This Management Report summarizes the main descriptive results of a study on researcher’s acceptance of Open Access publishing. The study was conducted in 2006 by the Ludwig-Maximilans-University Munich, Germany, in cooperation with the University of Arkansas at Little Rock. The main focus is centered on the question if and why scientists decide or do not decide to publish their work according to the Open Access principle without access barriers and free of cost to readers. With the responses from 688 publishing scientists it could be demonstrated that the general attitude toward the Open Access principle is extremely positive. However, many seem to be rather reluctant to publish their own research work in Open Access outlets. Advantages like increased speed, reach and potentially higher citation rates of Open Access publications are seen alongside insufficient impact factors, lacking long-term availability and the inferior ability to reach the specific target audience of scientists within one’s own discipline. Moreover the low level of use among close colleagues seems to be a barrier towards Open Access publishing.
Researchers’ overall attitude toward Open Access publishing is very positive....Up to 91% of the 688 participants in a study conducted jointly between researchers at the University of Munich and the University of Arkansas at Little Rock describe their attitude toward Open Access publishing to be positive or very positive. However many show reluctance to use these new means of distributing their research work. While about two-thirds of the respondents indicate to have accessed Open Access literature before, only one third has published work in Open Access outlets. Advantages like increased speed, range and potentially higher citation rates of Open Access publications are seen alongside insufficient impact factors, lacking long-term availability and the inferior ability to reach the specific target audience of scientists within one’s own discipline. Moreover the low level of use among close colleagues seems to be a barrier towards Open Access publishing. 73% of the interviewees believe that their close colleagues do not use Open Access media for publishing their research findings.
Comments.
All the fears or reservations documented by this study can be answered. But it reminds us that we still have a long way to go in educating authors. If we distinguish obstacles from objections, this study is all about obstacles, and none of the obstacles amounts to an objection.
The worries about impact factor, prestige, career advancement, and reaching the target audience have two kinds of answers. First, show that the best OA journals already meet these standards and that more join their ranks every month. Second, show that authors can publish in conventional non-OA journals, reap whatever advantages they have to offer, and still provide bona fide OA to their articles through self-archiving. The researchers did ask authors about OA archives, not just OA journals. But I can't tell whether they informed authors that OA archiving was compatible with publishing in non-OA journals.
Posted by
Peter Suber at 3/07/2007 10:16:00 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.
