Analysis and news
“It is clear that a lot more work is required to educate Chinese researchers”
understanding of OA in China is perhaps a little surprising, given that China is now the largest producer of research papers globally, and major Chinese agencies have been promoting various forms of OA for the past several years. Additionally, with China indicating
had published in an OA journal indicated the mandate, while in no other country was this mandate reported in greater proportion than 7% (B, 2% of 766; C, 7% of 710; I, 4% of 121; J, 4% of 415; SK, 1% of 181; US, 7% of 215). While the number of respondents from the UK answering the survey questions as to whether or not they have published in an OA journal and why (or why not) represented a relatively small sample size, this was not the case for the number of survey respondents from Asian countries. So, while one might think that the message of OA is received loud and clear in the UK, as part of the overall European Union push toward OA, and that an author simply opts in, or they don’t, the survey shows that the OA message is not being received equally, or in similar tone, in other countries. While a reasonable proportion of
authors who had published in an OA journal indicated that they prefer the open access model of publishing (B, 44% of 766; C, 52% of 710; I, 30% of 121; J, 32% of 415; UK, 54% of 67; US, 43% of 215), the same was not true for South Korea, where only 6% of 161 authors indicated that they prefer an OA model of publishing.
www.researchinformation.info | @researchinfo When authors who had not published in
an OA journal were asked why not, about 10% of authors in countries other than the UK responded that they don’t understand the OA publishing model (B, 10% of 293; I, 6% of 76; SK, 11% of 176; US, 10% of 181). Notably, in Japan this proportion of authors was 22% (of 260) and strikingly, in China 32% of 967 authors who had not published in an OA journal indicated that they do not understand the OA publishing model.
In India, the principal reason offered for
why the author had not published in an OA journal was that they could not afford the article processing charges (69% of 76). Interestingly, as noted above, the second highest proportion of responses indicating an inability to afford the article processing charges was from the UK (56% of 34). When you compare the gap between the understanding of OA publishing by authors in the UK who had not published in an OA journal (0% don’t understand OA publishing; 9% doubt the quality of OA journals; 12% don’t see any/adequate benefits of OA publishing) to those in China (32%, 28%, and 18%, respectively), the low level of both awareness and
support for Plan S at the recent Open Access 2020 conference in Berlin, it is clear that a lot more work is required to educate Chinese researchers as to the potential value that publishing in OA journals may offer them, in balance to an academic evaluation system that traditionally has emphasised the quantity of publications in high-impact journals (up until now – although changing – typically subscription-based journals). Therefore, while governments, funding bodies, and research institutes are increasingly adopting OA policies and setting up OA mandates – the development of these policies and mandates primarily based on the underpinning principle that publicly- funded research should be universally accessible – whether these policies are implemented effectively may depend, in large measure, on how well those establishing them understand research- specific factors, such as attitudes toward OA and awareness of OA benefits. Regional patterns, such as those
presented in this report, can provide guidance for where efforts need to be placed to strengthen OA strategies. For example, if the overall understanding of the OA publishing model among researchers in a country is weak, adequate training and educational resources on OA should be provided, especially to early-career researchers.
A full account of the regional patterns presented in the Editage report on Geographic Trends in Attitudes to Open Access can be downloaded at
www.editage.com. A fully referenced version of this Research Information report is at
www.researchinformation.info
Donald Samulack is president of US operations at Editage, a division of Cactus Communications
April/May 2019 Research Information 43
QinJin/
Shutterstock.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52
