Re: US University OA Resolutions Omit Most Important Component

[Stevan Harnad <harnad@ecs.soton.ac.uk>]

On Wed, 4 May 2005, Jan Szczepanski. Goteborgs Univ Bibl wrote:

> Maybe the problem is reality.
> Maybe scientists [are] fighting for their freedom.
> Maybe scientists feel that your alternative is 
> [taking] that freedom from them.
> Maybe [there] is something wrong when you make it compulsary.
> In Russia under the Stalin rule many things were compulsory to force
> people into the communist heaven.
> Maybe scientists are sceptical when their employer makes something
> compulsory.
> Scientists just trust other scientists. 
> That is the problem with the green way.

Perhaps then scientists also trust empirical survey data rather than
individual a-priori speculations. According to the empirical data from two
international, cross-disciplinary JISC surveys of scientists (and
scholars), when they were asked:

	"If your employer or research funder REQUIRED you to deposit
	copies of your articles in an open archive...":

    79% replied that they would comply WILLINGLY

    17% replied that the would comply reluctantly

    4% replied that they would not comply

http://www.eprints.org/berlin3/ppts/02-AlmaSwan.ppt

First study (69%), based on smaller sample is available (as article and
report, below). Second study (79%), based on larger sample, is currently
being written up.

    Swan, Alma and Brown, Sheridan (2004) Authors and open
    access publishing. Learned Publishing 17(3):pp. 219-224.
    http://cogprints.org/4123/
    Swan, Alma and Brown, Sheridan (2004) JISC/OSI JOURNAL AUTHORS SURVEY
    Report. In JISC Report http://cogprints.org/4125/

http://www.keyperspectives.co.uk/OpenAccessArchive/

Stevan Harnad