Full Metadata

creators_name: Antelman, Kristin
type: journalp
datestamp: 2006-04-12
lastmod: 2008-11-19 09:11:47
status_changed: 2008-11-19 09:11:47
userid: 718
metadata_visibility: show
countries: US-
title: Self-archiving practice and the influence of publisher policies in the social sciences
ispublished: pub
subjects: ED
subjects: HS
full_text_status: public
keywords: open access ; self-archiving
abstract: Authors in different disciplines exhibit very different behaviours on the so-called ‘green’ road to open access, i.e. self-archiving. This study looks at the self-archiving behaviour of authors publishing in leading journals in six social science disciplines. It tests the hypothesis that authors are self-archiving according to the norms of their respective disciplines rather than following self-archiving policies of publishers, and that, as a result, they are self-archiving significant numbers of publisher PDF versions. It finds significant levels of self-archiving, as well as significant self-archiving of the publisher PDF version, in all the disciplines investigated. Publishers’ self-archiving policies have no influence on author self-archiving practice.
date: 2006
date_type: published
publication: Learned Publishing
volume: 19
number: 2
publisher: Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers
pagerange: 85-95
linguabib: en
refereed: TRUE
altloc: http://www.lib.ncsu.edu/staff/kantelman/antelman_self-archiving.pdf
referencetext: Watkinson, A. Securing authenticity of scholarly
paternity and integrity, Book Industry Communication,
2003.
Frankel, M. S., et al. Defining and
certifying electronic publication in science: a proposal
to the International Association of STM Publishers.
Learned Publishing, 2000:13(4)
Lynch, C. When documents deceive:
trust and provenance as new factors for information
retrieval in a tangled web. Journal of the American
Society for Information Science and Technology,
2001:52(1)
Rowlands,I.and Nicholas,D.New journalpublishing
models: an international survey of senior researchers.
A CIBER report for the Publishers Association and
the International Association of STM Publishers,
2005
Swan, A. and Brown, S. Open access self-archiving:
an author study. Key Perspectives Limited, 2005
Harnad, S. and Brody, T. Comparing the impact
of open access (OA) vs. non-OA articles in the same
journals. D-Lib Magazine, 2004: June.
Kurtz, M. J.,Eichhorn, G.,Accomazzi,A., Grant, C.,
Demleitner, M., and Murray, S. S. Worldwide use and
impact of the NASA Astrophysics Data System digital
library, Journal of the American Society for Information
Science and Technology, 2005:56(1)
Antelman, K. Do open access articles have a greater research
impact? College & Research Libraries, 2004:65(5)
Wren, J.D. Open access and openly
accessible: a study of scientific publications shared via
the internet. BMJ, 2005:330.
Mabe,M.A.and Amin,M.DrJekylland Dr Hyde:
author–reader asymmetries in scholarly publishing.
Aslib Proceedings, 2002:54(3).
Guédon, J. C. The
‘green’ and ‘gold’ roads to open access: the case for
mixing and matching. Serials Review, 2004:30(4)
Gadd, E., Oppenheim, C., and Probets, S.
RoMEO Studies 3: how academics expect to use
open-access research papers. Journal of Librarianship
and Information Science, 2003:35(3).
Guédon, J. C. The ‘green’ and ‘gold’ roads to open
access: the case for mixing and matching. Serials
Review, 2004:30(4).
SHERPA Publisher Copyright Policies & Self-
archiving (http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeoinfo.html).
Frankel, M. S.,Elliott, R.,Blume,M., Bourgois,J.M.,
Hugenholtz, B., Lindquist, M. G., Morris, S., and
Sandewell, E. Defining and certifying electronic
publication in science. Learned Publishing, 2000:13
(4)
Gadd, E.,Oppenheim, C.,Probets,S.RoMEO Studies4:
an analysis of journal publishers’ copyright agreements.
Learned Publishing, 2003:16(4).
Pinfield, S. How do physicists use an e-print archive? Implications for
institutional e-print services. D-Lib Magazine, 2001:
Dec, 5.
JISC Disciplinary Differences Report, Sparks, S.,
Rightscom Ltd, 2005, 49.
Gadd, E. and Oppenheim, C. RoMEO Studies 1: the impact of
copyright ownership on academic author self-
archiving. Journal of Documentation, 2003:59(3)

Ober, J. Postprint Repository Services:
Context and Feasibility at the University of
California, Final Draft, 2005.
Goodman, D. The criteria for open access. Serials
Review, 2004:30(4).
Pinfield, S. How do physicists use an e-print archive?
Implications for institutional e-print services, D-Lib
Magazine, 2001: Dec, 5. (http://www.dlib.org/dlib/
december01/pinfield/12pinfield.html).
Wren,J.D.Open access and openly accessible: a
study of scientific publications shared via the internet.
BMJ, 2005:330.
Watkinson, A. Securing authenticity of scholarly
paternity and integrity, Book Industry Communication,
2003.
Whitley, R. The Intellectual and Social Organization of
the Sciences, New York, Oxford University Press, 2000.
Becher,T.and Trowler, P. R. Academic Tribes and
Territories, The Society for Research into Higher
Education,& Open University Press, 2001.
‘What Authors Want’: the ALPSP research study on
the motivations and concerns of contributors to
learned journals. Learned Publishing, 1999:12 (3).
King, R., Spector, L., and McKim, G. The guild
model. Journal of Electronic Publishing 2002:8(1).
Guédon, J. C. In Oldenburg’s long shadow: librarians,
research scientists, publishers, and the control of
scientific publishing. In ARL (Association of Research
Libraries) Proceedings, 138. May 2001 Membership
Meeting, 22.
Fry, J. Scholarly research and information practices: a
domain analytic approach. Information Processing &
Management 2006:42.
document_url: http://eprints.rclis.org/6023/1/antelman_self-archiving.pdf
lang_full_codex: en