Chinese researchers' perceptions and use of open access journals: Results of an online questionnaire survey

This paper reports the results of a survey on Chinese researchers' perceptions and use of open access journals (OAJs). A total of 381 Chinese researchers from different universities and disciplines were investigated through an online questionnaire survey in August and September 2018. The results showed that most Chinese researchers are familiar with and have positive attitude to OAJs. They know OAJs mainly through their peers, colleagues, and friends. PubMed Central, PLoS, and COAJ (China Open Access Journals) are the most well‐known OAJ websites among Chinese researchers. As for use, most of the respondents read and cite OAJs frequently and have experience of publishing in OAJs. However, they strongly prefer to use OAJs indexed in reputable databases (e.g. Web of Science, WoS) when making publishing decisions. Significant differences can be seen among disciplines, with researchers in HSS areas using OAJs less frequently than researchers from other disciplines, although they have the same positive attitudes and are equally well informed about them. Younger researchers preferred to rely on prestigious institutions and authors when using OAJs.

[2]  Sara Schroter,et al.  Open access publishing and author-pays business models: a survey of authors' knowledge and perceptions. , 2006, Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine.

[3]  David Nicholas,et al.  Chinese Early-Career Researchers' Scholarly Communication Attitudes and Behaviours: Changes Observed in Year Two of a Longitudinal Study , 2018 .

[4]  Thierry Lafouge,et al.  French publishing attitudes in the open access era: The case of mathematics, biology, and computer science , 2018, Learn. Publ..

[5]  Roger C. Schonfeld.  Scholarly Societies and Scholarly Communication: A Look Ahead , 2015, Coll. Res. Libr..

[6]  Jeff Tollefson,et al.  China declared world’s largest producer of scientific articles , 2018, Nature.

[7]  David W. Lewis,et al.  The Inevitability of Open Access , 2012, Coll. Res. Libr..

[8]  Abdullah Abrizah,et al.  So, are early career researchers the harbingers of change? , 2019, Learn. Publ..

[9]  H. Joseph.  The Open Access Movement Grows Up: Taking Stock of a Revolution , 2013, PLoS biology.

[10]  Quirin Schiermeier,et al.  China backs bold plan to tear down journal paywalls , 2018, Nature.

[11]  Mary Anne Kennan.  Academic authors, scholarly publishing, and open access in Australia , 2007, Learn. Publ..

[12]  Nicholas R Cozzarelli,et al.  Results of a PNAS author survey on an open access option for publication. , 2004, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[13]  Emily Drabinski.  From the Field: Elsevier as an Open Access Publisher , 2017 .

[14]  Alma Swan,et al.  Authors and open access publishing , 2004, Learn. Publ..

[15]  Carol Tenopir,et al.  Imagining a Gold Open Access Future: Attitudes, Behaviors, and Funding Scenarios among Authors of Academic Scholarship , 2017, Coll. Res. Libr..

[16]  Celina Ramjoué.  Towards Open Science: The vision of the European Commission , 2015, Inf. Serv. Use.

[17]  Joachim Schöpfel,et al.  Ready for the future? A survey on open access with scientists from the French National Research Center (CNRS) , 2016 .

[18]  Seema Rawat,et al.  Publish or perish: Where are we heading? , 2014, Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences.

[19]  Jingfeng Xia,et al.  A longitudinal study of scholars attitudes and behaviors toward open-access journal publishing , 2010, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[20]  Jing Zhong,et al.  Institutional Repositories in Chinese Open Access Development: Status, Progress, and Challenges , 2016 .

[21]  Suzie Allard,et al.  To Boldly Go Beyond Downloads: How Are Journal Articles Shared and Used? , 2015 .

[22]  Abdullah Abrizah,et al.  Not so different after all: Malaysian researchers' cross‐discipline view of quality and trustworthiness in citation practices , 2016, Learn. Publ..

[23]  Jesse S. Gainer,et al.  On Open Access to Research: The Green, the Gold, and the Public Good. , 2013 .

[24]  Heather Morrison.  Elsevier: among the world's largest open access publishers as of 2016 , 2017 .

[25]  Witold Kienc,et al.  Authors from the periphery countries choose open access more often , 2017, Learn. Publ..

[26]  Michael Derntl,et al.  Basics of research paper writing and publishing , 2014 .

[27]  Bryna Coonin,et al.  Publishing in Open Access Education Journals: The Authors’ Perspectives , 2010 .

[28]  Carol Tenopir,et al.  Changes in the digital scholarly environment and issues of trust: An exploratory, qualitative analysis , 2016, Inf. Process. Manag..

[29]  Linlin Zhao,et al.  Riding the Wave of Open Access: Providing Library Research Support for Scholarly Publishing Literacy , 2014 .

[30]  N. E. Goller.  Hybrid Data Structures Defined by Indirection , 1985, Comput. J..

[31]  Ximing Xiao,et al.  The Research of Open Access Resource Development Policy in China , 2009, 2009 International Conference on New Trends in Information and Service Science.

[32]  Martin Uhl,et al.  Survey on Europan Psychology Publication Issues , 2009 .

[33]  J. F. Cohen,et al.  Publish or Perish - But where? , 2016, South Afr. Comput. J..

[34]  Richard Van Noorden.  China by the numbers , 2016, Nature.

[35]  Xiang Ren,et al.  The quandary between communication and certification: Individual academics' views on Open Access and open scholarship , 2015, Online Inf. Rev..

[36]  S. Schroter,et al.  Perceptions of open access publishing: interviews with journal authors , 2005, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[37]  Chen Tiantian,et al.  Survey and Analysis on Cognition and Using of Institutional Repository for China Mainland Researchers , 2014 .

[38]  Sally Wyatt,et al.  What a difference a colon makes: how superficial factors influence subsequent citation , 2013, Scientometrics.

[39]  F. W. Dulle,et al.  The suitability of the Unified Theory of Acceptance and Use of Technology (UTAUT) model in open access adoption studies , 2011 .

[40]  B. Björk,et al.  Open access versus subscription journals: a comparison of scientific impact , 2012, BMC Medicine.