Abstract
Background: Many of the discussions surrounding Open Access (OA) revolve around how it affects publishing practices across different academic disciplines. It was a long-held view that it would be only a matter of time for all disciplines to fully and relatively homogeneously implement OA. Recent large-scale bibliometric studies show however that the uptake of OA differs substantially across disciplines. This study investigates the underlying mechanisms that cause disciplines to vary in their OA publishing practices. We aimed to answer two questions: First, how do different disciplines adopt and shape OA publishing practices? Second, what discipline-specific barriers to and potentials for OA can be identified? Methods: In a first step, we identified and synthesized relevant bibliometric studies that assessed OA prevalence and publishing patterns across disciplines. In a second step, and adopting a social shaping of technology perspective, we studied evidence on the socio-technical forces that shape OA publishing practices. We examined a variety of data sources, including, but not limited to, publisher policies and guidelines, OA mandates and policies and author surveys. Results: Over the last three decades, scholarly publishing has experienced a shift from “closed” access to OA as the proportion of scholarly literature that is openly accessible has increased continuously. The shift towards OA is however uneven across disciplines in two respects: first, the growth of OA has been uneven across disciplines, which manifests itself in varying OA prevalence levels. Second, disciplines use different OA publishing channels to make research outputs OA. Conclusions: We conclude that historically grown publishing practices differ in terms of their compatibility with OA, which is the reason why OA can be assumed to be a natural continuation of publishing cultures in some disciplines, whereas in other disciplines, the implementation of OA faces major barriers and would require a change of research culture.
Highlights
As a response to perceived limitations of the subscription-based model of scholarly publishing and propelled by technical possibilities provided by the internet, Open Access (OA) presents a new model of academic publishing[1]
Hybrid OA generally is of little variance for OA publishing, with 1% or less of all scholarly outputs being published as articles free under open licenses in subscription journals
Having compared OA publishing patterns for the broad academic disciplines natural and technical sciences, medical sciences, social sciences, law and humanities, we found that the shift of scholarly publishing towards OA occurs uneven across disciplines in two respects
Summary
As a response to perceived limitations of the subscription-based model of scholarly publishing and propelled by technical possibilities provided by the internet, Open Access (OA) presents a new model of academic publishing[1]. The potential implications of OA for academic publishing continue to generate debate in the academic community Many of these discussions revolve around the question of how OA affects publishing practices in different academic disciplines[3]. From an information-processing perspective, scholars across all fields should see these benefits and use OA communication channels uniformly[5] These trends suggested that it would only be a matter of time for all academic disciplines and fields to fully adopt OA and to converge on a stable set of relatively homogeneous OA publishing practices[8]. Many of the discussions surrounding Open Access (OA) revolve around how it affects publishing practices across different academic disciplines It was a long-held view that it would be only a matter of time for all disciplines to fully and relatively homogeneously implement OA. Conclusions: We conclude that historically grown publishing practices differ in terms of their compatibility with OA, which is the reason why OA can be assumed to be a natural continuation of publishing cultures version 2 (revision)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
