As you may be aware, some publishers are becoming concerned that if self-archiving of postprints, or even preprints, of journal articles becomes sufficiently widespread, this may lead to a decline in usage at journals’ own websites, and that this in turn may lead to cancellations. In order to understand whether or not our fears are well-founded, we would like to understand more about the process by which you make the decision to cancel journals, what the crucial factors are, and how you would rank them in importance, both now and in the future.
OA advocate Les Carr has criticized the survey for question-begging wording on some questions, confusing structure, and a scope limited to librarians, who are only part of the journal-cancellation process. Today I realized that I'd been following the controversy but hadn't yet blogged the survey itself. Sorry for the delay.
Posted by
Peter Suber at 1/11/2006 08:49:00 AM.
The open access movement:
Putting peer-reviewed scientific and scholarly literature
on the internet. Making it available free of charge and
free of most copyright and licensing restrictions.
Removing the barriers to serious research.
I recommend the OA tracking project (OATP) as the best way to stay on top of new OA developments. You can read the OATP feed on a blog-like web page or subscribe to it by RSS, email, or Twitter. You can also help build the feed by tagging new developments you encounter.
