Factors influencing publication choice: why faculty choose open access

BACKGROUND: In an attempt to identify motivating factors involved in decisions to publish in open access and open archives (OA) journals, individual interviews with biomedical faculty members at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC-Chapel Hill) and Duke University, two major research universities, were conducted. The interviews focused on faculty identified as early adopters of OA/free full-text publishing. METHODS: Searches conducted in PubMed and PubMed Central identified faculty from the two institutions who have published works in OA/free full-text journals. The searches targeted authors with multiple OA citations during a specified 18 month period. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with the most prolific OA authors at each university. Individual interviews attempted to determine whether the authors were aware they published in OA journals, why they chose to publish in OA journals, what factors influenced their publishing decisions, and their general attitude towards OA publishing models. RESULTS & DISCUSSION: Fourteen interviews were granted and completed. Respondents included a fairly even mix of Assistant, Associate and Full professors. Results indicate that when targeting biomedical faculty at UNC-Chapel Hill and Duke, speed of publication and copyright retention are unlikely motivating factors or incentives for the promotion of OA publishing. In addition, author fees required by some open access journals are unlikely barriers or disincentives. CONCLUSION: It appears that publication quality is of utmost importance when choosing publication venues in general, while free access and visibility are specifically noted incentives for selection of OA journals. Therefore, free public availability and increased exposure may not be strong enough incentives for authors to choose open access over more traditional and respected subscription based publications, unless the quality issue is also addressed

Who Shares? Who Doesn't? Factors Associated with Openly Archiving Raw Research Data

Many initiatives encourage investigators to share their raw datasets in hopes of increasing research efficiency and quality. Despite these investments of time and money, we do not have a firm grasp of who openly shares raw research data, who doesn't, and which initiatives are correlated with high rates of data sharing. In this analysis I use bibliometric methods to identify patterns in the frequency with which investigators openly archive their raw gene expression microarray datasets after study publication

Optics and Quantum Electronics

Contains table of contents on Section 3 and reports on nineteen research projects.Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency Grant F49620-96-0126Joint Services Electronics Program Grant DAAH04-95-1-0038National Science Foundation Grant ECS 94-23737U.S. Air Force - Office of Scientific Research Contract F49620-95-1-0221U.S. Navy - Office of Naval Research Grant N00014-95-1-0715Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency/National Center for Integrated Photonics TechnologyMultidisciplinary Research InitiativeU.S. Air Force - Office of Scientific ResearchNational Science Foundation/MRSECU.S. Navy - Office of Naval Research (MFEL) Contract N00014-91-J-1956National Institutes of Health Grant R01-EY11289U.S. Navy - Office of Naval Research (MFEL) Contract N00014-94-0717Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency Contract N66001-96-C-863