LIBLICENSE-L Archives

LibLicense-L Discussion Forum

LIBLICENSE-L@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
LibLicense-L Discussion Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 10 Oct 2013 20:51:24 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (88 lines)
From: Colin Steele <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, Oct 9, 2013 at 8:59 PM

Generation Gap in Authors' Open Access Views and Experience, Reveals
Wiley Survey

Hoboken, NJ

John Wiley & Sons, Inc., today announced the results of its 2013
author survey on open access, with over eight thousand respondents
from across Wiley’s journal portfolio. The survey is a follow up to
Wiley’s 2012 open access author survey and is the second such survey
conducted by Wiley. This year new sections were added including
research funding and article licenses.

Consistencies were seen between the 2012 and 2013 surveys in authors’
desire to publish in a high-quality, respected journal with a good
Impact Factor, but the survey also shed light on differences between
early career researchers (respondents between the ages of 26-44 with
less than 15 years of research experience) and more established
colleagues in their opinions on quality and licenses.  Differences
were also seen across funding bodies and in the funding available for
open access to different author groups.

Key findings included:

·         The number of open access authors has grown significantly:
The number of Wiley authors who have published an open access article
almost doubled since 2012, up to 59% from 32%.  Over half of
responding authors received grant funding (24% full funding, 29%
partial funding) to cover Article Publication Charges (APCs), an
increase of 43% over last year.

·         Quality and profile of open access publications remains a
concern: 68% of funded authors publish their work open access, but for
those who chose not to, the most prominent reasons were concerns about
the perceived quality and profile of open access publications.

·         There are indications of author confusion around funder
mandates. A significant majority of authors funded by institutions
mandating Creative Commons licensing (notably authors funded by
Research Councils UK (RCUK) and the Wellcome Trust which require
immediate Gold or Green after embargo periods) said there is no
specific license requirement when publishing open access.

·         Respondents overwhelmingly preferred the more permissive
licenses:  CC-BY-NC (Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial
License) was ranked in their top three by 81% of respondents and 70%
ranked CC-BY (Creative Commons Attribution License) in their top
three, but preferences vary by age group. Early career professionals
were 6% more likely to publish under a Creative Commons (CC) license
than more mature researchers, while over half of respondents above the
age of 55 preferred not to use CC licenses of any kind.

·         Considerable differences emerge between early career
professionals and more established colleagues when comparing funding
and payments for APCs. Early career professionals were significantly
more likely to have APCs paid for by funders or institutions and were
far less likely to pay out of their own funds than respondents over
the age of 45 with more than 15 years of experience.

“This year’s survey has shown many steady trends in author views on
open access and also clear differences between those of early career
and more experienced researchers” said Rachel Burley, Vice President &
Director, Open Access, Wiley. “We are continuing to build the Wiley
Open Access program to provide more high-quality, peer-reviewed
journals and ensure that we offer authors the options that are right
for them.”

The survey was circulated to 107,000 corresponding journal article
authors of 2012 papers across Wiley’s journal portfolio.  Regionally,
36% of respondents were from the Americas, 45% from countries in
Europe, the Middle East and Africa, and 19% from the Asia/Pacific
region. At the institution level, respondents from
Universities/Colleges comprised the majority of respondents (5,377
responses, 64%). The second and third largest pools of responses were
authors working at Research Institutes (937 responses, 11%) and
Hospitals/Clinics (839 responses, 10%).

To view the results in more detail, view the full presentation on Slideshare.

Colin Steele
Emeritus Fellow
The Australian National University
Canberra  ACT 0200
Australia
Email: [log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2