Al-Abdulla, AishaDobreva, Milena2025-09-242025-09-242017ACFAOS (2016) Amsterdam call for action on OS. https://www.government.nl/documents/reports/2016/04/04/amsterdam-call-for-action-on-open-science Al Abdulla, A. (2018) An investigation of factors affecting the adoption of an Institutional Repository by academics: The case of QSpace in Qatar University (QU). MA Thesis Library and Information Studies, UCL Qatar. Allen, J. (2005). Interdisciplinary differences in attitudes towards deposit in institutional repositories. MA Thesis Library and Information Management, Manchester Metropolitan University. Ayris, P. and Ignat, T. (2018). Defining the role of libraries in the Open Science landscape: a reflection on current European practice. Open Information Science, 2(1), pp.122. https://doi.org/10.1515/opis-2018-0001 Bamigbola, A. (2014). Surveying Attitude and Use of Institutional Repositories (IRs) by Faculty in Agriculture Disciplines: A Case Study. ProcediaSocial and Behavioral Sciences, 147, 505-509. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.07.145 Borrego, Á. (2017). Institutional repositories versus ResearchGate: The depositing habits of Spanish researchers. Learned Publishing, 30(3), 185192. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/leap.1099 Davis, P.M. and Conollay, M.J.L. (2007). Institutional repositories: evaluating the non-use of Cornell University’s installation of DSpace. D-Lib Magazine 13(3/4). http://www.dlib.org/dlib/march07/davis/03davis.html DOAJ (2019) Directory of Open Access Journals. https://doaj.org/ Dobreva, M. (2016) Collective knowledge and creativity: the future of citizen science in the Humanities. In: Kunifuji et al. (eds.) Knowledge, Information and Creativity Support Systems. Springer, 565573. https://www.springer.com/kr/book/9783319274775# Foster, N. F. and Gibbons, S. 2005. Understanding faculty to improve content recruitment for institutional repositories. D-Lib Magazine, 11(1). http://www.dlib.org/dlib/january05/foster/01foster.html Kim, J. (2007). Motivating and Impeding Factors Affecting Faculty Contribution to Institutional Repositories. Journal of digital information, 8(2), https://journals.tdl.org/jodi/index.php/jodi/article/view/193/177 Kim, J. (2010). Faculty self-archiving: Motivations and barriers. JASIST, 61(9), 1909–1922. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/asi.21336 Kim, J. (2011). Motivations of faculty self-archiving in institutional repositories. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 37(3), 247. Kyriaki-Manessi, D., Koulouris, A., Giannakopoulos, G., & Zervos, S. (2013). Exploratory research regarding faculty attitudes towards the institutional repository and self archiving. ProcediaSocial and Behavioral Sciences, 73, 777784. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.02.118 LERU (2018) Open Science and its role in universities: a roadmap for cultural change, LERU. 72pp. https://www.leru.org/publications/open-science-and-its-role-in-universities-a-roadmap-forcultural-change Tmava, A.M. and Miksa, S.D. (2017). Factors influencing faculty attitudes towards open access institutional repositories. Proc. Assoc. Info. Sci. Tech., 54(1), 519–522. https://doi.org/10.1002/pra2.2017.14505401061https://repository.ifla.org/handle/20.500.14598/6724Background: Institutional repositories (IR) are most frequently the first technological encounter of academics with some of the key constituents of open science (open access to articles but also to a wide range of other academic outcomes, including in some cases research data; the possibility to share own research outcome and reuse available data). Objective: To explore how academics in Qatar University perceive the role of their repositories especially in all aspects related to depositing research outcomes, use and reuse of deposited materials and integrating the use of research repositories in their personal research lifecycles. Methods: A case study examining attitudes of academics in Qatar University towards the use of their research repository, QSpace. Data were gathered through a mixed methodology approach combining a survey and analysis of the repository usage statistics. Results: Academics are willing to deposit research items, including research data, but have concerns about copyright. Many repository users are seeking Arabic material although most of the items already there are English language items. Top country views for items vary according to item topic. Conclusions: Academic users need support and training in copyright to encourage deposit of more items, and research data. Qatar University Library staff should supply more scientometric data on item usage to academic staff to encourage deposit.enAttribution 4.0 Internationalhttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Articlehttps://2019.ifla.org/conference-programme/satellite-meetings/open accessOpen ScienceQSpaceResearch DataAttitudes of AcademicsCopyright