ATTITUDE TO OPEN ACCESS IN RUSSIAN SCHOLARLY COMMUNITY: 2018. SURVEY RESULTS AND ANALYSIS

Introduction. The paper presents survey results on the awareness towards and practice of Open Access scholarly publishing among Russian academics.

Materials and Methods. We employed methods of statistical analysis of survey results. Materials comprise results of data processing of Russian survey conducted in 2018 and published results of the latest international surveys. The survey comprised 1383 respondents from 182 organizations. We performed comparative studies of the responses from academics and research institutions as well as different research areas. The study compares results obtained in Russia with the recently published results of surveys conducted in the United Kingdom and Europe.

Results. Our findings show that 95% of Russian respondents support open access, 94% agree to post their publications in open repositories and 75% have experience in open access publishing. We did not find any difference in the awareness and attitude towards open access among seven reference groups. Our analysis revealed the difference in the structure of open access publications of the authors from universities and research institutes. Discussion and

Conclusions. Results reveal a high level of awareness and support to open access and succeful practice in the open access publications in the Russian scholarly community. The results for Russia demonstrate close similarity with the results of the UK academics. The governmental open access policies and programs would foster the practical realization of the open access in Russia.

1. Swan A., Brown S. Authors and open access publishing. Learned Publishing. 2004;17(3):219–224. https://doi.org/10.1087/095315104323159649

2. Suber P. Open Access Overview. Focusing on open access to peer-reviewed research articles and their preprints. Available at: https://legacy.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/overview.htm (accessed 12 September 2018).

3. Björk B.C., Welling P., Laakso M., Majlender P., Hedlund T., Guonason G. Open Access to the scientific journal literature: Situation 2009. 2010. PLoS One. 2010;5(6):e11273. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0011273

4. Correia A.M.R., Teixeira J.C. Reforming scholarly publishing and knowledge communication: From the advent of the scholarly journal to the challenges of open access. Online Information Review. 2005;29(4):349– 364. https://doi.org/10.1108/14684520510617802

5. Laakso M., Welling P., Bukvova H., Nyman L., Björk B.C., Hedlund T. The development of open access journal publishing from 1993 to 2009. PLoS One. 2011;6(6):e20961. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0020961

6. Crow J. Open access and scholarly communication. Available at: http://eprints.rclis.org/12510/ (accessed 12 September 2018).

7. Laakso M. Green open access policies of scholarly journal publishers: A study of what, when, and where self-archiving is allowed. Scientometrics. 2014;99(2):475–494. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-013-1205-3

8. Björk B.C. Open access to scientific publications — An analysis of the barriers to change?. Information Research. 2004;9(2): paper 170. Available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10227/647 (accessed 12 September 2018).

9. Willinsky J. The stratified economics of open access. Economic Analysis and Policy. 2009;39(1):53–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0313-5926(09)50043-4

10. Kim J. Motivations of faculty self-archiving in institutional repositories. Journal of Academic Librarianship. 2011;37(3):246–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2011.02.017

11. Xia J.F. Assessment of self-archiving in institutional repositories: Across disciplines. Journal of Academic Librarianship. 2007;33(6):647–654. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.acalib.2007.09.020

12. Xia J.F., Sun L. Assessment of self-archiving in institutional repositories: Depositorship and full-text availability. Serials Review. 2007;33(1):14–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2007.10765087

13. Kim J. Motivating and impeding factors affecting faculty contribution to institutional repositories. Journal of Digital Information. 2007;8(2). Available at: https://journals.tdl.org/jodi/index.php/jodi/article/view/193/177 (accessed 12 September 2018).

14. Hendler J. Reinventing academic publishing — Part 1. IEEE Intelligent Systems. 2007;22(5):2–3. https://doi.org/10.1109/MIS.2007.4338485

15. Swan A. The culture of open access: Researchers’ views and responses. In: Jacobs N. (ed.). Open access: Key strategic. Chandos: Technical and Economic Aspects; 2006. Available at: https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/262428 (accessed 12 September 2018).

16. Creaser C. Open access research outputs — Institutional policies and researchers’ views: results form two complementary surveys. New Review of Academic Librarianship. 2010;16(1):4–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/13614530903162854

17. Rodriguez J.E. Awareness and attitudes about open access publishing: a glance at generational differences. Journal of Academic Librarianship. 2014;40:604–610. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2014.07.013

18. Spezi V., Fry J., Creaser C., Proberts S. and White S. Researchers’ green open access practice: a cross-disciplinary analysis. Journal of Documentation. 2013;69(3):334–359. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD01-2012-0008

19. Declaration of Rights and Principles to Transform Scholarly Communications. Available at: https:// osc.universityofcalifornia.edu/2018/06/championing-change-in-journal-negotiations/ (accessed 12 September 2018).

20. Policy for open access in the post-2014 research excellence framework. Available at: http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/year/2014/201407/ (accessed 12 September 2018); Open access in the Research Excellence Framework: Extension of flexibility. Available at: http://www.hefce.ac.uk/pubs/year/2016/CL,322016/ (accessed 12 September 2018).

21. Analytical Support for Bibliometrics Indicators. Open access availability of scientific publications. Final Report. Science-Metrix Inc. January 2018. Available at: http://www.science-metrix.com/sites/default/files/science-metrix/publications/science-metrix_open_access_availability_scientific_publications_report.pdf (дата обращения: 12.09.2018).

22. Razumova I.K. Is open access open? Visualization and analysis of an array open access particles on the platforms of global science citation indexes. In: The 7th International Scientific and Practical Conference “World-class scientific publication — 2018: Editorial Policy, Open Access, Scientific Communications”. Moscow; 2018. Available at: https://conf.neicon.ru/materials/35-Domestic0418/250418-03-Razumova.pdf (accessed 12 September 2018) (In Russ.).

23. Yimei Zhu. Who support open access publishing? Gender, discipline, seniority and other factors associated with academics’ OA practice. Scientometrics. 2017;111(2):557–579. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2316-z

24. Morais R., Borrell-Damian L. EUA Open Access Survey Report 2016–2017. February 2018. Available at: http://eua.be/Libraries/publications-homepage-list/open-access-2016-2017-eua-survey-results.pdf?sfvrsn=2 (accessed 12 September 2018).

25. Rowley J., Johnson F., Sbaffi L., Frass W., Devine E. Academics’ behaviors and attitudes towards open access publishing in scholarly journals. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology. 2017;68(5):1201–1211. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23710

26. Procter R., Williams R., Stewart J., Poschen M., Snee H., Voss A., Asgari-Targhi M. Adoption and use of Web 20 in scholarly communications. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A. 2010;368(1926):4039– 4056. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2010.0155