Do you know this report contained errors and when pointed out the errors
were corrected? And it was not an "independent" review; it was funded by
agencies opposed to OA.
Arun
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rupak Chakravarty"
To:
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2005 2:43 PM
Subject: [LIS-Forum] Latest Independent International Survey Shows
StrongSupport Among Senior Research Authors for Many Aspects of
theEstablished Publishing System
Dear All,
A comprehensive new global survey of 5,513 senior researchers who publish
in scholarly journals shows strong support for many aspects of the current
publishing model. In selecting where to publish, the key factor for authors
is the prestige of the publishing outlet, as indicated by the journal's
reputation, readership or its impact factor. In contrast, the research
community attaches the least importance to retaining copyright to the
published article or to the ability to deposit pre- or post-prints in
repositories.
Peer review remains the cornerstone of scholarly publishing for most
research authors. They give overwhelming emphasis (96.2%) to the value of
peer review in regulating the quality of what is published and in
underpinning the vitality and integrity of the scientific discovery process.
Recent experiences are highly positive - 77% found referees' comments
helpful. One author commented: "[Peer review] is one of the most important
safeguards we have to the quality of published work. With the expansion of
the Internet and the explosion of junk information on the web it is
absolutely essential to have a strong system of checks and balances. ... The
degree of misinformation ... is astronomical and perverse."
Highlighting the challenge to the role of libraries in scientific discovery,
researchers have become very dependent on, and supportive of, the
convenience and speed of electronic research tools, including following up
references by 'chaining' from one document to another, through abstracting
services and publishers' websites.
Awareness of open access issues has increased, the survey shows, although as
a publishing model it has not been widely embraced. Authors knowing "a lot"
or "quite a lot" about open access publishing has risen from 18% to 30%
since last year's survey. However, 69% of authors still know only "a little"
or "nothing at all" about the issue. The vast majority of authors still do
not publish in an open access journal, or do not view publishing in an Open
Access journal as a major issue for them. The researchers point out that the
increase in those who claim to publish in an open access journal may arise
from confusion between true open access journals and those more numerous
titles that, although subscription-based, are freely available to
researchers at the point of use, e.g. via library subscriptions. Other
research suggests that 65% of authors who claimed to have last published in
an open access journal had in fact published in a "traditional" journal.
A clear majority of authors believe that a major shift to open access would
undermine the current model of scholarly publishing. 43% of authors view
open access as being "very" or "quite" disruptive. While many believe that
open access publishing would make it easier to access articles, they do not
believe that it would improve the quality of the articles. Not surprisingly,
few authors voiced enthusiasm for author-pays models - not least, perhaps,
because almost a third of respondents had in fact published most of their
recent work without external funding (i.e. with none, or fewer than 50%, of
their papers being funded).
Overall, the new survey casts "real doubt" (says the report) "on the
feasibility of author pays business models across the board."
Depositing published articles in an institutional repository, recently
mandated by some funding bodies, remains an unfamiliar experience for most
authors. Fewer than 16% had actual experience of posting articles to a
repository and 38% of those responding declared an unwillingness to place
their articles in a repository.
The research surveyed author opinion in all global regions and was carried
out by CIBER with support from The Publishers Association and the
International Association of STM Publishers, as a basis for evidence-based
policy-making. All respondents were recent authors, and a high proportion
had also acted as referees, editorial board members and journal editors.
Details : http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/cgi/news/release?id=158235
--
Rupak Chakravarty
Assistant Librarian
Panjab University Library
Chandigarh 160014
INDIA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
LIS-Forum mailing list
LIS-Forum@ncsi.iisc.ernet.in
http://ncsi.iisc.ernet.in/mailman/listinfo/lis-forum
