IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v6y2016i1p2158244015625447.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Researchers’ Adoption of an Institutional Central Fund for Open-Access Article-Processing Charges

Author

Listed:
  • Stephen Pinfield
  • Christine Middleton

Abstract

This article analyzes researchers’ adoption of an institutional central fund (or faculty publication fund) for open-access (OA) article-processing charges (APCs) to contribute to a wider understanding of take-up of OA journal publishing (“Gold†OA). Quantitative data, recording central fund usage at the University of Nottingham from 2006 to 2014, are analyzed alongside qualitative data from institutional documentation. The importance of the settings of U.K. national policy developments and international OA adoption trends are considered. Innovation Diffusion Theory (IDT) is used as an explanatory framework. It is shown that use of the central fund grew during the period from covering less than 1% of the University’s outputs to more than 12%. Health and Life Sciences disciplines made greatest use of the fund. Although highly variable, average APC prices rose during the period, with fully OA publishers setting lower average APCs. APCs were paid largely from internal funds, but external funding became increasingly important. Key factors in adoption are identified to be increasing awareness and changing perceptions of OA, communication, disciplinary differences, and adoption mandates. The study provides a detailed longitudinal analysis of one of the earliest central funds to be established globally with a theoretically informed explanatory model to inform future work on managing central funds and developing institutional and national OA policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Stephen Pinfield & Christine Middleton, 2016. "Researchers’ Adoption of an Institutional Central Fund for Open-Access Article-Processing Charges," SAGE Open, , vol. 6(1), pages 21582440156, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:6:y:2016:i:1:p:2158244015625447
    DOI: 10.1177/2158244015625447
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244015625447
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2158244015625447?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Charles D Eckman & Beth T Weil, 2010. "Institutional Open Access Funds: Now Is the Time," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(5), pages 1-3, May.
    2. Bo-Christer Björk & Patrik Welling & Mikael Laakso & Peter Majlender & Turid Hedlund & Guðni Guðnason, 2010. "Open Access to the Scientific Journal Literature: Situation 2009," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 5(6), pages 1-9, June.
    3. Stuart M. Shieber, 2009. "Equity for Open-Access Journal Publishing," Working Papers id:2196, eSocialSciences.
    4. Stuart M Shieber, 2009. "Equity for Open-Access Journal Publishing," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(8), pages 1-3, August.
    5. Stephen Pinfield & Jennifer Salter & Peter A. Bath & Bill Hubbard & Peter Millington & Jane H.S. Anders & Azhar Hussain, 2014. "Open-access repositories worldwide, 2005–2012: Past growth, current characteristics, and future possibilities," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 65(12), pages 2404-2421, December.
    6. David J. Solomon & Bo-Christer Björk, 2012. "Publication fees in open access publishing: Sources of funding and factors influencing choice of journal," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(1), pages 98-107, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Andre Bruns & Niels Taubert, 2021. "Investigating the Blind Spot of a Monitoring System for Article Processing Charges," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-9, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stuart Lawson, 2015. "Fee Waivers for Open Access Journals," Publications, MDPI, vol. 3(3), pages 1-13, August.
    2. Jinhyo Joseph Yun & Zheng Liu & Euiseob Jeong & Sangwoo Kim & Kyunghun Kim, 2022. "The Difference in Open Innovation between Open Access and Closed Access, According to the Change of Collective Intelligence and Knowledge Amount," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-19, February.
    3. Roberta Ruggieri & Fabrizio Pecoraro & Daniela Luzi, 2021. "An intersectional approach to analyse gender productivity and open access: a bibliometric analysis of the Italian National Research Council," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 1647-1673, February.
    4. Ling Ling Wang & Xuan Zhen Liu & Hui Fang, 2015. "Investigation of the degree to which articles supported by research grants are published in open access health and life sciences journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(2), pages 511-528, August.
    5. Milan Frederik Klus & Alexander Dilger, 2020. "Success factors of academic journals in the digital age," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 13(3), pages 1115-1143, November.
    6. Yimei Zhu, 2017. "Who support open access publishing? Gender, discipline, seniority and other factors associated with academics’ OA practice," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(2), pages 557-579, May.
    7. Harley, Diane & Acord, Sophia Krzys, 2011. "Peer Review in Academic Promotion and Publishing: Its Meaning, Locus, and Future," University of California at Berkeley, Center for Studies in Higher Education qt1xv148c8, Center for Studies in Higher Education, UC Berkeley.
    8. Enrique Orduña-Malea & Emilio Delgado López-Cózar, 2015. "The dark side of open access in Google and Google Scholar: the case of Latin-American repositories," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 102(1), pages 829-846, January.
    9. Carol Tenopir & Elizabeth Dalton & Allison Fish & Lisa Christian & Misty Jones & MacKenzie Smith, 2016. "What Motivates Authors of Scholarly Articles? The Importance of Journal Attributes and Potential Audience on Publication Choice," Publications, MDPI, vol. 4(3), pages 1-22, July.
    10. Donald Taylor & Heather Morrison & Brian Owen & Kumiko Vézina & Andrew Waller, 2013. "Open Access Publishing in Canada: Current and Future Library and University Press Supports," Publications, MDPI, vol. 1(1), pages 1-22, June.
    11. George Macgregor, 2020. "Enhancing Content Discovery of Open Repositories: An Analytics-Based Evaluation of Repository Optimizations," Publications, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-17, February.
    12. Christian Heise & Joshua M. Pearce, 2020. "From Open Access to Open Science: The Path From Scientific Reality to Open Scientific Communication," SAGE Open, , vol. 10(2), pages 21582440209, May.
    13. Ana Teresa Santos & Sandro Mendonça, 2022. "Do papers (really) match journals’ “aims and scope”? A computational assessment of innovation studies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(12), pages 7449-7470, December.
    14. Justus Haucap & Nima Moshgbar & W. Benedikt Schmal, 2021. "The impact of the German 'DEAL' on competition in the academic publishing market," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(8), pages 2027-2049, December.
    15. Kovács, Kármen, 2017. "A nyílt hozzáférésű publikálás finanszírozási kérdései [The financial issues of open-access scholarly publishing]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(2), pages 185-207.
    16. Jørgen Burchardt, 2014. "Researchers Outside APC-Financed Open Access," SAGE Open, , vol. 4(4), pages 21582440145, September.
    17. Liu, Meijun & Hu, Xiao & Wang, Yuandi & Shi, Dongbo, 2018. "Survive or perish: Investigating the life cycle of academic journals from 1950 to 2013 using survival analysis methods," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 344-364.
    18. Sheila Keay & Zvonimir Poljak & Mackenzie Klapwyk & Annette O’Connor & Robert M Friendship & Terri L O’Sullivan & Jan M Sargeant, 2020. "Influenza A virus vaccine research conducted in swine from 1990 to May 2018: A scoping review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-27, July.
    19. Vivek Kumar Singh & Rajesh Piryani & Satya Swarup Srichandan, 2020. "The case of significant variations in gold–green and black open access: evidence from Indian research output," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 124(1), pages 515-531, July.
    20. Katrin Hussinger & Lorenzo Palladini, 2024. "Information accessibility and knowledge creation: the impact of Google’s withdrawal from China on scientific research," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(6), pages 753-783, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:6:y:2016:i:1:p:2158244015625447. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.