oapen-uk year one benchmarking survey of participants
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: OAPEN-UK Year One Benchmarking Survey of Participants](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071718/56649e945503460f94b990d5/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
OAPEN-UK Year One Benchmarking Survey of Participants
![Page 2: OAPEN-UK Year One Benchmarking Survey of Participants](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071718/56649e945503460f94b990d5/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Survey respondents
Group Total number of respondents
Number in control group
Number in experiment group
All authors 28 10 18
Tracking authors 22 7 15
Total number of respondents
Publishers University staff Authors Funders
Advisory group 10 5 2 2 1
‘All authors’ refers to all authors who completed the survey in 2013.‘Tracking authors’ refers to those authors who completed both the 2011 and 2013 surveys
All advisory group participants who completed the 2013 survey had also completed the 2011 survey.
![Page 3: OAPEN-UK Year One Benchmarking Survey of Participants](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071718/56649e945503460f94b990d5/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Most UK-based authors know about the RCUK OA mandate
Yes No0
2
4
6
8
10
12
10
3
Are you aware that from 1 April 2013 any journal articles based on research funded by a UK Research Council must be published in Open Access?
Base: all authors based in UK
![Page 4: OAPEN-UK Year One Benchmarking Survey of Participants](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071718/56649e945503460f94b990d5/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Green OA is more common than Gold, but many authors don’t know which option they’ve used
Of the content you have published via open access, was most of it published using Gold open access (payment to the publisher) or Green open access (post-publication archiving in a repository)?
Base: all authors with OA publications
Don't know Gold Green Same0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
109
2
6
4
![Page 5: OAPEN-UK Year One Benchmarking Survey of Participants](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071718/56649e945503460f94b990d5/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Researchers read books in different ways
How do you usually consume the monographs you read in order to undertake your research?
Base: all authors
I read one or two chapters I read several chapters I read the whole book0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
8
13
8
![Page 6: OAPEN-UK Year One Benchmarking Survey of Participants](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071718/56649e945503460f94b990d5/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Researchers still prefer print books to electronic
All other things being equal - if print and electronic books were equally easy to find and access - what is your preferred reading format?
Base: all authors
Print Electronic No preference0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
14
3
8
![Page 7: OAPEN-UK Year One Benchmarking Survey of Participants](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071718/56649e945503460f94b990d5/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Changes made to the survey were valuableIn our baseline survey the following pairs of author motivations for publishing were grouped together. Following feedback from the steering group we separated them out for the year one survey. Did authors assign the two motivations in each pair the same importance?
Base: all authors
Same i
mportance
Claiming fi
ndings more
importa
nt
Claiming n
ew id
eas m
ore im
portant
02468
101214161820
18
1
9
Same i
mportance
Informati
on for s
ocial p
rogre
ss more
importa
nt
Informati
on for k
nowledge
in so
ciety
more im
portant
02468
101214161820
17
9
2
![Page 8: OAPEN-UK Year One Benchmarking Survey of Participants](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071718/56649e945503460f94b990d5/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Comparative dataWe compared data from authors and advisory group members who responded to both baseline and year one surveys. This is a small sample so it is dangerous to draw sweeping conclusions, but there are some key messages about the progress of the authors in the study.
• Author behaviour is changing: they are more likely to publish content electronically, and also read books in different ways;
• Participants’ views on the likely outcome of OAPEN-UK have changed for sales and citations, but not for usage.
![Page 9: OAPEN-UK Year One Benchmarking Survey of Participants](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071718/56649e945503460f94b990d5/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Electronic publishing has become more commonThis chart shows the number of authors who said they had not published electronically at baseline, but had published electronically in year one.
Base: authors responding baseline and year one
Articles Book chapters Books0123456789
7
2
8
![Page 10: OAPEN-UK Year One Benchmarking Survey of Participants](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071718/56649e945503460f94b990d5/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Views on OA impact on sales have changedWhat do you think the effect of OAPEN-UK will be on sales of OA titles?
Broadly speaking, authors are more pessimistic in year one than at baseline, while publishers have become more uncertain. Others have become more optimistic.
But note the small ‘n’ for publishers and others and treat with some caution.
Base: all participants responding baseline and year one
Authors (n = 20)
Publishers (n = 5)
Others (n = 5)
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
I no longer know what I thinkIncreased pessimismIncreased optimismSame
![Page 11: OAPEN-UK Year One Benchmarking Survey of Participants](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071718/56649e945503460f94b990d5/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Views on OA impact on citations have changedWhat do you think the effect of OAPEN-UK will be on citations of OA titles?
Again, authors are generally more pessimistic in year one than at baseline, while publishers have become more uncertain. Others have become more optimistic.
But note the small ‘n’ for publishers and others and treat with some caution.
Base: all participants responding baseline and year one
Authors (n = 20)
Publishers (n = 5)
Others (n = 5)0%
10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
I no longer know what I thinkIncreased pessimismIncreased optimismSame
![Page 12: OAPEN-UK Year One Benchmarking Survey of Participants](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071718/56649e945503460f94b990d5/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Views on OA impact on usage haven’t changedWhat do you think the effect of OAPEN-UK will be on usage of OA titles?
Here, most participants did not change their views. Authors and publishers who did change moved to uncertainty. The one ‘other’ person who changed their views became more optimistic.
Again note the small ‘n’ for publishers and others and treat with some caution.
Base: all participants responding baseline and year one
Authors (n = 20+
Publishers (n = 5)
Others (n = 5)0%
10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
I no longer know what I thinkIncreased pessimismIncreased optimismSame
![Page 13: OAPEN-UK Year One Benchmarking Survey of Participants](https://reader035.vdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022071718/56649e945503460f94b990d5/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
OAPEN-UK participation increases understandingWe asked whether participation in OAPEN-UK had increased the advisory group members’ understanding of other groups involved in the scholarly communications process.
This chart shows whether participants felt their understanding of the named groups had improved.
Note that some respondents felt their understanding of their own group had improved through participation in the project, particularly publishers.
Base: all AG respondents
Researchers Librarians Publishers Funders0123456789
Not at allA littleA lot