Risk Communication and the Social Amplification of Risk. In R. E. Kasperson & P. J. M. Stallen (Eds.), Communicating Risks to the Public (Vol. 4, pp. 287–324). Netherlands: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-1952-5_14
10.1007/978-94-009-1952-5_14 Google Scholar
- RLG-NARA Digital Repository Certification Task Force. (2007). Trustworthy Repositories Audit & Certification: Criteria and Checklist, Version 1.0. http://www.crl.edu/sites/default/files/attachments/pages/trac_0.pdf
- Scott, W. A. (1955). Reliability of Content Analysis: The Case of Nominal Scale Coding. Public Opinion Quarterly, 19(3), 321. https://doi.org/10.1086/266577
- Sudman, S., Bradburn, N. M., & Schwarz, N. (1996). Thinking About Answers: The Application of Cognitive Processes to Survey Methodology. Jossey-Bass Publishers.
- Thomer, A. K., Starks, J. R., Rayburn, A., & Lenard, M. C. (2022). Maintaining Repositories, Databases, and Digital Collections in Memory Institutions: An Integrative Review. Proceedings of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 59(1), 310–323. https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.755
10.1002/pra2.755 Google Scholar
- Vaughan, D. (1996). The Challenger Launch Decision: Risky Technology, Culture, and Deviance at NASA. University of Chicago Press.
-
Vermaaten, S., Lavoie, B., & Caplan, P. (2012). Identifying Threats to Successful Digital Preservation: The SPOT Model for Risk Assessment. D-Lib Magazine, 18(9/10). https://doi.org/10.1045/september2012-vermaaten
10.1045/september2012-vermaaten Google Scholar
- Wynne, B. (1992). Misunderstood Misunderstanding: Social Identities and Public Uptake of Science. Public Understanding of Science, 1(3), 281–304. https://doi.org/10.1088/0963-6625/1/3/004
10.1088/0963-6625/1/3/004 Google Scholar
- Yakel, E. (2007). Digital Curation. OCLC Systems & Services: International Digital Library Perspectives, 23(4), 335–340. https://doi.org/10.1108/10650750710831466
10.1108/10650750710831466 Google Scholar
