Academic opinions of Wikipedia and Open Access publishing
| Pages | 332-347 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-04-2013-0062 |
| Date | 29 April 2014 |
| Published date | 29 April 2014 |
| Author | Lu Xiao,Nicole Askin |
| Subject Matter | Library & information science,Information behaviour & retrieval |
Academic opinions of Wikipedia
and Open Access publishing
Lu Xiao and Nicole Askin
Human-Computer Interaction Laboratory,
Faculty of Information and Media Studies,
University of Western Ontario, London, Canada
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine academics’ awareness of and attitudes towards
Wikipedia and Open Access journals for academic publishing to better understand the perceived
benefits and challenges of these models.
Design/methodology/approach – Bases for analysisinclude comparison of the models,enumeration
of their advantages and disadvantages, and investigation of Wikipedia’s web structure in terms of
potential for academic publishing. A web survey was administered via department-based invitations
and listservs.
Findings – The survey results show that: Wikipedia has perceived advantages and challenges in
comparison to the Open Access model; the academic researchers’ increased familiarity is associated
with increased comfort with these models; and the academic researchers’ attitudes towards these
models are associated with their familiarity, academic environment, and professional status.
Research limitations/implications – The major limitation of the study is sample size. The result
of a power analysis with GPower shows that authors could only detect big effects in this study at
statistical power 0.95. The authors call for larger sample studies that look further into this topic.
Originality/value – This study contributes to the increasing interest in adjusting methods of
creating and disseminating academic knowledge by providing empirical evidence of the academics’
experiences and attitudes towards the Open Access and Wikipedia publishing models. This paper
provides a resource for researchers interested in scholarly communication and academic publishing,
for research librarians, and for the academic community in general.
Keywords Wikipedia, Open Access publishing, Academic perspectives, Questionnaire study
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
When it comes to the decision of where to submit academic research papers, relevance
to practice is considered important, as is scholarly rigour (Klobasa and Clydec, 2010).
However, social and technological advances have brought significant changes in
publication, particularly via a shift to electronic or online media (Rowlands, 2007).
The idea of Open Access publishing is predicated upon that shift, which enables works
to be freely available online, and has received significant attention (e.g. Rowlands, 2007;
Suber, 2012). There are in general three models in the current movement towards
Open Access academic publishing: pushing traditional jour nals towards Open Access
by changing policies (e.g. British Medical Journal and College & Research Libraries);
creating Open Access journals (e.g. First Monday,Journal of Computer-Mediated
Communication,Journal of Community Informatics); and using existing online
Open Access venue Wikipedia (e.g. Black, 2008; Xiao and Askin, 2012).
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1468-4527.htm
Received 2 April 2013
Second revision approved
25 June 2013
Online Information Review
Vol. 38 No. 3, 2014
pp. 332-347
rEmeraldGroup PublishingLimited
1468-4527
DOI 10.1108/OIR-04-2013-0062
The authors thank Tatiana Vashchilko, Kinful Lartebea Aryee and Lindsay Baker for their
assistance with the project. The authors thank the researchers who participated in the survey as
respondents. This study is supported by Natural Sciences and Engineering Research and an
internal research grant at the corresponding author’s faculty.
332
OIR
38,3
Most interest in this topic has focused on the first two models. For example Suber
(2007) discusses making traditional journals Open Access, while Peters (2007) examines
the conversion process for a single publisher. Researchers from multiple institutions
developed an open-source system to create and manage Open Access journals
(http://pkp.sfu.ca/), and Solomon (2008) issued a practical guide to developing an
Open Access journal. The third model, on the other hand, has been little explored.
Although there have been numerous studies about Wikipedia publishing, they have
mainly focused on the quality of Wikipedia articles (e.g. Yaari, 2011; Dooley, 2010; Stvilia
et al., 2005), technical elements of Wikipedia (e.g. Vo
¨lkel et al., 2006; Vie
´gas et al., 2007),
demographics, particularly the “gender gap” (e.g. Yasseriet al., 2012; Lam et al., 2011), and
Wikipedia as a pedagogical tool (e.g. Forte and Bruckman, 2006; Moy et al., 2010). Only a
few studies have examined the possibility of using Wikipedia for academic publishing.
Xiao and Askin (2012) conducted a conceptual analysis to compare the Wikipedia and
Open Access publishing models, and identified benefits and challenges of using
Wikipedia for academic publishing. Black (2008) suggests that the Wikipedia model
would improve on the existing peer-review processes of traditional journals. However,
there has been little examination of academia’s views on the matter.
Addressing the gap in the literature, we surveyed academics to understand
their perspectives on using Wikipedia for academic publishing in comparison with
Open Access journals. We hypothesised that the researchers’ perspectives would be
affected by their knowledge of Wikipedia’s peer-review process, their experiences with
Wikipedia and Open Access journals, and their academic environment and status.
The research questions in our study are:
RQ1. What are the perceived advantages and disadvantages of using Wikipedia for
academic publishing?
RQ2. Do the researchers’ experienceswith Wikipedia andOpen Access journals affect
their perspectives on using Wikipedia for academic publishing? If so, how?
RQ3. Do the researchers’ academic environments and statuses affect their perspectives
on using Wikipedia for academic publishing? If so, how?
RQ4. Does the researchers’ knowledge of Wikipedia’s peer-review process affect
their perspectives on using Wikipedia for academic publishing? If so, how?
Related work
In designing this study we examined literature on both Open Access journals and
Wikipedia publishing. In regard to the Open Access model Rowlands (2007) noted that it
represents a “tectonic shift” in scholarly communication. Bjørk (2004) suggested that the
current emphasis on journal prestige is a major barrier to adoption of the Open Access
model. Papin-Ramcharan and Dawe (2006) suggest that academics encounter barriers in
Open Access publishing, including cost and infrastructure, particularly in the developing
world. Nicolas et al. (2006) argue that the solution is a market structure for academic
publishing. Peter Suber’s book Open Access (2012) provides a concise yet comprehensive
introduction to Open Access, including its benefits to research and authors, copyright
issues, and future directions. The University of North Texas (https://openaccess.unt.edu)
has been maintaining resources related to Open Access, e.g. international Open Access,
libraries and Open Access, etc.
333
Wikipedia and
Open Access
publishing
To continue reading
Request your trial