Researchers' green open access practice: a cross‐disciplinary analysis

Date10 May 2013
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.1108/JD-01-2012-0008
Pages334-359
Published date10 May 2013
AuthorValérie Spezi,Jenny Fry,Claire Creaser,Steve Probets,Sonya White
Subject MatterInformation & knowledge management,Library & information science
Researchers’ green open access
practice: a cross-disciplinary
analysis
Vale
´rie Spezi
LISU, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK
Jenny Fry
Department of Information Science, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK
Claire Creaser
LISU, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK
Steve Probets
Department of Information Science, Loughborough University,
Loughborough, UK, and
Sonya White
LISU, Loughborough University, Loughborough, UK
Abstract
Purpose – This paper aims to report on the findings of the second phase of the Behavioural strand of
the EC-funded PEER project (http://www.peerproject.eu/). The paper seeks to explore authors’ and
readers’ behaviours in relation to authors’ peer-reviewed accepted manuscripts in open access
repositories.
Design/methodology/approach – The research was undertaken using a mixed-method approach,
involving the distribution of a survey by the 12 participating publishers to their authors in selected
journal titlesand a participatory workshop with European researchers fromselected disciplinary areas.
Findings – Researchers’ attitudes towards versions of published journal articles made open access
via open access repositories may vary depending on whether researchers report behaviours from the
perspective of an author or a reader. The research found that disciplinary cultures, norms and
traditions shape authors’ self-archiving behaviour and readers’ use of those versions of journal articles
held in repositories.
Research limitations/implications One of the limitations of the research is that it was
impossible for the research team to gauge the representativeness of the survey compared to the actual
disciplinary distribution of the population of EU researchers, as such population information is not
available in an aggregated and consistent format.
Originality/value – The PEER Observatory is an unprecedented large-scale collaboration between
publishers, researchers and repositories to investigate the effects of self-archiving at European level.
The paper provides a disciplinary reading of the findings and augments the understanding of how
disciplinary culture and norms shape authors’ and readers’ behaviours in relation to self-archiving.
Keywords Open access, Repositories, Self-archiving,Behaviour, Attitudes, PEER project,
Disciplinarydifferences, Research work
Paper type Research paper
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0022-0418.htm
The authors would like to thank the PEER Executives for funding this research.
JDOC
69,3
334
Received 29 January 2012
Revised 16 July 2012
Accepted 19 July 2012
Journal of Documentation
Vol. 69 No. 3, 2013
pp. 334-359
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
0022-0418
DOI 10.1108/JD-01-2012-0008
Introduction
The EC-funded Publishing and the Ecology of European Research (PEER) project
(www.peerproject.eu/) is an unprecedented coll aboration between stake holders
involved in scholarly research and scholarly publishing, looking into specific
aspects of the complex relationship between Open Access (OA) and scholarly
communication. The project includes publishers and representatives, libraries, open
access repositories (OARs) and researchers themselves, both as authors of journal
articles and as readers (or consumers) of journal literature.
The behavioural research is one of three strands that form the PEER Observatory,
which was set up to investigate the effects of the large scale deposit of stage-two
manuscripts (also known as authors’ final peer-reviewed and accepted manuscripts) on
reader access, journal visibility and viability, and the broader ecology of European
research (Shepherd and Wallace, 2009). The PEER behavioural research project was
carried out in two phases, between April and September 2009, and from September
2010 to August 2011. Researchers at Loughborough University examined the
behavioural aspects affecting self-archiving of stage-two manuscripts in OARs as well
as the use of these manuscripts by fellow researchers.
Most discussion of Open Access recognises the two main mechanisms to achieving
open access. The gold route, often referred to as the “author pays” route, involves
payment of an article processing charge to publishers enabling the article to be made
available to all without subscription or charge barriers. The alternative green route,
often referred to as the “self archiving” route, entails authors submitting manuscripts
to traditional journals but maintaining the right to mount a version of their work on an
open access repository. Much debate has focussed on the most effective way to achieve
Open Access. There are many advocates of the green self archiving route to OA;
subject-based repositories containing both stage-two manuscripts and preprints of
research articles are a widely accepted development in certain disciplines such as
physics and economics. Alongside this, many institutions are developing their own
open access repositories and some are mandating deposit into these respositories.
ROARMAP (http://roarmap.eprints.org/) and OpenDOAR (www.opendoar.org/)
outline the extent of these developments worldwide. On the other hand, the recent
report by the Working Group on Expanding Access to Published Research Findings,
chaired by Professor Dame Janet Finch (Working Group on Expanding Access to
Published Research Findings, 2012) recommended developing clear policies in support
of publication in Open Access journals. In recommending gold OA, the Finch report
requests that repositories carefully consider the balance between the aims of open
access and possible risks “to the sustainability of subscription-based journals during
what is likely to be a lengthy transition to open access”, however the report does
recommend the continual development of the infrastructure surrounding subject and
institutional repositories, though primarily for the purposes of research data and grey
literature. In the lights of current policy developments in favour of the different routes
to Open Access, a cross disciplinary analysis of researcher’s views and attitudes
towards green (self archiving) OA practice is timely.
Based on Phase 2 of the project, this article extends the preliminary results from
phase 1 reported in Creaser et al. (2010), and further develops understanding of
researchers’ green OA experience both as authors and readers of peer-reviewed journal
articles by looking in greater detail at their reported use of OARs and the context of
that use. The article identifies disciplinary patterns of behaviour at the level of the
Medical sciences, Life sciences, Physical sciences and mathematics, and Social
Green open
access practice
335

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT