Open Access News

News from the open access movement


Saturday, April 22, 2006

OA archiving for librarian-authors

Rachel Singer Gordon, How to Get Published: Publish, don't Perish! Emerald Library Link. Undated but March 2006 or later, judging by the citations. Excerpt:
Many librarian authors find that depositing work in online open-access (OA) LIS archives complements writing for LIS journals. While a number of academic institutions offer space for faculty to self-archive their work (and some even require it), librarian authors should also consider self-archiving their articles, presentations, and other work in a subject-specific cross-institutional archive. Archives generally take both published and unpublished work, as well as preprints, conference papers, theses, working papers and reports, and any other relevant material authors wish to contribute.... Why post your work in an OA repository? Individual advantages to participating in online open-access archives include: [1] Easy archiving....[2] Increased citation....[3] Increased exposure....[4] International representation....[5] Long-term preservation....[6] Participation in projects that complement the philosophy of librarianship....[7] Stimulation of “open peer review.”...

When placing your work with a journal publisher, consider that publisher’s willingness to let you archive your work in an open access repository. Pay special attention to copyright agreements, which vary tremendously from publisher to publisher. Some leave copyright with the author and give you the right to archive your work (on your own web site, or with a general or institution-specific repository) after a certain period of time; others will demand all rights to your work in perpetuity. Read before you sign, and think about how big a priority OA archiving is to you.

Comment. Good advice. I have just one caution. Authors should deposit their work in OA repositories in addition to publishing it in peer-reviewed journals. If they deposit in repositories instead of publishing in journals, then they bypass peer review, which is neither a gain for research nor a goal of OA. (I'm not saying that Singer disagrees.)