Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft

Public knowledge: some findings of a survey on open access

publishing

Juergen Guedler, German Research Foundation (DFG), Department of Information Management

Presented at EuroCRIS Members Meeting Tartu, Estonia, 18-20 May 2005

The DFG Open Access Study

Aims of the study:

to gather information on new dynamics in the access to scientific information and changing patterns in scientific publication

to study similarities and differences in the various research disciplines on these topics

to learn about the expectations of the scientific community about appropriate funding schemes

To get an empirical basis in designing and developing DFG funding programmes and initiative

Methodogical Approach (I)

Study Concept and Design : DFG Working Group with members from

Scientific Library Services and Information Systems Department of Information Management

Consultations with external Experts about Open Access

Survey, Data Capture and statistical analysis: Associtation for Empirical studies, Kassel (GES Maiworm & Over)

Field period October / November 2004

Methodogical Approach (II)

Population: DFG-grants awardees from the years : 2002 to 2004 From all disciplines

Sampling basis: Basis : DFG-CRIS with information

about 450.000 Grant applications (since 1982) about 120.000 Grant applicants (since 1982)

In the considered period: 40.284 projects funded Pre-selection : specific funding programmes Overcoming the problem of “Over-fishing”

Database recording all persons contacted in various surveys Sampling procedure

Stratified sampling 4 broad scientific fields: Social Sciences and Humanities; Life Sciences,

Natural Sciences and Engineering Professional Status : Researchers in their earlier career and “established”

Researchers

Profile of the Respondents

A total of 1.028 Respondents (response rate: 64%)

16 % Women

84 % researchers at universities

Distribution of the respondents according to the professional status and research field (in %)

Social Sciences and Hum anities

Life sciencesNatural

SciencesEngineering Total

"Established" Researchers 84,4 81,9 84,9 90,3 85,2Reseachers in their early careers

15,6 18,1 15,1 9,7 14,8

Total 100 100 100 100 100Count (n) 231 248 298 217 994m iss ing values : 34

Publication mediums most used by researchers to get information on their fields

Social Sciences and Humanities

Life sciencesNatural

SciencesEngineering Total

Articles in Journals 93,6 98,0 95,8 90,7 94,7Chapters in books 74,8 39,6 41,0 40,2 48,4Books (monography) 70,9 20,5 33,1 36,1 39,6Aricles in proceedings 44,6 26,0 31,9 83,9 44,9Book reviews 38,2 7,5 3,8 6,2 13,3"Grey Literature" 14,9 3,7 9,9 9,7 9,4Total 100 100 100 100 100Count (n) 236 255 307 225 1.023missing values : 5

How often do you use the following publication medium/ publication form to get informed in your field ? (1 = very often, 5 = very seldom)Percentage of 1 and 2

Important aspects in selecting a journal for publication

0,8

8,8

23,2

59,5

60,7

61,7

82,7

90,7

92,2

92,6

0 20 40 60 80 100

Royalities for the author

Subscription price of the journal

Author fees

Rapidity in the publication

Long term accessibility of the Journal

Impact factor of the journal

High standards in peer-reviewing thesubmitted papers

Reputation of the Journal

International circulation of the journal

Disciplinary focus of the journal

When you want to publish your research results, how important are the following factors in the choice of the scholarly journal ? (1 = very important, 5 = not important at all (Percentage of 1 and 2)

Knowledge of Declarations and Initiative supporting Open Access

6,9

3,0

1,3 1,3

3,94,8

1,2

4,9

3,7

22,1

6,7

2,01,0

2,4

5,1

1,90,9

1,41,9

2,8

0,0

5,0

10,0

15,0

20,0

25,0

Berliner Erklärung überoffenen Zugang zu

wissenschaftlichem Wissen

Budapester Initiative(Budapest Open Access

Initiative)

Bethesda-Erklärung(Bethesda Statement on

Open Access Publishing)

Open Archives Initiative Public Library of Science

Social Sciences and Humanities Life sciences Natural Sciences Engineering

Which of the following declaration and initiative do you know ? (1 = good knowledge, not in the details, no knowledge at all). Here : Percentage of 1

Knowledge of Open Access Journals

Do you know Open Access Journals in your fields of research ? Base: All Respondents

24,2

40,3

47,6

38,9

75,8

59,7

52,4

61,1

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Engineering

Natural Sciences

Life sciences

Social Sciencesand Humanities

Yes No

Important Open Access Journals (in absolute numbers)

Which are the most important OA Journals in your fields (max. five titles)

Italic : only some years/issues available in OA

Life SciencesPublic Library of Science - Biology 17Public Library of Science – (non specified) 9BioMed Central (non specified) 3The Journal of Clinical Investigation 3German Medical Science 3The Journal of Biological Chemistry online 3Journal of Biology 3Journal of Neuroscience 2BMC Biology (BioMed Central) 2

Respondents from Life Sciences: 248

Usage of OA Journals

How often do you use OA Journals ? (Base: Respondents who know OA-Journals)

36,5

24,3

17

18,4

50

62,6

64,2

58,6

13,5

13

18,9

23

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Engineering

Natural Sciences

Life sciences

Social Sciencesand Humanities

Often seldom not all

Usage of OA Journals

How often do you use OA Journals ? (Base: All Respondents)

8,7

9,6

7,6

7

11,9

24,7

28,8

22,2

5,2

8,5

8,7

76,1

60,5

55,1

62,2

3,2

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Engineering

Natural Sciences

Life sciences

Social Sciencesand Humanities

Often seldom not all no knowledge of OA Journals

Publication in OA Journals (arithmetic means of n of articles in the last five years)

Italic : standard deviation

Social Sciences and Hum anities

Life sciencesNatural

SciencesEngineering Total

13 21 22,9 17,9 19,113,3 17,6 19,8 20,5 18,50,2 0,3 0,8 0,6 0,50,5 1,5 3,7 2,1 2,4

Count (n) 203 217 280 202 902

Total Num ber of journal articles... of which , in Open Access journal

Knowledge of Pre-prints Servers

Do you know Pre-print Servers in your research field?

20,3

49

26,5

13,9

79,7

51

73,5

86,1

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Engineering

Natural Sciences

Life sciences

Social Sciencesand Humanities

Yes No

Experiences with Pre-prints and postprints* (%)

have already published in Pre-prints archives/ Servers+

Preprints

Postprints

established researchers

Early Career Researchers

50,0 63,9

have published journal articles in Post-print modus** 23,9 27,4

* All fields; **Basis : all respondents ; + Basis: Respondents who know pre-print server in their field; ++ Basis : all respondents

8,4have already published in Pre-prints archives/ Servers + +

19,2

Authors’ fees

Have you ever paid author fees to publish in journal ? If yes, how much have you paid ?

conv. OA conv. OA conv. OA conv. OA conv. OA

up to 250 € 81,1 24,0 37,8 20,0 53,3 66,7 35,1 21,4between 251 and 500 € 8,3 37,8 16,7 34,0 60,0 30,1 33,3 34,2 35,7between 501 and 1.000 € 8,4 24,2 50,0 20,5 20,0 8,6 20,2 28,6

between 1.001 and 2.000 € 2,2 12,3 16,7 7,3 5,9 9,3 7,1

More than 2.000 € 1,7 16,7 0,5 2,1 1,2 7,1Total 100 0 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100Count (n) 16 0 179 6 136 5 48 3 379 14missing values: 0

Life sciences Natural Sciences Engineering Total Social Sciences

and Humanities

OA – Views*

 Early Career Researchers

Established Researchers

Improvement of access to scientific knowledge 72 69

OA will have a lasting impact on scientific publishing 61 64

Easy access to scientific knowledge in developing countries 89 88

In the following, we list some assertions often heard in the debates about Open Access. Which do you/ don‘t you agree with ? (Point 1 and 2, on a five point scale : 1 „ I fully agree“ to 5 „i do not agree at all“), Here Percentage of 1 and 2

OA Views

 Early CareerResearchers

Established Researchers

Open Access publication are not sufficiently taken into account in evaluating researchers‘s performance 55 67

Open Access publication are not sufficiently taken into account in evaluating research grants applications

59 58

Open Access publications are cited less frequently than conventional publications 65 71

Open Access are seldom taken into account in bibliographic systems 61 66

A long term accessibility cannot be guaranteed for Open Access Publications 47 58

The quality assurance is as good for Open Access Publications as for conventional publications 48 44

As a publication modus, Open Access is still not well known 86 80

In the following, we list some assertions often heard in the debates about Open Access. Which do you/ don‘t you agree with ? (Point 1 and 2, on a five point scale : 1 „ I fully agree“ to 5 „i do not agree at all“), Here Percentage of 1 and 2

Supporting of OA Publishing

Do you think that OA publishing should be supported ?

Social Sciences and Hum anities

Life sciencesNatural

SciencesEngineering Total

Yes 80,7 88,2 83,8 73,6 81,9No 19,3 11,8 16,2 26,4 18,1Total 100 100 100 100 100Count (n) 228 238 302 216 984m iss ing values : 44

OA – Views and Experience : A Contradiction ?

Advantage of OA

OA Publication

(1) The Respondents publish seldom in OA. From the different forms of OA Publishing the most used is the Post-print (Self Archiving). OA Journals are less used.

(2) The vast majority believe that OA can improve the access to scientific journals and that it will have a lasting impact on scientific publishing.

(3) The Respondents are clearly in favor of supporting OA .

Thank you for your attention!

Infos unter www.dfg.de

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft

Dr. Juergen Guedler, Department of Information Management, juergen.guedler@dfg.de