PEER Behavioural Research Authors and Users vis à…

PEER Behavioural Research: Authors and Users vis-à-vis Journals and Repositories (final report) :

“The Behavioural research project is one of three independent research projects commissioned and managed by PEER as part of the PEER Observatory. The aim of the Behavioural research
project was to address the role of stage-two manuscript repositories in the scholarly and scientific communication system by exploring perceptions, motivations and behaviours of authors and readers. The research was carried out between April 2009 and August 2011 by the Department of Information Science and LISU at Loughborough University, UK.”

URL : http://www.peerproject.eu/fileadmin/media/reports/PEER_D4_final_report_29SEPT11.pdf

Faculty self archiving behavior factors affecting the decision…

Faculty self-archiving behavior : factors affecting the decision to self-archive :

“A transformation in scholarly communication is occurring due to the interactions among Internet technologies, new ways of accessing and disseminating scholarly content, as well as changes in the legal, economic, and policy aspects of scholarly publication systems. Self-archiving – the placement of research material on publicly accessible web sites – is an emerging practice used to disseminate scholarly content in a cost-effective and timely manner. This practice is supported by university libraries and public funding agencies through the support or provision of Open Access repository services. Nevertheless, many repositories suffer from low rates of participation. Institutional Repositories (IRs), in particular, have difficulty recruiting content from faculty members whose conduct research and generate a wide variety of research materials. To address this problem, I investigate the motivational factors affecting faculty to participation in various forms of self-archiving practices.

Based on the socio-technical network framework, this study views self-archiving practices as intertwined with technologies and social factors. The factors identified include cost, benefit, and contextual aspects of self-archiving, in addition to individual characteristics. To examine these significant factors affecting self-archiving, my research design involves triangulation of survey and interview data of faculty members sampled from 17 Carnegie Research Universities with DSpace IRs. The sample is also stratified by academic discipline due to existing evidence of variation based on fields.

The analysis of survey responses from 684 professors and 41 phone interviews found that the factor of altruism has the strongest effect on faculty self-archiving. This factor, however, is characterized more by reciprocity, rather than pure altruism. Self-archiving culture has the second greatest impact on the decision to self-archive. Therefore, faculty self-archiving is influenced greatly by intrinsic benefits or disciplinary norms, as opposed to extrinsic benefits. Concerning IRs in particular, results shows that the primary reason professors contribute to the repositories is the perceived ability of IRs to preserve scholarly content. This implies that digital preservation should be significantly more a core function of IRs. IR contributors are also concerned about copyright than non-contributors. Thus IR staff need to provide guidance for copyright management to alleviate this concern and any confusion.”

URL : http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/61564/1/jhkz_1.pdf

Recruiting Content for the Institutional Repository The Barriers…

Recruiting Content for the Institutional Repository: The Barriers Exceed the Benefits :

“Focus groups conducted at Carnegie Mellon reveal that what motivates many faculty to self-archive on a website or disciplinary repository will not motivate them to deposit their work in the institutional repository. Recruiting a critical mass of content for the institutional repository is contingent on increasing awareness, aligning deposit with existing workflows, and providing value-added services that meet needs not currently being met by other tools. Faculty share concerns about quality and the payoff for time invested in publishing and disseminating their work, but disagree about metrics for assessing quality, the merit of disseminating work prior to peer review, and the importance of complying with publisher policies on open access. Bridging the differences among disciplinary cultures and belief systems presents a significant challenge to marketing the institutional repository and developing coherent guidelines for deposit.”

URL : http://journals.tdl.org/jodi/article/view/2068

Analyse prospective du libre accès en Fr…

Analyse prospective du libre accès en France :

“Dresser un panorama et identifier les enjeux liés au développement du libre accès en France ont été les objectifs de l’étude que nous avons menée. Pour réaliser cette étude, nous avons emprunté une méthode de travail d’une autre discipline, la prospective, qui est souvent utilisée dans le domaine du management stratégique. L’analyse structurelle, la première étape de la prospective, est utilisée dans le cadre général de cette méthode à la fois pour dresser un panorama de l’environnement de l’entreprise et pour identifier les questions clés liées au développement de celle-ci. Par le biais de la méthode MICMAC (Matrice d’Impacts Croisés—Multiplication Appliquée à un Classement), nous avons pu identifier que les principaux enjeux liés au développement du libre accès en France seraient le développement des mandats obligatoires, les politiques de l’Union européenne et les embargos liés à l’auto-archivage. Ces enjeux devront s’articuler autour de deux spécificités françaises, à savoir HAL, l’archive ouverte disciplinaire et nationale, et l’environnement disparate de la recherche publique française.”

URL : http://archivesic.ccsd.cnrs.fr/sic_00537239/fr/

Authors’ Awareness and Attitudes Toward…

Authors’ Awareness and Attitudes Toward Open Access Repositories :

“This article investigates the awareness of scholarly authors toward open access repositories and the factors that motivate their use of these repositories. The article reports on the findings obtained from a mixed methods approach which involved a questionnaire returned by over 3000 respondents, supplemented by four focus groups held across Europe in the summer 2009. The research found that although there was a good understanding and appreciation of the ethos of open access in general, there were clear differences between scholars from different disciplinary backgrounds in their understanding of open access repositories and their motivations for depositing articles within them. This research forms the first part of a longitudinal study that will track the changing behaviors and attitudes of authors toward open access repositories.”

URL : http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~db=all~content=a928309069~frm=titlelink

Self-Selected or Mandated, Open Access I…

Self-Selected or Mandated, Open Access Increases Citation Impact for Higher Quality Research :

Background
Articles whose authors have supplemented subscription-based access to the publisher’s version by self-archiving their own final draft to make it accessible free for all on the web (“Open Access”, OA) average twice as many citations as articles in the same journal and year that have not been made OA. Some have suggested that this “OA Advantage” may not be causal but just a self-selection bias, because authors preferentially make higher-quality articles OA. To test this we compared self-selective
self-archiving with mandatory self-archiving for a sample of 27,197 articles published 2002-2006 in 1,984 journals.
Methdology
Principal Findings: The OA Advantage proved just as high for both. Logistic regression analysis showed that the advantage is independent of other correlates of citations (article age; journal impact factor; number of co-authors, references or pages; field; article type; or country) and greatest for the most highly cited articles. The OA Advantage is real, independent and causal, but skewed. Its size is indeed correlated with quality, just as citations themselves are (the top 20% of articles receive about 80% of all citations).
Conclusions/Significance
The OA advantage is greater for the more citable articles, not because of a quality bias from authors self-selecting what to make OA, but because of a quality advantage, from users self-selecting what to use and cite, freed by OA from the constraints of selective accessibility to subscribers only. It is hoped that these findings will help motivate the adoption of OA self-archiving mandates by universities, research institutions and research funders.”

URL : http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/18493/58/MandateOA_PLOSpostprint.pdf

PEER : Annual Report – Year 2

PEER (Publishing and the Ecology of European Research), supported by the EC eContentplus programme, is investigating the potential effects of the large-scale, systematic depositing of authors’ final peer-reviewed manuscripts (so called Green Open Access or stage-two research output) on reader access, author visibility, and journal viability, as well as on the broader ecology of European research.

The project has recently been granted a nine month extension and will now run until May 2012.

URL : http://www.peerproject.eu/fileadmin/media/reports/D9_8_annual_public_report_20100930.pdf