Forscher inmitten von Open Access und DEAL-Verhandlungen. Teil 1: Open-Access-Aktivitäten

• Main Author: Obst, Oliver
• Format: Article
• Language: deu
• Published: German Medical Science GMS Publishing House 2019-09-01
• Series: GMS Medizin – Bibliothek – Information
• Subjects: open access; publication fond; University Münster; medical faculty
• Online Access: http://www.egms.de/static/en/journals/mbi/2019-19/mbi000441.shtml

Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate to what extent the scientists of the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Münster publish open access and whether they know about the open access activities of the University and State Library (ULB) (part 1). Also their knowledge and opinions on the DEAL negotiations and ways of accessing non-licensed journal articles should be inquired (part 2).Method: Online questionnaires were distributed among all scientists of the medical faculty via an email list of the dean’s office. The questionnaire consisted of 14 questions, answers to the first 7 questions were analyzed for part 1.Results: 384 questionnaires could be evaluated. 63% of the scientists had already published open access at least once. 61% knew about the ULB's publication fund before the survey, 38% were made aware of it by colleagues and 35% by library activities (multiple answers). 21% of the respondents had already applied to the fund, and 35% of those who knew about it. The main source of funding for open access publications was own funds (57%) or funds of the institution (44%). For 84% of the respondents the impact factor was crucial for choosing an open access journal, followed by the good reputation of a journal (62%).Conclusion: About two-thirds of the scientists at the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Münster knew well about the evaluation of open access journals, took advantage of the opportunity to publish open as, knew about funding opportunities and obviously had no problems paying the article processing charges (APC). There was a distinct difference between senior and junior scientists: Older, established researchers did not rely on high impact, career enhancing journals; they could afford to publish in smaller, unknown journals. They had more open access experiences than the junior researchers and knew better about the funds of the ULB as well.