Scholarly Communication Practices in Humanities and Social Sciences: A Study of Researchers’ Attitudes and Awareness of Open Access

Bhuva Narayan 1 , Edward J. Luca 2 , Belinda Tiffen 1 , Ashley England 1 , Mal Booth 1 , and Henry Boateng 1
  • 1 University of Technology Sydney,, Sydney, Australia
  • 2 University of Sydney,, Sydney, Australia

Abstract

This paper examines issues relating to the perceptions and adoption of open access (OA) and institutional repositories. Using a survey research design, we collected data from academics and other researchers in the humanities, arts and social sciences (HASS) at a university in Australia. We looked at factors influencing choice of publishers and journal outlets, as well as the use of social media and nontraditional channels for scholarly communication. We used an online questionnaire to collect data and used descriptive statistics to analyse the data. Our findings suggest that researchers are highly influenced by traditional measures of quality, such as journal impact factor, and are less concerned with making their work more findable and promoting it through social media. This highlights a disconnect between researchers’ desired outcomes and the efforts that they put in toward the same. Our findings also suggest that institutional policies have the potential to increase OA awareness and adoption. This study contributes to the growing literature on scholarly communication by offering evidence from the HASS field, where limited studies have been conducted. Based on the findings, we recommend that academic librarians engage with faculty through outreach and workshops to change perceptions of OA and the institutional repository.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Association of College & Research Libraries (2003). Principles and Strategies for the Reform of Scholarly Communication 1. Retrieved from http://www.ala.org/acrl/publications/whitepapers/principlesstrategies (Archived by WebCite® at http://www.webcitation.org/6nr5uq4V3)

  • Al-Aufi, A., Fulton, C. (2015). Impact of social networking tools on scholarly communication: A cross-institutional study. The Electronic Library, 33(2), 224-241.

  • Armstrong, M. (2014). Institutional repository management models that support faculty research dissemination. OCLC Systems & Services, 30(1), 43-51.

  • Atiso, K., Adkins, D., Borteye Mensah, E. (2017). Knowledge of Open Access Journals Among Research Scientists in Ghana. The Serials Librarian, 73(3-4), 327-337.

  • Bell, S., Fried Foster, N., Gibbons, S. (2005). Reference librarians and the success of institutional repositories. Reference Services Review, 33(3), 283-290.

  • Bongiovani, P. C., Guarnieri, G., Babini, D., Lopez, F. A. (2014). Acceso abierto en la Universidad Nacional de Rosario necesidades y practicas de los docentes/ investigadores. Informacion, Cultura y Sociedad, 30, 13-34.

  • Butterwick, S., Dawson, J. (2005,). Undone business: Examining the production of academic labour. Women’s Studies International Forum, 28(1), 51-65.

  • Creaser, C., Fry, J., Greenwood, H., Oppenheim, C., Probets, S., Spezi, V., White, S. (2010). Authors’ awareness and attitudes toward open access repositories. New Review of Academic Librarianship, 16(S1), 145-161.

  • Crow, R. (2002). The Case for Institutional Repositories: A SPARC Position Paper. Association of Research Libraries, no. 223 (August 2002): 1-4. http://www.sparc.arl.org/resources/papers-guides/the-case-for-institutional-repositories (Archived by WebCite® at http://www.webcitation.org/6xGcL6307)

  • Cullen, R., Chawner, B. (2011). Institutional repositories, open access, and scholarly communication: a study of conflicting paradigms. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 37(6), 460-470.

  • Donelan, H. (2016). Social media for professional development and networking opportunities in academia. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 40(5), 706-729.

  • Dulle, F. W., M. K. Minishi-Majanja, L. M. Cloete, (2011). The Adoption of Open Access Scholarly Communication in Tanzanian Public Universities: Some Influencing Factors. Mousaion 29(1), 112-135.

  • Elsayed, A. M. (2016). The use of academic social networks among Arab researchers: A survey. Social Science Computer Review, 34(3), 378-391.

  • Fruin, C., Sutton, S. (2016). Strategies for success: open access policies at North American educational institutions. College & Research Libraries, 77(4), 469-499.

  • Goodfellow, R. (2013). Scholarly, digital, open: an impossible triangle?. Research in Learning Technology, 21, 1-15.

  • Greenhow, C., Gleason, B. (2014). Social scholarship: Reconsidering scholarly practices in the age of social media. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45(3), 392-402.

  • Gruzd, A., Goertzen, M. (2013). Wired academia: Why social science scholars are using social media. In: Proceedings of the 46th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS) (pp. 3332-3341). Piscataway, NJ: IEEE.

  • Jain, P., Bentley, G. Oladiran, M.T. (2009). The role of institutional repository in digital scholarly communications”. In: African Digital Scholarship and Curation Conference (pp. 12-14).

  • Jamali, H. R., Nicholas, D., Herman, E. (2016). Scholarly reputation in the digital age and the role of emerging platforms and mechanisms. Research Evaluation, 25(1), 37-49.

  • Johnson, R. (2002). Institutional repositories: partnering with faculty to enhance scholarly communication. D-Lib Magazine, 8(11), http://www.dlib.org/dlib/november02/johnson/11johnson.html

  • Kennan, M. A. (2008). Reassembling scholarly publishing: open access, institutional repositories and the process of change (PhD thesis). Sydney: The University of New South Wales. Retrieved from http://handle.unsw.edu.au/1959.4/10148

  • Kim, J. (2007). Motivating and impeding factors affecting faculty contribution to institutional repositories. Journal of Digital Information, 8(2), https://journals.tel.org/jodi/index.php/ jodi/article/ view/193/177

  • Kim, J. (2011). Motivations of faculty self-archiving in institutional repositories. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 37(3), 246-254.

  • Luca, E., Narayan, B. (2016). Redesigning the open-access institutional repository: A user experience approach. In A. Morishima, A. Rauber, & C. li Liew (Eds.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science (pp. 275-281). Berlin: Springer Verlag.

  • Lwoga, E. T., Questier, F. (2015). Open access behaviours and perceptions of health sciences faculty and roles of information professionals. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 32(1), 37-49.

  • Manca, S., Ranieri, M. (2017). Exploring Digital Scholarship. A Study on Use of Social Media for Scholarly Communication among Italian Academics. In Esposito A. (Ed.), Research 2.0 and the Impact of Digital Technologies on Scholarly Inquiry (pp. 116-141). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

  • Marsh, R. M. (2015). The role of institutional repositories in developing the communication of scholarly research. OCLC Systems & Services: International digital library perspectives, 31(4), 163-195.

  • Mercer, H. (2011). Almost halfway there: An analysis of the open access behaviors of academic librarians. College & Research Libraries, 72(5), 443-453.

  • Narayan, B., Luca, E. (2017). Issues and challenges in researchers’ adoption of open access and institutional repositories: a contextual study of an institutional repository. Information Research: An International Electronic Journal, 22(4). Retrieved from http://www.informationr.net/ir/22-4/rails/rails1608.html

  • National Science Foundation (2014). Reducing investigators’ administrative workload for federally funded research. Report by the National Science Board. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.

  • Nentwich, M., König, R. (2014). Academia goes Facebook? The potential of social network sites in the scholarly realm. In Opening science (pp. 107-124). Springer International Publishing.

  • Niyazov, Y., Vogel, C., Price, R., Lund, B., Judd, D., Akil, A., Mortonson, M., Schwartzman, J., Shron, M. (2016). Open access meets discoverability: Citations to articles posted to Academia.edu. PloS one, 11(2), 1-23.

  • Odell, J., Coates, H., Palmer, K. (2016). Rewarding open access scholarship in promotion and tenure: Driving institutional change. College & Research Libraries News, 77(7), 322-325.

  • Ortega, J. L. (2015). Disciplinary differences in the use of academic social networking sites. Online Information Review, 39(4), 520-536.

  • Peekhaus, W., Proferes, N. (2015). How library and information science faculty perceive and engage with open access. Journal of Information Science, 41(5), 640-661.

  • Ren, X. (2015). The quandary between communication and certification: Individual academics’ views on Open Access and open scholarship. Online Information Review, 39(5), 682-697.

  • Rodriguez, J. E. (2014). Awareness and attitudes about open access publishing: A glance at generational differences. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 40(6), 604-610.

  • Serrano-Vicente, R., Melero, R., Abadal, E. (2016). Open Access Awareness and Perceptions in an Institutional Landscape. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 42(5), 595-603.

  • Singson, M., Joy, M. G., Thiyagarajan, S., Dkhar, V. (2015). Perceptions of open access publishing by Faculty at Pondicherry University: A survey. International Information & Library Review, 47(1-2), 1-10.

  • Stewart, B. E. (2015). In abundance: Networked participatory practices as scholarship. International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 16(3), 318-340.

  • Stokker, J. (2011). Open access: a widening agenda - an Australian perspective. Paper presented at the IATUL 2011 Conference, Warsaw, Poland. Retrieved from http://docs.lib.purdue.edu/iatul/2011/papers/14/ (Archived by WebCite® at http://www.webcitation.org/6xGdDJzwH)

  • Suber, P. (2017). Why Is Open Access Moving So Slowly In The Humanities? Retrieved September 27, 2017, from https://blogapaonline.org/2017/06/08/open-access-in-the-humanities-part-2/ (Archived by WebCite® at http://www.webcitation.org/6xGcXh34v)

  • Sugimoto, C. R., Work, S., Larivière, V., Haustein, S. (2017). Scholarly use of social media and altmetrics: A review of the literature. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 68(9), 2037-2062.

  • Tenopir, C., Levine, K., Allard, S., Christian, L., Volentine, R., Boehm, R., Nichols, F., Nicholas, D., Jamali, H. R., Herman, E., Watkinson. A. (2016). Trustworthiness and Authority of Scholarly Information in a Digital Age: Results of an International Questionnaire. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 67(10), 2344-2361.

  • Tomaszewski, R., Poulin, S., MacDonald, K. I. (2013). Publishing in discipline-specific open access journals: opportunities and outreach for librarians. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 39(1), 61-66.

  • University of Technology Sydney (UTS). (2013). Open Access Policy. Retrieved 21 January, 2017, from: http://www.gsu.uts.edu.au/policies/open-access.html (Archived by WebCite® at http://www.webcitation.org/6xGcr9Ns0)

  • Veletsianos, G. (2016). Social media in academia: Networked scholars. New York, NY: Routledge.

  • Van de Velde, E. (2016). Let IR RIP. Retrieved 30 January, 2017, from: http://scitechsociety.blogspot.com.au/2016/07/let-ir-rip.html (Archived by WebCite® at http://www.webcitation.org/6xGd3de8X)

  • Xia, J. (2007). Assessment of self-archiving in institutional repositories: Across disciplines. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 33(6), 647-654.

  • Zhong, J., Jiang, S. (2016). Institutional repositories in Chinese open access development: Status, progress, and challenges. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 42(6), 739-744.

OPEN ACCESS

Journal + Issues

Search