The open access divide

Publications

Volumn 1, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 113-139

  Xia, Jingfeng ^a  

^a Indiana University   (United States)

Author keywords

Data; Open access; Publications; Scholarly information sharing; Self archiving

Indexed keywords

EID: 84947744514     PISSN: None     EISSN: 23046775     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3390/publications1030113     Document Type: Article

References (132)

1. King, C.J.; Harley, D.; Earl-Novell, S.; Arter, J.; Lawrence, S.; Perciali, I. Scholarly Communication: Academic Values and Sustainable Models; Center for Studies in Higher Education: Berkeley, CA, USA, 2006; p. 1.
2. Graham, M. Time machines and virtual portals: The spatialities of the digital divide. Progr. Dev. Stud. 2011, 11, 15.
3. PLoS: Open Access. Available online: http://www.plos.org/about/open-access/(accessed on 15 October 2013).
4. Berlin10. Conference. Available online: http://www.berlin10.org/call-to-action.html (accessed on 15 October 2013).
5. Xia, J. A longitudinal study of scholars attitudes and behaviors in open access publishing. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 2010, 61, 615–624.
6. Xia, J. An anthropological emic-etic perspective of open access practices. J. Doc. 2011, 67, 75–94.
7. Xia, J.; Gilchrist, S.B.; Smith, N.X.P.; Kingery, J.A.; Radecki, J.R.; Wilhelm, M.L.; Harrison, K.C.; Ashby, M.L.; Mahn, A.J. A review of open access self-archiving mandate policies. Port. Libr. Acad. 2012, 12, 85–102.
8. Thatcher, S.G. From the university presses–Open access and the future of scholarly communication. Against Grain 2009, 21, 78–81.
9. Thatcher, S.G. From the university presses–What university presses think about open access? Against Grain 2010, 22, 56–57.
10. Thatcher, S.G. Back to the future: Old models for new challenges. Against Grain 2011, 23, 38–43.
11. Xia, J.; Wilhoite, S.K.; Myers, R.L. A ‘librarian-LIS faculty’ divide in open access practice. J. Doc. 2011, 67, 791–805.
12. Feijen, M.; van der Kuil, A. A recipe for cream of science: Special content recruitment for Dutch institutional repositories. Ariadne 2005, 45. Available online: http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue45/vanderkuil (accessed on 15 October 2013).
13. Morris, S.; Thorn, S. Learned society members and open access. Learn. Publ. 2009, 22, 221–239.
14. Rowlands, I.; Nicholas, D. New Journal Publishing Models: An International Survey of Senior Researchers; CIBER: London, UK, 2005.
15. Swan, A.; Brown, S. Open Access Self-Archiving: An Author Study; Key Perspectives Ltd.: Truro, UK, 2005.
16. Xia, J.; Liu, Y. Usage patterns of open genomic data. Coll. Res. Libr. 2013, 47, 195–207.
17. Hilbert, M. The end justifies the definition: The manifold outlooks on the digital divide and their practical usefulness for policy-making. Telecommun. Policy 2011, 35, 715–736.
18. Augustine, A. Liber de Rhetorica. In Rhetores Latini Minores; Halm, K., Ed.; Aedibus B.G. Teubneri: Leipzig, Germany, 1863, p. 141.
19. Robertson, D.W. A note on the classical origin of ‘circumstances’ in the medieval confessional. Stud. Philol. 1946, 43, 6–14.
20. Trumbull, H.C. Teaching and Teachers; John, D., Wattles: Philadelphia, PA, USA, 1988; p. 120.
21. Lasswell, H.D. The Structure and Function of Communication in Society. In the Communication of Ideas; Bryson, L., Ed.; Harper and Row: New York, NY, USA, 1948; p. 37.
22. Griffin, P.F. The correlation of English and journalism. Engl. J. 1949, 38, 189–194.
23. Bradshaw, P. Five W’s and an H that should come *after* every story. Online J. Blog 2007, Nov 19. Available online: http://recoveringjournalist.typepad.com/recovering_journalist/2007/11/5-ws-an-h-20.html (accessed on 15 October 2013).
24. Lasswell, H.D. Politics Who Gets What, When and How; Whittlesey House: New York, NY, USA, 1936.
25. Mackie, M. Filling institutional repositories: Practical strategies from the DAEDALUS project. Ariadne 2006, 39. Available online: http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue39/mackie (accessed on 15 October 2013).
26. Xia, J.; Dalbello, M. Self-Archiving as an Emergent Scholarly Practice. In Proceedings of the Research Showcase of School of Communication, Information, and Library Studies, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA, 8 May 2007.
27. Austin, A.; Heffernan, M.; David, N. Academic Authorship, Publishing Agreements and Open Access: Survey Results; Queensland University of Technology: Brisbane, Australia, 2008.
28. Hess, T.; Wigand, R.T.; Mann, F.; von Walter, B. Open Access & Science Publishing; Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitat: Munich, Germany, 2007.
29. Boufarss, M. If we build it, will they come? In Proceedings of the SLA-Arabian Gulf Chapter 16th Annual Conference, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, 2 March, 2010.
30. Harley, D.; Acord, S.K.; Earl-Novell, S.; Lawrence, S.; King, C.J. Assessing the Future Landscape of Scholarly Communication: An Exploration of Faculty Values and Needs in Seven Disciplines; Center for Studies in Higher Education: Berkeley, CA, USA, 2010; p. i.
31. Warlick, S.E.; Vaughan, K.T.L. Factors influencing publication choice: Why faculty choose open access. Biomed. Dig. Libr. 2007, 4. Available online: http://www.bio-diglib.com/content/4/1/1 (accessed on 15 October 2013).
32. Becher, T. The significance of disciplinary differences. Stud. High. Educ. 1994, 19, 151–161.
33. Damrosch, D. We Scholars: Changing the Culture of the University; Harvard University Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1995.
34. Tierney, W.G. Organizational culture in higher education: Defining the essentials. J. High. Educ. 1988, 59, 2–21.
35. Suber, P. Open Access Overview. Available online: http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/overview.htm (accessed on 15 October 2013).
36. Rowlands, I.; Nicholas, D.; Huntingdon, P. Scholarly Communication in the Digital Environment: What do Authors Wants? CIBER: London, UK, 2004.
37. Ware, M. Pathfinder Research on Web-Based Repositories–Final Report; Publisher and Library Learning Solutions: Bristol, UK, 2004.
38. Ware, M. Institutional repositories and scholarly publishing. Learn. Publ. 2004, 17, 115–124.
39. University of California, Faculty Attitudes and Behaviors Regarding Scholarly Communication: Survey Findings, 2007. Available online: http://osc.universityofcalifornia.edu/responses/materials/OSC-survey-full-20070828.pdf (accessed on 15 October 2013).
40. Xia, J.; Opperman, D. Current trends in institutional repositories of Master’s and baccalaureate institutions. Ser. Rev. 2010, 36, 10–18.
41. Sale, A. The acquisition of open access research articles. First Monday 2006, 11. Available online: http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1409 (accessed 15 October 2013).
42. Sale, A. The impact of mandatory policies on ETD acquisition. D-Lib. Mag. 2006, 12. Available online: http://www.dlib.org/dlib/april06/sale/04sale.html (accessed on 15 October 2013).
43. Sale, A. Comparison of content policies for institutional repositories in Australia. First Monday 2005, 11. Available online: http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/1324 (accessed 15 October 2013).
44. Piwowar, H.A. Who shares? Who doesn’t? Factors associated with openly archiving raw research data. PLoS One 2011, 6, e18657.
45. Kennan, M.A. Learning to share: Mandates and open access. Libr. Manag. 2011, 32, 302–318.
46. Kennan, M.A.; Kingsley, D. The state of the nation: A snapshot of Australian institutional repositories. First Monday 2009, 14. Available online: http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2282/2092 (accessed on 15 October 2013).
47. Kurtz, M.J.; Eichhorn, G.; Accomazzi, A.; Grant, C.; Demleitner, M.; Henneken, E.; Murray, S.S. The effect of use and access on citations. Inf. Process. Manag. 2005, 41, 1395–1402.
48. Carter, H.; Snyder, C.A.; Imre, A. Library faculty publishing and intellectual property issues. Port. Libr. Acad. 2009, 7, 65–79.
49. Mercer, H. Almost halfway there: An analysis of the open access behaviors of academic librarians. Coll. Res. Libr. 2011, 72, 443–453.
50. Harnad, S. Open access to research: Changing researcher behavior through university and funder mandates. J. Democr. Open Gov. 2011, 3, 33–41.
51. Lewis, D.W. The inevitability of open access. Coll. Res. Libr. 2012, 73, 493–506.
52. Poynder, R. Suber: Leader of a leaderless revolution. Inf. Today 2011, 28. Available online: http://www.infotoday.com/it/jul11/Suber-Leader-of-a-Leaderless-Revolution.shtml (accessed on 15 October 2013).
53. Peterson, W.K. Open access to digital information: Opportunities and challenges identified during the electronic geophysical year. Data Sci. J. 2010, 8, S108–S112.
54. Shin, E. The challenges of open access for Korea's national repositories. Interlend. Doc. Supply 2010, 38, 231–236.
55. Young, P. Open access dissemination challenges: A case study. OCLC Syst. Serv. 2009, 25, 93–104.
56. Palmer, K.L.; Dill, E.; Christie, C. Where there’s a will there’s a way? Survey of academic librarian attitudes about open access. Coll. Res. Libr. 2009, 70, 315–335.
57. Suber, P. Timeline of the Open Access Movement, 2009. Available online: http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/timeline.htm (accessed on 15 October 2013).
58. Evans, J.A.; Reimer, J. Open access and global participation in science. Science 2009, 323, 1025.
59. Xia, J. Diffusionism and open access practices. J. Doc. 2012, 68, 72–99.
60. Rowlands, I.; Nicholas, D. The changing scholarly communication landscape: An international survey of senior researchers. Learn. Publish. 2006, 19, 31–55.
61. Liu, Z.; Wan, G. Scholarly Journal Articles on Open Access in LIS Literature: A Content Analysis, 2007. Available online: http://www.white-clouds.com/iclc/cliej/cl23LiuWan.htm (accessed on 15 October 2013).
62. Directory of Open Access Journals. Available online: http://www.doaj.org/(accessed on 15 October 2013).
63. HDI 2010 Index. Available online: http://hdr.undp.org/en/media/Lets-Talk-HD-HDI_2010.pdf (accessed on 15 October 2013).
64. Ulrichsweb Global Serials Directory. Available online: http://www.ulrichsweb.com/ulrichsweb/faqs.asp (accessed on 15 October 2013).
65. Rogers, E.M. Diffusion of Innovations, 5th ed.; Free Press: New York, NY, USA, 2003.
66. Rogers, E.M. Communication Technology: The New Media in Society; Free Press: New York, NY, USA, 1986.
67. Rogers, E.M. Diffusion of Innovations; Free Press: New York, NY, USA, 1995.
68. Andrew, T. Trends in self-posting of research material online by academic staff. Ariadne 2003, 37. Available online: http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue37/andrew (accessed on 15 October 2013).
69. Jenkins, B.; Breakstone, E.; Hixson, C. Content in, content out: The dual roles of reference librarian in institutional repositories. Ref. Serv. Rev. 2005, 33, 312–324.
70. Pinfield, S. Self-Archiving Publications. In International Yearbook of Library and Information Management 2004–2005: Scholarly Publishing in an Electronic Era; Gorman, G.E., Rowland, R., Eds.; Facet Publishing: London, UK, 2004; pp. 118–145.
71. Shearer, M.K. Institutional repositories: Towards the identification of critical success factors. Can. J. Inf. Libr. Sci. 2003, 27, 89–108.
72. arXiv. Available online: http://arXiv.org (accessed on 15 October 2013).
73. RePEc. Available online: http://repec.org/(accessed on 15 October 2013).
74. Hubbard, B. SHERPA and institutional repositories. Serials 2003, 16, 243–247.
75. Lynch, C.D. Institutional repositories: Essential infrastructure for scholarship in the digital age. Port. Libr. Acad. 2003, 3, 327–336.
76. Carr, L.; Brody, T. Size isn’t everything: Sustainable repositories as evidenced by sustainable deposit profiles. D-Lib. Mag. 2007, 13. Available online: http://www.dlib.org/dlib/july07/carr/07carr.html (accessed on 15 October 2013).
77. Xia, J.; Sun, L. Assessment of self-archiving in institutional repositories: Depositorship and full-text availability. Ser. Rev. 2007, 33, 14–21.
78. AHA. Statement on polices regarding the embargoing of completed history PhD dissertations. AHA Today 2013. Available online: http://blog.historians.org/2013/07/american-historical-association-statement-on-policies-regarding-the-embargoing-of-completed-history-phd-dissertations/(accessed on 15 October 2013).
79. Jaschik, S. Embargoes for dissertations? Inside High. ED 2013, July 24. Available online: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2013/07/24/historians-association-faces-criticism-proposal-embargo-dissertations (accessed on 15 October 2013).
80. Patten, S. Scholarly group seeks up to 6-year embargoes on digital dissertations. Chron. High. Educ. 2013, July 24. Available online: http://chronicle.com/article/Scholarly-Group-Seeks-Up-to/140515/(accessed on 15 October 2013).
81. Ramirez, M.L.; Dalton, J.T.; McMillan, G.; Read, M.; Seamans, N.H. Do open access electronic theses and dissertations diminish publishing opportunities in the social sciences and humanities? Findings from a 2011 survey of academic publishers. Coll. Res. Libr. 2013, 74, p. 368.
82. Suber, P. An open access mandate for the National Institutes of Health. Open Med. 2008, 2. Available online: http://www.openmedicine.ca/article/view/213/135 (accessed on 15 October 2013).
83. Bankier, J.G.; Smith, C. Establishing Library Publishing: Best Practices for Creating Successful Journal Editors. In Proceedings of the ELPUB 2008 Conference on Electronic Publishing, Toronto, ON, Canada, June 2008; pp. 68–78.
84. Royster, P. Publishing original content in an institutional repository. Ser. Rev. 2008, 34, 27–30.
85. Xia, J. Library publishing as a new model of scholarly communication. J. Sch. Publ. 2009, 40, 370–383.
86. Pinfield, S. Journals and repositories: An evolving relationship? Learn. Publ. 2009, 22, 165–175.
87. Becher, T.; Trowler, P.R. Academic Tribes and Territories: Intellectual Enquiry and the Cultures of Discipline; Open University Press: Buckingham, UK, 2001.
88. Kreber, C. The University and its Disciplines: Teaching and Learning within and beyond Disciplinary Boundaries; Routledge: London, UK, 2008.
89. Kekäle, J. Preferred patterns of academic leadership in different disciplinary (sub)culture. High. Educ. 1999, 37, 232–233.
90. DeMartini, J.R. Basic and applied sociological work: Divergence, convergence, or peaceful co-existence. J. Appl. Behav. Sci. 1982, 18, 203–215.
91. Gadd, E.; Oppenheim, C.; Probets, S. RoMEO studies 1: The impact of copyright ownership on academic author self-archiving. J. Doc. 2003, 50, 243–277.
92. Gadd, E.; Oppenheim, C.; Probets, S. RoMEO studies 4: An analysis of journal publishers’ copyright agreements. Learn. Publ. 2003, 16, 293–308.
93. Carr, L.; Harnad, S. Keystroke economy: A study of the time and effort involved in self-archiving. Available online: http://www.eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/10688 (accessed on 15 October 2013).
94. Ozek, Y.H. Lund virtual medical journal makes self-archiving attractive and easy for authors. D-Lib. Mag. 2005, 11. Available online: http://www.dlib.org/dlib/october05/ozek/10ozek.html (accessed on 15 October 2013).
95. Austin, A.E.; Rice, R.E. Making tenure viable: Listening to early career faculty. Am. Behav. Sci. 1998, 41, 736–754.
96. Olsen, D. Work satisfaction and stress in the first and third year of academic appointment. J. High. Educ. 1993, 64, 453–471.
97. Developing New and Junior Faculty; Sorcinelli, M.D., Austin, A.E., Eds.; Jossey-Bass: San Francisco, FL, USA, 1992.
98. McCain, K. Mandating sharing: Journal policies in the natural sciences. Sci. Commun. 1995, 16, 403–431.
99. Piwowar, H.A.; Chapman, W. A review of journal policies for sharing research data. TELPUB 2008. Available online: http://precedings.nature.com/documents/1700/version/1 (accessed on 15 October 2013).
100. Ellingford, L. Education Scholars’ Motivations, Approaches and Practices toward Open Access Publishing. In Proceedings of the Berlin 9 Open Access Conference, Washington, DC, USA, 9–10 November 2011.
101. Senders, J. An on-line scientific journal. Inf. Sci. 1977, 11, 3–9.
102. Harnad, S. Scholarly skywriting and the prepublication continuum of scientific inquiry. Psychol. Sci. 1990, 1, 342–343.
103. Schauder, D. Electronic publishing of professional articles: Attitudes of academics and implications for the scholarly communication industry. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. 1994, 45, 73–100.
104. Devakos, R.; Turko, K. Synergies: Building national infrastructure for Canadian scholarly publishing. ARL Bi-Mon. 2007, 252/253, 16–19.
105. Maron, N.L.; Smith, K.K. Current Models of Digital Scholarly Communication: Results of an Investigation Conducted by Ithaka for the Association of Research Libraries; Association of Research Libraries: Washington, DC, USA, 2008.
106. Nicholas, D.; Huntington, P.; Jamali, H.R. The impact of open access publishing (and other access initiatives) on use and users of digital scholarly journals. Learn. Publ. 2007, 20, 11–15.
107. Hahn, K.L. Research Library Publishing Services: New Options for University Publishing; Association of Research Libraries: Washington, DC, USA, 2008.
108. Koh, A. What is publishing? A Report from THATCamp publishing. Chron. High. Educ. 2011, November 28. Available online: http://chronicle.com/blogs/profhacker/what-is-publishing-a-report-from-thatcamp-publishing/37420 (accessed on 15 October 2013).
109. Suber, P. The SPARC Open Access Newsletter. 2011, 162. Available online: http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/newsletter/12-02-11.htm (accessed on 15 October 2013).
110. PLoS Journals. Available online: http://www.plos.org/publications/journals/(accessed on 15 October 2013).
111. Bankier, J.G.; Foster, C.; Wiley, G. Institutional repositories–Strategies for the present and future. Ser. Libr. 2009, 56, 109–115.
112. King, D.W. The cost of journal publishing: A literature review and commentary. Learn. Publ. 2007, 20, 85–106.
113. Reische, J. Who bears the cost? Comment on S. Jaschik, ‘abandoning print, not peer review’, Inside High. Ed. 2008, February 28. Available online: http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/02/28/open (accessed on 15 October 2013).
114. Givler, P. University Press Publishing in the United States. In Scholarly Publishing: Books, Journals, Publishers and Libraries in the Twentieth Century; Abel, R.E., Newman, L.W., Eds.; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2002.
115. Pochoda, P. Editor’s note for reimagining the university press. J. Electron. Publ. 2010, 13. Available online: http://quod.lib.umich.edu/j/jep/3336451.0013.201?rgn=main;view=fulltext (accessed on 15 October 2013).
116. Fry, B.M.; White, H.S. Economics and Interaction of the Publisher-Library Relationship in the Production and Use of Scholarly and Research Journals; National Science Foundation: Washington, DC, USA, 1975; p. 61.
117. Wittenberg, K. Reimagining the university press. J. Electron. Publ. 2010, 13. Available online: http://quod.lib.umich.edu/j/jep/3336451.0013.203?rgn=main;view=fulltext (accessed on 15 October 2013).
118. Esposito, J.J. Stage five book publishing. J. Electron. Publ. 2010, 13. Available online: http://quod.lib.umich.edu/j/jep/3336451.0013.204?rgn=main;view=fulltext (accessed on 15 October 2013).
119. Jensen, M.J. University presses in the ecosystem of 2020. J. Electron. Publ. 2010, 13. Available online: http://quod.lib.umich.edu/j/jep/3336451.0013.209?rgn=main;view=fulltext (accessed on 15 October 2013).
120. Lynch, C.D. Imagining a university press system to support scholarship in the digital age. J. Electron. Publ. 2010, 13. Available online: http://quod.lib.umich.edu/j/jep/3336451.0013.207?rgn=main;view=fulltext (accessed on 15 October 2013).
121. McPherson, T. Scaling vectors: Thoughts on the future of scholarly communication. J. Electron. Publ. 2010, 13. Available online: http://quod.lib.umich.edu/j/jep/3336451.0013.208?rgn=main;view=fulltext (accessed on 15 October 2013).
122. SHERPA/RoME. Available online: http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo (accessed on 15 October 2013).
123. Antelman, K. Self-archiving practice and the influence of publisher policies in the social sciences. Learn. Publ. 2006, 19, 90.
124. Pinfield, S. How do physicists use an e-print archive? Implications for institutional e-print services. D-Lib. Mag. 2001, 7. Available online: http://www.dlib.org/dlib/december01/pinfield/12pinfield.html (accessed on 15 October 2013).
125. Probets, S.; Jenkins, C. Documentation for institutional repositories. Learn. Publ. 2006, 19, 57–71.
126. Cave, P. Work Package 2: Requirements Exercise–Report of a Survey of Academics and Information Professionals; University of Leeds: Leeds, UK, 2007; p. 3.
127. NISO/ALPSP Journal Article Versions (JAV) Technical Working Group. Journal Article Versions (JAV): Recommendations of the NISO/ALPSP JAV Technical Working Group; National Information Standards Organization: Baltimore, MD, USA.
128. Harper, F.M.; Raban, D.; Rafaeli, S.; Konstan, J.A. Predictors of answer quality in online Q&A sites. In Proceedings of the 26th Annual SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems; ACM: New York, NY, USA.
129. Goodman, D. The criteria for open access. Ser. Rev. 2004, 30, 258–270.
130. Guédon, J. The “Green” and “Gold” roads to open access. Ser. Rev. 2004, 30, 315–328.
131. Harnad, S.; Brody, T.; Vallières, F.; Carr, L.; Hitchcock, S.; Gingras, Y.; Oppenheim, C.; Hajjem, C.; Hilf, E.R. The access/impact problem and the green and gold roads to open access: An update. Ser. Rev. 2008, 34, 36–40.
132. Guédon, J. Mixing and matching the green and gold roads to open access—Take 2. Ser. Rev. 2008, 34, 41–51.