[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Maximising research access vs. minimizing copy-editing errors
- To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
- Subject: RE: Maximising research access vs. minimizing copy-editing errors
- From: "David Prosser" <david.prosser@bodley.ox.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2006 19:32:58 EDT
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
May I quote from the report that Sally mentions of OUP's journal Nucleic Acids Research? On page 113 the three effects of open access are listed: 'What then did OA actually deliver? Firstly, it contributed to an additional increase in usage of around 7-8%. Secondly, it saw a switch of use from abstracts to full-text. Thirdly, it led to a significant increase in the usage of newer articles - material that had previously been embargoed.' So, moving to open access increased usage by 8% (which is not the same as saying that 8% of the increase came from open access!) and user behaviour changed as now they were able to access the full text. It is also noted that the archive (material over 6 months) was already freely available so the 8% increase in usage came about from opening up 2% of the total number of articles on the site. David C Prosser PhD Director SPARC Europe E-mail: david.prosser@bodley.ox.ac.uk -----Original Message----- [mailto:owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu] On Behalf Of Sally Morris (ALPSP) Sent: 28 July 2006 00:36 To: Liblicense Subject: Re: Maximising research access vs. minimizing copy-editing errors Maybe we need more information about the actual size of the access problem. Publishers tend, I think, to report fairly low levels of 'turnaways' - those who try to access full text but can't. If any publishers reading this can contribute figures, that would be useful. A very, very small percentage of accesses to BMJ's free research articles are from patients and the general public; see http://miranda.ingentaconnect.com/vl=6377737/cl=15/tt=885/ini=alpsp/nw=1/fm= docpdf/rpsv/cw/alpsp/09531513/v16n3/s1/p163. In OUP's recent study of NAR (http://www.oxfordjournals.org/news/oa_report.pdf) only eight to twelve percent of increased access was attributable to its going OA; far, far more was due to opening up to search engine crawlers. Sally Morris, Chief Executive Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers Email: sally.morris@alpsp.org
- Prev by Date: Central site for IR
- Next by Date: RE: Subscription to Open Access Transition
- Previous by thread: Re: Maximising research access vs. minimizing copy-editing errors
- Next by thread: Re: Maximising research access vs. minimizing copy-editing errors
- Index(es):