Abstract
This article seeks to extend the knowledge of the behaviour and attitudes towards open access publishing through a survey that focusses on the attitudes and behaviours of academic researchers in Korea working in medicine and healthcare. Issues covered include: use of and intentions regarding OAP, and perceptions regarding advantages and disadvantages of OAP, journal article publication services, peer review, and re-use. A significant proportion of the articles (mean 58%) published by this group are published gold open access, consistent with the push in Korea towards international impact for their research. Researchers were more positive about the benefits of OAP than they were negative about its disadvantages. Analysis of responses on the basis of gender, and experience in publishing, showed some significant differences in attitudes to some statements.
Highlights
Open access (OA) to the findings of scholarly research is a growing international movement, intended to increase access to research outcomes by offering an alternative access route to subscription-based academic journals, which are typically accessible through the licences managed by university libraries
This article seeks to extend the knowledge of the behaviour and attitudes towards open access publishing through a survey that focusses on the attitudes and behaviours of academic researchers in Korea working in medicine and healthcare
This article draws on data from a survey conducted in Korea amongst academics in medicine and health sciences
Summary
Open access (OA) to the findings of scholarly research is a growing international movement, intended to increase access to research outcomes by offering an alternative access route to subscription-based academic journals, which are typically accessible through the licences managed by university libraries. Academics, as researchers, authors, editors, and reviewers, are largely responsible for the intellectual content of scholarly communication in all of its forms, the success of the ‘OA Project’ depends heavily on them, and it is important to design a model of scholarly communication for the digital age that they will embrace, or even better to engage them in the co-creation of that model. As Mulligan and Mabe (2011a) suggest: ‘changes to the scholarly information business model will only be successful if they continue to satisfy the underlying motivations and needs of researchers’ (p. 290)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 call
