Article downloads lower?

["\"FrederickFriend\"" <ucylfjf@ucl.ac.uk>]

It would assist us all in understanding the effect of free repository
content if publishers could make available their download statistics for
articles for which a free repository copy exists. It may then be possible
to compare the publisher statistics with the download statistics for the
equivalent repository copy. I have no reason to doubt IOPP's statement
(from Ken Lillywhite to Lis-e-journals on 5 September)  that "article
downloads from our site are significantly lower for those journals whose
content is substantially replicated in the arXiv repository than for those
which are not", but with all due respect to IOPP the lower downloads could
be due to factors other than the existence of an arXiv copy.

Clearly download statistics do vary between journals even when no
repository copy exists, and the time-line for downloads is also a
significant factor. If public positions are to be based upon such
statistics, as when publishers base resistance to repository deposit upon
lower downloads from their own sites, we need to be sure that the
statistical base is firm. The point is often made that we need more
evidence of the effects of changes in scholarly communication, and JISC
and other organizations have been gathering evidence. Making download
statistics available for examination alongside download statistics from
repositories would be one way in which publishers could work with the
academic community in gathering evidence about the effect of repositories.

Frederick J. Friend
JISC Consultant
OSI Open Access Advocate
Honorary Director Scholarly Communication UCL
E-mail ucylfjf@ucl.ac.uk