From: "Oosman, Aalia" <[log in to unmask]> Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2013 07:59:03 +0000 Taylor & Francis investigated author’s values and attitudes surrounding research communication. 9 in 10 authors are in favour of academic papers remaining the principal outputs of academic research with no statistically significant variation between those answering from the perspective of what they think will happen those asked to select what they would like to happen. Subject Variations Analysing the responses regarding future types of research output by subject reveals a startling degree of homogeneity. With one exception, no subject across both the Science, Technical and Medical sphere and the Humanities and Social Science sphere varies by more than 5% from the all-subject average – both in terms of what authors think the future of academic papers is and what they would like it to be. The only significant variation in responses came from the Library and Information Science authors: more than a quarter of whom said they would like an alternative to academic papers to become the main output of research. Although, even amongst these authors, the proportion who said they think this will happen was only 4% above the average for Humanities and Social Science authors. Unlike all the other subjects, there is no majority view amongst Library and Information Science authors, with the proportion who responded by saying journals will remain the primary output down to just one-third (31% think and 34% like). To counter this, the proportion who think the future comprises a mixture of journals and repositories (44%) is more than double the Humanities and Social Science average (19%), just as the proportion who would like a mixture future (35%) is also more than double the Humanities and Social Science average (15%). Regional Variations Regionally, there is also very little variation in the preferred future direction of publication outlets, except in Australasia where there is a slightly higher propensity for authors to think that traditional journals will prevail, in the Middle East where slightly more think something new will emerge and China where a quarter of authors think that a significant proportion of research papers will be published only in repositories in the future. This bulletin is accompanied by Supplement 7 to the original report – which examines the subject, regional and country-level variations for each question regarding authors’ attitudes to metrics in full: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/explore/open-access-survey-supp7.pdf The basic results from the full survey and a copy of the questionnaire can be found here and is available under a Creative Commons Attribution licence: www.tandf.co.uk/journals/pdf/open-access-survey-march2013.pdf Follow us on Twitter for the latest news on the survey @TandFOpen (#oasurvey). Visit our newsroom at: http://newsroom.taylorandfrancisgroup.com For more information, please contact: Aalia Oosman, Library Marketing & Communications Manager Taylor & Francis Group Journals email: [log in to unmask] http://www.tandfonline.com/page/openaccess/opensurvey