Re: Roundtable Press Release (Access to Research Results)

From: Marc Couture <jaamcouture_at_GMAIL.COM>
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 11:25:22 -0500

On 17-Jan-10, at 2:39 PM, Sally Morris wrote:

> Those who look beyond the abstract will find that we did, indeed, ask
> where they looked for articles

As one who has indeed looked beyond the abstract (read the whole paper
in fact), I have some difficulty understanding what the authors mean
precisely by "using", "accessing" "identifying" self-archived
articles, as well as by "whenever possible", so that it is somewhat
difficult to sort out the various numbers and percentages stated in p.
230-231, including those quoted in previous posts.

Perhaps the exact wording of the questionnaire would help clarify the
issue, but unfortunately the DOI-based hyperlink to Appendix 1: Text
of survey ( don't seem to work.

What I think I can deduce is that close to 50% of those who didn't
have access to the published version didn't even look for a
self-archived version (but I'm not sure if I my reasoning is right,
because the paper refers to those who "did not [never?] use
self-archived versions"). And we don't know how often those who did
look for such a version were able to find one.

What I found most interesting though - and more useful, from an
OA-advocacy standpoint - is the fact that there was much confusion
among participants about what is a repository, and whether an article
(or journal) is OA or not.

As to the latter issue, one can argue that institutionally-provided
Internet access and use of proxies do blur the distinction. For
instance, I have no obvious way to determine if Morris & Thorn's
paper, which I freely accessed from home (with proxy) on the publisher
website, is OA or not (a Google Scholar search seems to indicate it

Marc Couture
Received on Mon Jan 18 2010 - 17:29:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Dec 10 2010 - 19:50:04 GMT