IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/ejlwec/v39y2015i3p475-503.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The determinants of open access publishing: survey evidence from Germany

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Eger
  • Marc Scheufen
  • Daniel Meierrieks

Abstract

We discuss the results of a survey conducted in the fall of 2012 and covering 2151 researchers in Germany. We show that there are significant differences between the scientific disciplines with respect to researchers’ awareness of, and experience with, both open access (OA) journals and self-archiving. Our results reveal that the relevance of OA within a discipline may explain why researchers from particular disciplines do (not) publish OA. Furthermore, several aspects like copyright law, age, profession or the inherent reward system of a discipline also play a role. Consequently, the paper emphasizes that a “one-size-fits-all” approach, as promoted by most recent policy initiatives, is unlikely to provide an effective framework for shaping the future of scholarly publishing. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Eger & Marc Scheufen & Daniel Meierrieks, 2015. "The determinants of open access publishing: survey evidence from Germany," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 475-503, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:ejlwec:v:39:y:2015:i:3:p:475-503
    DOI: 10.1007/s10657-015-9488-x
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10657-015-9488-x
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10657-015-9488-x?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Migheli, Matteo & Ramello, Giovanni B., 2014. "Open Access Journals & Academics' Behaviour," IEL Working Papers 18, Institute of Public Policy and Public Choice - POLIS.
    2. Hanauske, Matthias & Bernius, Steffen & Dugall, Berndt, 2007. "Quantum Game Theory and Open Access Publishing," MPRA Paper 15986, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Matteo Migheli & Giovanni B. Ramello, 2014. "Open Access Journals And Academics' Behavior," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 52(4), pages 1250-1266, October.
    4. Matteo Migheli & Giovanni B. Ramello, 2013. "Open Access, Social Norms & Publication Choice," ICER Working Papers 03-2013, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research.
    5. Hanauske, Matthias & Bernius, Steffen & Dugall, Berndt, 2007. "Quantum game theory and open access publishing," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 382(2), pages 650-664.
    6. 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.
    7. Marc Scheufen, 2015. "Copyright Versus Open Access," International Law and Economics, Springer, edition 127, number 978-3-319-12739-2, October.
    8. Matteo Migheli & Giovanni Ramello, 2013. "Open access, social norms and publication choice," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 149-167, April.
    9. Ramello, Giovanni B., 2010. "Copyright and endogenous market structure: a glimpse from the journal-publishing market," POLIS Working Papers 146, Institute of Public Policy and Public Choice - POLIS.
    10. J. Scott Long & Jeremy Freese, 2006. "Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables using Stata, 2nd Edition," Stata Press books, StataCorp LP, edition 2, number long2, March.
    11. Müller-Langer, Frank & Watt, Richard, 2014. "The Hybrid Open Access Citation Advantage: How Many More Cites is a $3,000 Fee Buying You?," MPRA Paper 61801, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    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. Jacqmin, Julien, 2018. "Why are some online courses more open than others?," MPRA Paper 89929, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Martin Grančay & Jolita Vveinhardt & Ērika Šumilo, 2017. "Publish or perish: how Central and Eastern European economists have dealt with the ever-increasing academic publishing requirements 2000–2015," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(3), pages 1813-1837, June.
    3. 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.
    4. Matteo Migheli & Giovanni Battista Ramello, 2018. "The market of academic attention," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(1), pages 113-133, January.
    5. Eberhard Feess & Marc Scheufen, 2016. "Academic copyright in the publishing game: a contest perspective," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 263-294, October.
    6. Mueller-Langer, Frank & Andreoli-Versbach, Patrick, 2018. "Open access to research data: Strategic delay and the ambiguous welfare effects of mandatory data disclosure," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 20-34.
    7. Maja Jokić & Andrea Mervar & Stjepan Mateljan, 2018. "Scientific potential of European fully open access journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(3), pages 1373-1394, March.
    8. Mueller-Langer, Frank & Scheufen, Marc & Waelbroeck, Patrick, 2020. "Does online access promote research in developing countries? Empirical evidence from article-level data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(2).
    9. Thomas Eger & Marc Scheufen & Daniel Meierrieks, 2016. "The determinants of open access publishing: survey evidence from countries in the Mediterranean Open Access Network (MedOANet)," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 43(4), pages 463-489, December.
    10. Frank Mueller-Langer & Marc Scheufen, 2013. "Academic publishing and open access," Chapters, in: Ruth Towse & Christian Handke (ed.), Handbook on the Digital Creative Economy, chapter 32, pages 365-377, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Carmen López-Vergara & Pilar Flores Asenjo & Alfonso Rosa-García, 2021. "Why Open Access: Economics and Business Researchers’ Perspectives," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-17, August.
    12. Carmen López-Vergara & Pilar Flores Asenjo & Alfonso Rosa-García, 2020. "Incentives to Open Access: Perspectives of Health Science Researchers," Publications, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-17, May.
    13. Mueller-Langer, Frank & Scheufen, Marc & Waelbroeck, Patrick, 2017. "Does Online Access Promote Research in Developing Countries?," Discussion Papers in Economics 31973, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
    14. Jacqmin, Julien, 2022. "Why are some Massive Open Online Courses more open than others?," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    15. Thomas Eger & Marc Scheufen, 2021. "Economic perspectives on the future of academic publishing: Introduction to the special issue," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(8), pages 1922-1932, December.

    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. Eberhard Feess & Marc Scheufen, 2016. "Academic copyright in the publishing game: a contest perspective," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 42(2), pages 263-294, October.
    2. Matteo Migheli & Giovanni Battista Ramello, 2018. "The market of academic attention," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(1), pages 113-133, January.
    3. Mueller-Langer, Frank & Scheufen, Marc & Waelbroeck, Patrick, 2020. "Does online access promote research in developing countries? Empirical evidence from article-level data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(2).
    4. Thomas Eger & Marc Scheufen & Daniel Meierrieks, 2016. "The determinants of open access publishing: survey evidence from countries in the Mediterranean Open Access Network (MedOANet)," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 43(4), pages 463-489, December.
    5. Carmen López-Vergara & Pilar Flores Asenjo & Alfonso Rosa-García, 2021. "Why Open Access: Economics and Business Researchers’ Perspectives," Publications, MDPI, vol. 9(3), pages 1-17, August.
    6. Maja Jokić & Andrea Mervar & Stjepan Mateljan, 2018. "Scientific potential of European fully open access journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(3), pages 1373-1394, March.
    7. 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.
    8. Abdelghani Maddi, 2021. "Game theory and scholarly publishing: premises for an agreement around open access," Papers 2106.13321, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2021.
    9. Jacqmin, Julien, 2018. "Why are some online courses more open than others?," MPRA Paper 89929, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Hajar Sotudeh & Zahra Ghasempour & Maryam Yaghtin, 2015. "The citation advantage of author-pays model: the case of Springer and Elsevier OA journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 104(2), pages 581-608, August.
    11. 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.
    12. Matteo Migheli & Giovanni Ramello, 2013. "Open access, social norms and publication choice," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 35(2), pages 149-167, April.
    13. Carmen López-Vergara & Pilar Flores Asenjo & Alfonso Rosa-García, 2020. "Incentives to Open Access: Perspectives of Health Science Researchers," Publications, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-17, May.
    14. Li Yan & Wang Zhiping, 2023. "Mapping the Literature on Academic Publishing: A Bibliometric Analysis on WOS," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(1), pages 21582440231, March.
    15. Hanauske, Matthias & Kunz, Jennifer & Bernius, Steffen & König, Wolfgang, 2010. "Doves and hawks in economics revisited: An evolutionary quantum game theory based analysis of financial crises," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 389(21), pages 5084-5102.
    16. Thomas Eger & Marc Scheufen, 2021. "Economic perspectives on the future of academic publishing: Introduction to the special issue," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(8), pages 1922-1932, December.
    17. Mueller-Langer, Frank & Scheufen, Marc & Waelbroeck, Patrick, 2017. "Does Online Access Promote Research in Developing Countries?," Discussion Papers in Economics 31973, University of Munich, Department of Economics.
    18. Suzanne Heller Clain & Karen Leppel, 2018. "Patterns in Economics Journal Acceptances and Rejections," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 63(1), pages 94-109, March.
    19. Matteo Migheli & Giovanni B. Ramello, 2021. "The unbearable lightness of scientometric indices," Managerial and Decision Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(8), pages 1933-1944, December.
    20. Jinsuk Yang & Qing Hao & Mahmut Yaşar, 2023. "Institutional investors and cross‐border mergers and acquisitions: The 2000–2018 period," International Review of Finance, International Review of Finance Ltd., vol. 23(3), pages 553-583, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Academic publishing; Open access; Copyright; Law and economics; C83; K11; O34;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C83 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Survey Methods; Sampling Methods
    • K11 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Property Law
    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:kap:ejlwec:v:39:y:2015:i:3:p:475-503. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.