Scholarly Communication Practices in Humanities and Social Sciences: A Study of Researchers’ Attitudes and Awareness of Open Access

Abstract

This paper examines issues relating to the perceptions and adoption of open access (OA) and institutional repositories. Using a survey research design, we collected data from academics and other researchers in the humanities, arts and social sciences (HASS) at a university in Australia. We looked at factors influencing choice of publishers and journal outlets, as well as the use of social media and nontraditional channels for scholarly communication. We used an online questionnaire to collect data and used descriptive statistics to analyse the data. Our findings suggest that researchers are highly influenced by traditional measures of quality, such as journal impact factor, and are less concerned with making their work more findable and promoting it through social media. This highlights a disconnect between researchers’ desired outcomes and the efforts that they put in toward the same. Our findings also suggest that institutional policies have the potential to increase OA awareness and adoption. This study contributes to the growing literature on scholarly communication by offering evidence from the HASS field, where limited studies have been conducted. Based on the findings, we recommend that academic librarians engage with faculty through outreach and workshops to change perceptions of OA and the institutional repository.

Academicians’ awareness, attitude, and use of open access during the COVID-19 pandemic

“…However, it is surprising that academics have limited knowledge of many of the important concepts used in open access, although they are highly aware of open access. Narayan et al (2018) indicate that most academics state that they do not understand how the impact factor of a journal is evaluated or how their own actions can change this impact factor. Indeed, although the publication of scholarly research on platforms, such as Academia.edu and ResearchGate, greatly increase the number of citations ( Niyazov et al, 2016 ), it was determined in a study by Ortega (2015) that a very small proportion of the participants use these platforms.…”

“…The results show that half of the academics involved do not know whether there are open access institutional repositories at their institutions. Indeed, a lack of adoption of self-archiving ( Narayan et al., 2018 ) and the effective use of a few open access institutional repositories at universities are a reflection of this situation ( Alaca et al, 2019 ). It is determined that 34% of the academics who are aware of their institutional repositories use them.…”

Green Open Access in Lithuania

“…Atvirosios prieigos judėjimo pradžioje impulsą šio naujo leidybos būdo įgyvendinimui davė priimti tarptautiniai dokumentai -Budapešto (2002) 27 , Berlyno (2003) 28 ir Bethesdos (2003) 29 deklaracijos. Vėliau, siekiant sustiprinti atvirosios prieigos pozicijas ir nubrėžti tolesnes jos raidos kryptis, priimti ir kiti tarptautiniai atvirąją prieigą reglamentuojantys dokumentai, kuriais remiantis buvo formuojama ir atvirosios prieigos įgyvendinimo strategija Lietuvoje.…”

There is a method to it: Making meaning in information research through a mix of paradigms and methods

“…Bhuva will discuss some of the different user‐centered methods used in her collaborative research around information behaviors including the diary method (Narayan, Case, & Edwards ; Narayan, ), experience sampling method or ESM (Narayan & Chowdhury, ), natural language processing (Narayan & Chowdhury, ), social media analysis (Fransen‐Taylor & Narayan, ; Narayan & Preljevic, ; Fransen‐Taylor & Narayan, ), discourse analysis (Booth & Narayan, ; Booth & Narayan, ), online ethnography (Talip et al, ; Pingo & Narayan, , ), autoethnography (Campbell & Narayan, ; Latham, Narayan & Gorichanaz, ), design thinking (Luca & Narayan, ), conversation design (McKie & Narayan, ), and a mixed paradigm study (Luca & Narayan, ; Narayan & Luca, ; Narayan et al, ).…”