Open Access News

Abstract: Librarians have often led the way in championing Open-Access (OA) journals on the Internet as an alternative to established journal titles that are subscription based. In the discipline of Library and Information Science [LIS], all types of journals continue to be published—paper and electronic, subscription-based and free. Using a survey, this article explores how some librarians view OA titles. The article collects suggestions for editors of OA journals. The article also asks questions about the relationship of OA journals to the promotion and tenure process for academic librarians.

From the body of the paper:

Question 5 solicited ideas for “What would need to change before you would consider publishing in an Open-Access journal.” The vast majority took time to answer this question. Many authors responded that nothing needed to change. Of those that thought change was needed, their answers can be grouped into three broad categories:

• The Quality Argument: “Has to be peer reviewed,” “rigorous, with editorial control,” “double-blind refereed,” “great reputation,” “permanence,” “on par with the print,” “indexed,” or “legitimacy.”
• The Development Argument: “Needs to develop,” “has to cover specialized topics,” “more journal title options,” “more information about the journal,” or “more marketing on topics they are willing to cover.”
• The University Tenure Argument: “Needs buy-in from the institution,” “perceptions in higher education,” “would that such a venue would be equally acceptable in education,” or the generic “institutional attitudes.” ...

[A]s shown in Question 6..., supporting OA journals through a conscious effort of publishing in them instead of an established, print title, is clearly not a priority with most authors....The written comments indicate that OA titles are not yet on par with their paper/electronic subscription based counterparts....

[L]ibrarians could routinely explore OA journals when seeking a publication venue. There seems to be a lot of interest percolating in the discipline. Moreover, in at least one comment, the percolation has boiled over. As one librarian wrote, “I’ve agreed to write one more...and after that, I will no longer publish in Haworth, Elsevier, or Emerald publications, just to name a few. Instead, I intend to publish only in peer-reviewed, open-access publications.” ...

For academic librarians, is it time to lead promotion and tenure discussions at universities to help open the door and legitimize OA publications? For librarians with tenure, those discussions of course can be more proactive. Most of us with tenure sit at some point on review committees and can educate others about electronic journals that have the same rigor as their print counterparts....

Perhaps this would also be an opportunity for librarians to mentor junior librarians (especially new library faculty) in pointing out legitimate publication venues in the OA sphere, or at least in some combination with print publications for their dossiers. In some ways, only time will establish the permanence and legitimacy of these journals, but librarians are in a position to push the envelope.

Comment. Until OA journals in LIS are more successful at attracting authors, it's critical that authors make their work OA through repositories, no matter where they publish. LIS is unusual for having two excellent OA repositories: E-LIS and dLIST.