I would like to start off this week’s blog by defining open access and comparing its advantages and disadvantages.
http://www.powtoon.com/embed/ekieo8m537I/
As a student, I am obviously biased towards the idea of open access. This is because I don’t want to pay for information and it would benefit myself and my peers. However, there are two sides to every story of which I am going to weigh up in this blog post.
As summarised in my video open access gives rise to scientific and humanistic research. In essence, the work of content producers would spread quicker and reach a wider audience. My initial assumption was that a researcher would be proud of their work and would be eager to share their results with the public. However, some papers as shown in the diagram below acquire an access fee. Why?
The answer is simple. Not all research is funded by the government. Therefore, recognition and appreciation might not be enough for someone who has spent numerous years on their projects. Imagine the amount of blood, sweat and tears some of these people have invested into what you consider being “just a paper”. This paper might be their greatest achievement. Think about it. We all complete our weekly assignments and then move on to the next topic. But some of these people devote their lives to particular subject areas, if they wish to be receive revenue from it; can we really judge them? The researchers who write these papers need to earn an income to live; I think it is obvious that they should be paid for their contributions.
It is frustrating when you come across information online that you cannot visit for free. Even more so, if the abstract has not given sufficient detail regarding the research and you end up buying irrelevant information. We have all been there!
So what can we do? Is there a middle ground? A higher level of government intervention?
Further research has shown me that there are charitable organisations such as Wellcome, who are willing to pay the full open access fee in order to cover the costs of the content producer. However, whether the researcher believes this fee is enough, is subjective.
For my own curiosity I would ask you to answer the following question below after having read my blog.
Lastly, I have created an info-graphic that defines copyright and other symbols that you should look out for when conducting individual research.
407 words
References:
- http://www.openoasis.org/index.php%3Foption%3Dcom_content%26view%3Darticle%26id%3D550%26Itemid%3D372
- https://www.forbes.com/sites/kalevleetaru/2016/04/29/the-future-of-open-access-why-has-academia-not-embraced-the-internet-revolution/#5cc6d75e45eb
- https://unchronicle.un.org/article/open-access-and-closed-minds-balancing-intellectual-property-and-public-interest-digital-age
- https://www.plos.org/open-access
- https://www.tue.nl/en/university/library/education-research-support/scientific-publishing/open-access-coach/basic-concepts-and-background/pros-and-cons-of-open-access/
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=L5rVH1KGBCY
- http://www.thedrum.com/news/2013/04/12/90-online-content-be-held-behind-paywalls-three-years-media-company-survey-suggests
- https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED535639
- https://www.forbes.com/sites/skollworldforum/2013/04/07/education-finally-ripe-for-radical-innovation-by-social-entrepreneurs/#1db048d95081
- http://www.scoop.it/t/open-access-and-copyright
Living and Working on the Web 
May 8, 2017 at 10:52 pm
Hi Sharon, I really appreciate the depth of thought you’ve put into this blog post, it is certainly emotive and conveys a great deal of passion. I also love the H5P interactive element at the end – a nice touch! I just wanted to query part of your post. You talk about the right for academics to be paid for their work (and broader contributions to the research community). While researching for this topic, did you find any evidence to support this point? I find it hard to believe that the revenue generated by journals goes back to individual academics, but please correct me if I am wrong! Regarding the charitable solutions you mention – namely the Wellcome trust – do you believe that they are sustainable alternatives?
Finally, given the differences between small and large-sized journals (Cox and Cox (2003)), do you believe that open access might make it difficult for smaller journals to have impact (or even ‘survive’)?
Brad
LikeLiked by 1 person
May 12, 2017 at 2:49 pm
Hi Brad,
there are cases where researchers are getting paid to publish papers in certain journals. In turkey for example “The Ministry of Science, Industry and Technology (“Ministry”) will now provide funds equivalent to the monthly gross minimum wage, for employees at R&D centers who have at least an undergraduate degree in mathematics, physics, chemistry or biology (“Basic Sciences”).”
If you wish to read about further information I provided you with a link:
http://www.mondaq.com/turkey/x/474894/new+technology/Turkey+Introduces+New+Mechanisms+To+Support+Research+And+Development
However, this scenario as you have correctly mentioned is rare, the revenue doesn’t usually return to the actual writer.
Welcome trust is one of many charities that offer a sustainable alternative. I cannot say weather this will be a success in the long run but at the moment the option is available.
Regarding your last question I have found that small journals provide a large range of variety. Someone could argue that a small journals might publish information that the larger journals don’t provide. Therefore, it is hard to say if the small sized journals would essentially have difficulty when providing open access.
Thanks,
Sharon Bürgin
LikeLike
May 14, 2017 at 8:15 am
Hi Sharon
Thank you very much, that’s an interesting find. I suppose it depends on governmental priorities and whether educational institutions are willing to provide payment also.
Based on the information that smaller journals may provide diversity, perhaps this might lead to redundant information or less ‘focussed’ publications. But nonetheless, an interesting point. It looks like sustainability will be a key issue throughout the realm of publication, and journals may well have to adapt or face significantly reduced readerships.
LikeLiked by 1 person
May 9, 2017 at 9:31 am
Hi Sharon,
Thank you for an engaging and insightful post!
I really like how you considered the content producer’s perspective in terms of the effort and dedication that many researchers put into their work, and how their papers have value beyond being ‘just a paper’ to be shared freely.
I’m wondering, do you think the issues you raise would be different for the area of news/journalism publishing, rather than research/academic publishing?
For example, this article outlines how a number of news companies have decided to use paywalls in an attempt to put a value on their content and make up for the decline of newspaper circulation. Do you think that news articles have the same value as research papers and should therefore have the option of restricted access? Or do you think that this type of media should remain free to access? If so, do you think that open access in journalism is sustainable? I look forward to hearing your views!
Thanks,
Patricia
LikeLiked by 1 person
May 12, 2017 at 1:24 pm
Hi Patricia,
you are raising a very interesting question. Sadly, the figures in your shared article indicate that some sort of action had to take place in order to keep the newspapers alive. Therefore, it made sense for the big US brands such as The New York Times and The Washington Post to introduce paywalls. It comes without saying that newspaper articles are essential and valuable. People wish to know what is going on around them. Although information regarding the news is quickly outdated due to the constant change of external factors, I would personally be willing to pay a small access fee in order to obtain reliable up to date information from certain newspaper brands.
Many thanks,
Sharon Bürgin
LikeLike
May 12, 2017 at 4:44 pm
Hi Sharon,
Thanks for your response!
It’s great to hear your views on open access in the journalism world. Whilst I share your view that newspaper articles are essential and valuable, I’m not sure whether I would consider paying a regular subscription fee. Having said this, I do not mind paying a small fee every now and then to buy a newspaper or magazine, so it would seem logical that web users should have to pay a small fee to access the same content online. I think this raises some issues about web users taking open access for granted. Would you agree?
This article makes an interesting suggestion about a membership-based approach, rather than a standard paywall approach. This transforms a sort of penalty system into a reward system, by rewarding the most loyal customers to exclusive content. I personally think that this seems like a good middle-ground, to prevent news companies from declining completely, but still allowing some level of open access. What is your take on this?
Many thanks,
Patricia
LikeLike
May 9, 2017 at 2:40 pm
Hi Sharon,
This was another excellent blog post from you this week! I like the conversational approach you took which made the content easily digestible. You raise some very important points in regards to open access showing taxpayers what is done with their money and improving education as well as researchers deserving revenue for the hard work that they put in. Following this, you include that charities such as Wellcome pay open access fees; which can help to alleviate problems associated with paywalls. However, presently most charities that offer this kind of service are related to medical issues, they are called the Charity Open Access Fund under the Association of Medical Research Committee. http://www.amrc.org.uk/our-work/open-access/open-access/charity-open-access-fund-coaf
Additionally, the Research Councils UK mainly partner with science and engineering researchers at the expense of other fields such as law, economics, media etc. I suppose, this is understandable because in the absence of quality health other fields cannot flourish. Nonetheless, I wanted to know, do you think charities which pay for open access should cater to particular fields or should they fund the research for all fields?
Thanks,
Raziya
LikeLike
May 12, 2017 at 12:39 pm
Hi Raziya,
Thank you for commenting on my blog and sharing the article on Charity Open Access Funds, it was an enjoyable read.
In regards to your question, I would personally promote open access for all fields. As a marketing student who is currently writing a dissertation proposal, I can say that most business related fields stray out of their own boundaries, including disciplines such as psychology, sociology and many others. It is not unusual to research two or more subject areas to answer one research question. This therefore highlights the importance of promoting all subject fields. In addition, I don’t believe that one field can be argued as being more important than the other.
I hope this answers your question.
Many thanks,
Sharon Bürgin
LikeLiked by 1 person