Sending again as requested. - Steve
At 12:00 30/05/2008, Steve Hitchcock wrote:
> A paper at the recent OR08 conference sheds further light on this:
>
> Fitzgerald, B. and Austin, A. (2008) Issues for Academic Authors,
> Institutional Repositories, Open Access Journals and End-Users
> http://pubs.or08.ecs.soton.ac.uk/19/
>
> The paper 'outlines' the results of a survey of issues facing
> academic authors within Australia in relation to repositories, open
> access journals and traditional subscription based academic
> publishing. A full report on the survey has just appeared, but I
> haven't had the chance to read it all all yet
> http://eprints.qut.edu.au/archive/00013623/
>
> Similarly, Peter Suber blogs on this report (Wednesday, May 28,
> 2008): "I've caught what I think are the most important excerpts,
> but the report is long (129 pp.) and I'll need more time to read it with
> care."
>
> In the context of this thread, about whether the right questions are
> being asked, Peter adds: "This significant survey asked all the
> right questions."
> http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/2008/05/major-report-on-author-attitude
> s-and.html
>
> I'm quoting from the conference summary version, assuming that these
> statements are supported in the full report.
>
> "Academic authors do support the depositing of works through a
> non-exclusive
> licence for non-commercial, publicly accessible on-line
> institutional repository, but do
> not understand how publishing or depositing open access will link to
> or promote their
> work, profile, employment or career or how this activity will affect
> their receipt of
> funding. The lack of metrics or citation data in both repositories
> and in open access
> journals is a disincentive for academic authors to either deposit or
> contribute works."
>
> This seems to back up the 'want' (OA), 'will willingly comply' (with
> deposit mandates), but are 'not doing' (deposits) effects observed.
>
> "It may be the case that many institutions or open access journals
> have decided not to
> address these issues, preferring instead to continue to promote
> repositories and
> open access journals on the basis of the greater public good and to
> let authors make
> their own decisions. Whilst authors might agree with the principles
> of open access,
> the failure of institutions or open access journals to address these
> issues has led to a
> sizeable number of authors either ignoring repositories/open access
> journals or
> developing uniformed opinions, making traditional subscription based
> publishing
> more attractive."
>
> There is in some places a negative perception that mandates, while
> effective, have to resort to compulsion. This report suggests there
> will be benefit in reaching out positively to authors, if that can
> be coordinated. As a consequence, one could also raise the question
> of whether a more positive perception will speed up the adoption of
> mandates, by faculty, as at Harvard, and by institutions.
>
> Steve Hitchcock
> IAM Group, School of Electronics and Computer Science
> University of Southampton, SO17 1BJ, UK
> Email: sh94r_at_ecs.soton.ac.uk
> Tel: +44 (0)23 8059 7698 Fax: +44 (0)23 8059 2865
>
Received on Mon Jun 02 2008 - 23:37:47 BST