[GOAL] Re: GOAL Digest, Vol 47, Issue 23

[Danny Kingsley]

Alicia,

I do not wish to end up in a tit for tat over this but the three things 
you cite as 'evidence factored into decision-making' are precisely the 
three things that are discussed in the blog with substantial support for 
their lack of credibility.

1. The usage evidence on its own does not prove causation.

2. The causation evidence is based on a 2012 study that has no validity 
and the methodology of which has been soundly rebuked. If the dire 
predictions of the 2006 study had come to fruition in the ensuing nine 
year period then this would itself be the evidence rather than the 
original study.

3. This has nothing to do with green open access and everything to do 
with the gold open access model versus a subscription model - an 
important but different debate.

Danny

-- 
Dr Danny Kingsley
Head of Scholarly Communications
Cambridge University Library
West Road, Cambridge CB39DR
P: +44 (0) 1223 747 437
M: +44 (0) 7711 500 564
E: dak45 at cam.ac.uk
T: @dannykay68
ORCID iD: 0000-0002-3636-5939



On 16/10/2015 17:23, goal-request at eprints.org wrote:
> From: goal-bounces at eprints.org [mailto:goal-bounces at eprints.org] On Behalf Of Wise, Alicia (ELS-OXF)
> Sent: 16 October 2015 16:31
> To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)
> Cc: Wise, Alicia (ELS-OXF)
> Subject: [GOAL] Re: BLOG: Unlocking Research 'Half-life is half the story'
>
> Hi Danny -
>
> Publishers support sustainable approaches to Green OA as well as Gold OA - indeed that was the focus of the panel discussion at the STM conference.
>
> For articles that are published under the subscription business model, when and how they are made available for free (on a wide array of platforms - institutional repositories are one important example of these platforms) does make a difference.  In my experience publishers are both evidence-based and thoughtful about how they set embargo periods and so forth.
>
> The evidence that is factored into decision-making currently includes:
>
>
> 1. Usage Evidence
>
>
>
> In 2014 Phil Davis published a study commissioned by the Association of American Publishers which demonstrates that journal article usage varies widely within and across disciplines, and that only 3% of of journals have half-lives of 12 months or less. Health sciences articles have the shortest median half-life of the journals analyzed, but still more than 50% of health science journals have usage half-lives longer than 24 months. In fields with the longest usage half-lives, including mathematics and the humanities, more than 50% of the journals have usage half-lives longer than 48 months. See http://publishers.org/sites/default/files/uploads/PSP/journalusagehalflife.pdf
>
>
>
> 2. Evidence for the link between embargos, usage and cancellations
>
>
>
> A 2012 study by ALPSP was a simple one-question survey: "If the (majority of) content of research journals was freely available within 6 months of publication, would you continue to subscribe?" The results "indicate that only 56% of those subscribing to journals in the STM field would definitely continue to subscribe. In AHSS, this drops to just 35%. See http://www.alpsp.org/ebusiness/AboutALPSP/ALPSPStatements/Statementdetails.aspx?ID=407  This 2012 study builds on earlier, more nuanced, studies undertaken for ALPSP in 2009 and 2006. The 2009 ALPSP study (see the next to last bullet) found that "overall usage" is the prime factor that librarians use in making cancellation decisions. The 2006 ALPSP study (see points 7 and 8) found that "the length of any embargo" would be the most important factor in making cancellation decisions.
>
>
>
> A 2006 PRC study (see pages 1-3) shows that a significant number of librarians are likely to substitute green OA materials for subscribed resources, given certain levels of reliability, peer review and currency of the information available. With a 24 month embargo, 50% of librarians would use the green OA material over paying for subscriptions, and 70% would use the green OA material if it is available after 6 months. See http://publishingresearchconsortium.com/index.php/115-prc-projects/research-reports/self-archiving-and-journal-subscriptions-research-report/145-self-archiving-and-journal-subscriptions-co-existence-or-competition-an-international-survey-of-librarians-preferences
>
>
>
> 3. Experiences of other journals
>
>
>
> For example, the Journal of Clinical Investigation which went open access with a 0 month embargo in 1996 and lost c. 40% of institutional subscriptions over time. The journal was forced to return to the subscription model in 2009, see http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2009/02/26/end-of-free-access/  Other examples that spring to mind are the Annals of Mathematics, the Journal of Dental Research, the American Journal of Pathology, and Genetics.
>
> With kind wishes,
> Alicia
>
> Dr Alicia Wise
> Director of Access and Policy
> Elsevier I The Boulevard I Langford Lane I Kidlington I Oxford I OX5 1GB
> M: +44 (0) 7823 536 826 I E: a.wise at elsevier.com<mailto:a.wise at elsevier.com>
> Twitter: @wisealic
>