IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v129y2024i5d10.1007_s11192-024-05003-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Understanding differences of the OA uptake within the German University landscape (2010–2020): Part 2—repository-provided OA

Author

Listed:
  • Niels Taubert

    (Bielefeld University)

  • Anne Hobert

    (University of Göttingen)

  • Najko Jahn

    (University of Göttingen)

  • Andre Bruns

    (Bielefeld University)

  • Elham Iravani

    (Bielefeld University)

Abstract

This article is the second part of the investigation of the determinants for the uptake of Open Access (OA). While the first part focusses on journal-based OA (hybrid and full OA) (Taubert et al. in Scientometrics 128(6):3601–3625, 2023), the article at hand investigates the determinants for the uptake of institutional and subject repository OA in the university landscape of Germany. Both articles consider three types of factors: the disciplinary profile of universities, their OA infrastructures and services and large transformative agreements The article also apply a conjoint methodological design: the uptake of OA as well as the determinants are measured by combining several data sources (incl. Web of Science, Unpaywall, an authority file of standardised German affiliation information, the ISSN-Gold-OA 4.0 list, and lists of publications covered by transformative agreements). For universities’ OA infrastructures and services, a structured data collection was created by harvesting different sources of information and by manual online search. To determine the explanatory power of the different factors, a series of regression analyses was performed for different periods and for both institutional as well as subject repository OA. Given that both articles derive from the same project, there is a thematical overlap in the methods and data section. As a result of the regression analyses, the most determining factor for the explanation of differences in the uptake of both repository OA-types turned out to be the disciplinary profile, whereas all variables that capture local infrastructural support and services for OA turned out to be non-significant. The outcome of the regression analyses is contextualised by an interview study conducted with 20 OA officers of German universities. The contextualisation provides hints that the original function of institutional repositories, offering a channel for secondary publishing is vanishing, while a new function of aggregation of metadata and full texts is becoming of increasing importance.

Suggested Citation

  • Niels Taubert & Anne Hobert & Najko Jahn & Andre Bruns & Elham Iravani, 2024. "Understanding differences of the OA uptake within the German University landscape (2010–2020): Part 2—repository-provided OA," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(5), pages 2801-2825, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:129:y:2024:i:5:d:10.1007_s11192-024-05003-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-024-05003-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-024-05003-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-024-05003-5?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mikael Laakso & Lisa Matthias & Najko Jahn, 2021. "Open is not forever: A study of vanished open access journals," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 72(9), pages 1099-1112, September.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Bo-Christer Björk & Mikael Laakso & Patrik Welling & Patrik Paetau, 2014. "Anatomy of green open access," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 65(2), pages 237-250, February.
    5. Martín-Martín, Alberto & Costas, Rodrigo & van Leeuwen, Thed & Delgado López-Cózar, Emilio, 2018. "Evidence of open access of scientific publications in Google Scholar: A large-scale analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 819-841.
    6. Niels Taubert & Anne Hobert & Najko Jahn & Andre Bruns & Elham Iravani, 2023. "Understanding differences of the OA uptake within the German university landscape (2010–2020): part 1—journal-based OA," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(6), pages 3601-3625, June.
    7. Vincent Larivière & Cassidy R. Sugimoto, 2018. "Do authors comply when funders enforce open access to research?," Nature, Nature, vol. 562(7728), pages 483-486, October.
    8. Mikael Laakso & Lisa Matthias & Najko Jahn, 2021. "Response to comment on “Open is not forever: A study of vanished open access journals”," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 72(9), pages 1115-1116, September.
    9. Philippe Vincent-Lamarre & Jade Boivin & Yassine Gargouri & Vincent Larivière & Stevan Harnad, 2016. "Estimating open access mandate effectiveness: The MELIBEA score," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 67(11), pages 2815-2828, November.
    10. Rob Kling & Geoffrey McKim, 2000. "Not just a matter of time: Field differences and the shaping of electronic media in supporting scientific communication," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 51(14), pages 1306-1320.
    11. repec:plo:pone00:0189751 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Niels Taubert & Anne Hobert & Najko Jahn & Andre Bruns & Elham Iravani, 2023. "Understanding differences of the OA uptake within the German university landscape (2010–2020): part 1—journal-based OA," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(6), pages 3601-3625, June.
    2. Wei Ming & Zhenyue Zhao, 2022. "Rethinking the open access citation advantage: Evidence from the “reverse‐flipping” journals," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(11), pages 1608-1620, November.
    3. Laura Bowering Mullen, 2024. "Open Access, Scholarly Communication, and Open Science in Psychology: An Overview for Researchers," SAGE Open, , vol. 14(1_suppl), pages 21582440231, April.
    4. Fernanda Morillo, 2020. "Is open access publication useful for all research fields? Presence of funding, collaboration and impact," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 689-716, October.
    5. Byczyński, Marcin Jan, 2025. "Global Open Access Repository Infrastructure: Development, Impact, Trends, and Implications for Higher Education," OSF Preprints ztbxq_v1, Center for Open Science.
    6. Najko Jahn & Lisa Matthias & Mikael Laakso, 2022. "Toward transparency of hybrid open access through publisher‐provided metadata: An article‐level study of Elsevier," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(1), pages 104-118, January.
    7. 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.
    8. Simon Mahony, 2022. "Toward openness and transparency to better facilitate knowledge creation," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 73(10), pages 1474-1488, October.
    9. Shlomit Hadad & Noa Aharony & Daphne R. Raban, 2024. "Policy shaping the impact of open-access publications: a longitudinal assessment," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(1), pages 237-260, January.
    10. Pablo Sastrón-Toledo & Patricia Alonso-Álvarez & Jorge Mañana-Rodríguez, 2024. "Compliance with open access mandates and its effects on research visibility: the case of the Spanish National Plan of R&D," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(4), pages 2057-2081, April.
    11. Anne Hobert & Najko Jahn & Philipp Mayr & Birgit Schmidt & Niels Taubert, 2021. "Open access uptake in Germany 2010–2018: adoption in a diverse research landscape," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(12), pages 9751-9777, December.
    12. Shina Caroline Lynn Kamerlin & David J. Allen & Bas de Bruin & Etienne Derat & Henrik Urdal, 2021. "Journal Open Access and Plan S: Solving Problems or Shifting Burdens?," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 52(3), pages 627-650, May.
    13. Moumita Koley & Kanchan Lala, 2022. "Changing dynamics of scholarly publication: a perspective towards open access publishing and the proposed one nation, one subscription policy of India," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(6), pages 3383-3411, June.
    14. Jacqmin, Julien, 2018. "Why are some online courses more open than others?," MPRA Paper 89929, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. repec:osf:osfxxx:xr8mv_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. W. Benedikt Schmal, 2024. "How transformative are transformative agreements? Evidence from Germany across disciplines," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 129(3), pages 1863-1889, March.
    17. Sandra Miguel & Ely Francina Tannuri de Oliveira & Maria Cláudia Cabrini Grácio, 2016. "Scientific Production on Open Access: A Worldwide Bibliometric Analysis in the Academic and Scientific Context," Publications, MDPI, vol. 4(1), pages 1-15, January.
    18. Marcia J. Bates, 2021. "Search foundations: Toward a science of technology‐mediated experience. Sachi Arafat and Elham Ashoori. Boston, MA: MIT Press, 2019. 448, pp. $65.00 (hardback). (ISBN 9780262038591)," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 72(3), pages 377-383, March.
    19. Alexander Cuntz & Frank Mueller-Langer & Alessio Muscarnera & Prince C. Oguguo & Marc Scheufen, 2024. "Access to science and innovation in the developing world," WIPO Economic Research Working Papers 78, World Intellectual Property Organization - Economics and Statistics Division.
    20. Dulong de Rosnay, Mélanie & Stalder, Felix, 2020. "Digital commons," Internet Policy Review: Journal on Internet Regulation, Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society (HIIG), Berlin, vol. 9(4), pages 1-22.
    21. Schmal, W. Benedikt & Haucap, Justus & Knoke, Leon, 2023. "The role of gender and coauthors in academic publication behavior," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(10).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:spr:scient:v:129:y:2024:i:5:d:10.1007_s11192-024-05003-5. 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.