Although about 85% of NIH-funded researchers say they have heard about NIH’s policy on public access to research articles, only 18% of them report knowing specific details, according to a study by the Publishing Research Consortium (PRC), an international group of publishers and scientific societies. The survey of 1,128 journal authors was conducted in January. It focuses on how well authors who publish in the life sciences and medical journals understand NIH’s public-access policy. That policy, issued in May 2005, asks NIH-funded researchers to voluntarily post their manuscripts on PubMed Central, the agency’s online database, within one year of publication. The survey results also indicate that a lack of understanding about the policy has resulted in low submission rates: 24% of the NIH-funded authors surveyed reported that they have submitted a full manuscript to PubMed Central. Another 43% said they intend to do so in the future. Only 3% said they don’t plan to post manuscripts on the database. “As publishers, we are committed to working with NIH in improving dissemination of and enhancing access to scientific and medical research,” said PRC Chairman Robert Campbell in a statement, adding that the publishing consortium will work with NIH to facilitate author compliance.
PS: See my blogged comment on this study from 3/2/06.
Posted by
Peter Suber at 3/09/2006 02:08:00 PM.
The open access movement:
Putting peer-reviewed scientific and scholarly literature
on the internet. Making it available free of charge and
free of most copyright and licensing restrictions.
Removing the barriers to serious research.
I recommend the OA tracking project (OATP) as the best way to stay on top of new OA developments. You can read the OATP feed on a blog-like web page or subscribe to it by RSS, email, or Twitter. You can also help build the feed by tagging new developments you encounter.
