Funding and Bureaucracy, Not Access to Journals are Chief Obstacles to Scientific Productivity

["Foley Virginia" <VFoley@bos.blackwellpublishing.com>]

NEWS RELEASE

Media Contacts:
Rene Olivieri (Blackwell Publishing)
Rene.olivieri@oxon.blackwellpublishing.com
+44 1865 476119

Ginny Foley (Blackwell Publishing)
vfoley@bos.blackwellpublishing.com
781-388-8334

Ian Rowlands (UCL Centre for Publishing, University College London)
i.rowlands@ucl.ac.uk

Funding and Bureaucracy, Not Access to Journals are Chief 
Obstacles to Scientific Productivity

Study Cites 90% of respondents are more effective researchers because of 
access to online journal content

Oxford, UK and Boston, USA - May 12, 2006 -The single most 
important issue obstructing the productivity of biomedical 
scientists today is the culture of research funding. This finding 
challenges the belief of some that the lack of "open access" to 
journal content is a major barrier to scientific productivity.

A survey of 883 biomedical scientists - in Europe and North 
America - commissioned by the Publishing Research Consortium 
found that aside from lack of resources, a 'stop-go' funding 
culture prohibits scientists from initiating new ideas, choosing 
research projects that contrast with funders' priorities, and 
recruiting and retaining qualified staff.

Conversely, the study found that 90% of respondents reported 
access to publishers' online content had increased their 
productivity by saving them significant time in locating research 
articles and enabling them to become more effective researchers.

"This study reinforces the critical role that publishing plays in 
advancing research and scholarship," says Rene Olivieri, CEO, 
Blackwell Publishing.  "Major improvements in journal 
accessibility over the last few years have not only improved 
research productivity but they have also helped to maximize 
return on investment in scientific research."

A number of recommendations to address the non-financial barriers 
to productivity were highlighted in the study including help with 
recruiting suitable research and administrative staff, autonomy 
in setting research direction, and technical help in writing 
proposals.

"More than anything, the study shows the need for policymakers to 
listen more carefully to its scientists," says Dr. Ian Rowlands, 
Centre for Information Behaviour and the Evaluation of Research 
(CIBER). "By making small changes in work practices and 
addressing the sources for productivity bottlenecks, we can 
ensure the future of scientific and economic progress."

This study was conducted by CIBER in 2005. It utilized one-to-one 
interviews to find out what researchers thought were the main 
issues affecting their productivity.  This, together with an 
analysis of the peer-reviewed literature enabled the team to 
identify a list of 16 key factors.

Online polling methods in conjunction with conjoint analysis 
techniques were used to establish the relative priority that 
researchers place on each of these 16 factors.  The results were 
highly consistent and represent a strong consensus view of the 
biomedical research community.

A PRC Summary Paper entitled "Journals and Scientific 
Productivity - a case study in immunology and microbiology" and 
the full report of the study entitled "Overcoming the Barriers to 
Research Productivity" can be accessed from the PRC site: 
<http://www.publishingresearch.org.uk/>

About PRC

The Publishing Research Consortium is a group representing 
publishers and societies supporting global research into 
scholarly communication, with the aim to provide unbiased data 
and objective analysis. Our objective is to support work that is 
scientific and pro-scholarship. Overall, we aim to promote an 
understanding of the role of publishing and its impact on 
research and teaching. For more information, visit 
<http://www.publishingresearch.org.uk/> .