Objectives. To determine whether free access to research
articles on bmj.com is an important factor in authors’ decisions
on whether to submit to the BMJ, whether the introduction of
access controls to part of the BMJ’s content has influenced
authors’ perceptions of the journal, and whether the
introduction of further access controls would influence authors’
perceptions.
Design. Cross sectional electronic survey.
Participants. Authors of research articles published in the BMJ.
Results 211/415 (51%) eligible authors responded. Three
quarters (159/211) said the fact that all readers would have free
access to their paper on bmj.com was very important or
important to their decision to submit to BMJ. Over half
(111/211) said closure of free access to research articles would
make them slightly less likely to submit research articles to the
BMJ in the future, 14% (29/211) said they would be much less
likely to submit, and 34% (71/211) said it would not influence
their decision. Authors were equally divided in their opinion as
to whether the closure of access to parts of the journal since
January 2005 had affected their view of the BMJ; 40% (84/211)
said it had, 38% (80/211) said it had not. In contrast, 67%
(141/211) said their view of the BMJ would change if it closed
access to research articles. Authors’ comments largely focused
on disappointment with such a regressive step in the era of
open access publishing, loss of a unique feature of the BMJ, a
perceived reduction in the journal’s usefulness as a resource
and global influence, restricted readership, less attractive to
publish in, and the negative impact on the journal’s image.
Conclusions. Authors value free access to research articles and
consider this an important factor in deciding whether to submit
to the BMJ. Closing access to research articles would have a
negative effect on authors’ perceptions of the journal and their
likeliness to submit.
Posted by
Peter Suber at 1/10/2006 10:13:00 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.
