On Mon, 9 May 2005, Lisa Dittrich wrote:
> I love all the rhetoric about faculty not "knowing what's good for them"
> and how they simply have to be "educated" about the virtues of OA and IRs.
> Baloney. If it was of value to them, they'd know, and they'd do.
Here is a partial reply (re-posted from Alma Swan):
Date: Fri, 6 May 2005 17:58:46 +0100
From: Alma Swan <a.swan at TALK21.COM>
To: AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM at LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG
Subject: Re: What Provosts Need to Mandate
"I can now report that I have completed the data analysis for the
latest survey on self-archiving and the results on this issue of
mandating are as follows:
"Percentage of authors who would willingly self-archive if their
employer or funder required them to do so = 81%
Percentage who would do so reluctantly = 13%
Percentage who would not self-archive, even with a mandate = 5%
"The 'most willing' country is the USA, where 88% of authors would
self-archive willingly under a mandate and a further 11% would
self-archive reluctantly. The 'least willing' is China, where 58%
would self-archive willingly and 32% would do so reluctantly.
"The report is now written and out with reviewers. It will be published
by JISC shortly."
Key Perspectives Ltd
> I have been reading lately about how uninterested authors seem to be in
> OA (except a vocal few) and how the response is "we must educate them."
> Too funny. Summer is upon us: shall we organize special camps?
I would say that, for example, the 34,000 biologists who signed the
PLoS open letter hardly betoken a lack of interest in OA:
But there is certainly still a lack of awareness on the part of many
researchers about OA, how and why to provide it, and especially about
its dramatic influence of research impact:
I will close with some more data from the remarkable Alma Swan,
along with her recommendations on ways of raising faculty awareness,
from a presentation she is doing in Amsterdam this very day:
Making the strategic case for institutional
repositories (CNI, JISC, SURF) Amsterdam, May 10-11
Alma Swan (2005) Session on [Raising] "Faculty Awareness"
AWARENESS OF SELF-ARCHIVING:
Of those who have not self-archived any articles:
-- 29% are aware of the possibility of providing open access this way
-- 71% are not
-- Non-archivers = 51% of the population
-- 31% of researchers are not aware of the possibility of self-archiving
-- Only 10% of self-archivers know about the SHERPA/RoMEO
publisher policies directory
-- Less than 25% are aware of the UK House of Commons Select Committee
-- Less than 25% are aware of the NIH proposals
What to do about author awareness, then? Make them AWARE:
-- of the citation advantage of open access work
-- of the existence of IRs and what is in them
-- that THEY can self-archive too and reap the benefits
easy to do
-- doesn't take long - just a few minutes, a few keystrokes
-- of moves on the official requirement to self-archive
-- officially require them to self-archive!
-- Providing "hit" statistics
-- Demonstrating the citation advantage
-- Showing how to find citation counts
AMERICAN SCIENTIST OPEN ACCESS FORUM:
A complete Hypermail archive of the ongoing discussion of providing
open access to the peer-reviewed research literature online (1998-2005)
is available at:
To join or leave the Forum or change your subscription address:
Post discussion to:
american-scientist-open-access-forum at amsci.org
UNIVERSITIES: If you have adopted or plan to adopt an institutional
policy of providing Open Access to your own research article output,
please describe your policy at:
UNIFIED DUAL OPEN-ACCESS-PROVISION POLICY:
BOAI-1 ("green"): Publish your article in a suitable toll-access journal
BOAI-2 ("gold"): Publish your article in a open-access journal if/when
a suitable one exists.
in BOTH cases self-archive a supplementary version of your article
in your institutional repository.