Researchers’ perceptions, patterns, motives, and challenges in self-archiving as a function of the discipline

Abstract

The green open access (OA) model, which offers the most economical approach to comply with open access policies, can increase researchers’ audience and scientific outputs impact by delivering wider and easier access. This study examined researchers’ perceptions from STEM (science, technology, engineering, math) and SSH (social sciences, art and humanities) disciplines in order to reveal the types, patterns, motives, and challenges underlying their articles’ self-archiving in the green route to open-access (repositories and institutional repositories) and ASNs (academic social networks). Interviews were conducted with 20 Israeli academic researchers. Half were from STEM and half from SSH disciplines. Interviews were mapped using a bottom-up thematic analysis and follow-up quantitative comparisons. According to the findings, STEM researchers self-archived pre/post-print versions of their articles to subject-based repositories as a part of their discipline norm resulting from their funding grant requirements and as a way to receive recognition and claim priority. SSH researchers post a link to the printed-published article at the publisher’s website in ASNs, and their goal is greater visibility. In addition, findings indicate a lack of awareness, mostly by SSH researchers, regarding copyright issues and OA repositories. The green OA model provides opportunities for researchers to self-archive their work. However, there are differences between the disciplines regarding where, when, why, and how to self-archive, and what is considered a legitimate mode of green OA. This indicates an urgent need to raise SSH researchers’ awareness of the existence of open subject-based repositories and of the terms of self-archiving from publishers.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 12 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.