www.donau-uni.ac.at/cedem

1. Danube University Krems
The Motivation(s)
Behind
Open Access
Publishing
CeDEMAsia 2016
Workshop
Noella Edelmann
& Judith Schossböck

2. Danube University Krems, CeDEM Asia 2016
www.donau-uni.ac.at
Overview
Open Access
JeDEM eJournal
Evaluation
Project Outline: Motivational Factors in OA
Workshop and Discussion 

3. Danube University Krems, CeDEM Asia 2016
www.donau-uni.ac.at
Open Access Publishing
Green and golden way of OA
Smecher’s (2008) Editorial “The Future of the
Electronic Journal” in NeuroQuantology:
The character of the electronic academic journal is
changing rapidly as new technologies, reader habits,
and patterns of communication evolve and the Internet is
increasingly adopted as a common medium. The
obvious changes involve new methods of delivery and
subscription, but the underlying structures of academic
communication are also changing, presenting a host of
new possibilities.

4. Danube University Krems, CeDEM Asia 2016
www.donau-uni.ac.at
JeDEM.org, eJournal for eDemocracy and
Open Government – since 2009
Policy and Legislation Information Technology
Political Science eDemocracy
Business Information eSociety
Business Economy eGovernance
Media Psychology eParticipation
Usability eVoting
2 issues per year

5. Danube University Krems, CeDEM Asia 2016
www.donau-uni.ac.at
JeDEM Catgories
 Part I: Scientific Research Papers (research in
progress or completed) - anonymous peer
review;
 Part II: Case Studies - anonymous peer review;
 Part III: Project Descriptions (focus on
practitioners) – editorial review;
 Part IV: Literature Reviews; Q&A; Letters to the
Editors/Editorial; Expert Comments; Readers’
Page; Editorial Comment... – no review.

6. Danube University Krems, CeDEM Asia 2016
www.donau-uni.ac.at
JeDEM
Impact Factor: 8,5 cites per year and about 4,6 cites
per paper, Journal-h-index 13
Licenses and Indices
Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Austria (CC BY 3.0)
License
Indexed with EBSCO, DOAJ, Google Scholar and the
Public Knowledge Project metadata harvester.
Evaluation
 DOAJ
 QOAM

7. Danube University Krems, CeDEM Asia 2016
www.donau-uni.ac.at
JeDEM Evaluation
DOAJ (since 02/2011):
 JeDEM fulfills criteria for quality and transparency,
openness, copyright and licensing issues
 Missing some qualifications for the DOAJ seal
(e.g. permanent identifiers, external repository)

8. Danube University Krems, CeDEM Asia 2016
www.donau-uni.ac.at
JeDEM Evaluation (II)
QOAM (2016)
Ranks 17,000 journals; a service that gathers
information about OA journals to provide an overview
about reliability, crowd-sourced
Assesses quality, trustworthiness and value for money
 Base Score: 2,0/5 (transparency in terms of editorial
information, peer-review, governance and
workflow);
 Valuation Score Card (by 5 reviewers): 4,3/5;

9. Danube University Krems, CeDEM Asia 2016
www.donau-uni.ac.at
QOAM Swot Matrix

10. Danube University Krems, CeDEM Asia 2016
www.donau-uni.ac.at
QOAM Swot Matrix (II)

11. Danube University Krems, CeDEM Asia 2016
www.donau-uni.ac.at
Project Outline
Developing a Methodology for Evaluating Users’
Perspective of the OA Journal JeDEM
 Based on workshops at CeDEM16 and
CeDEM Asia 2016
Survey in 2017
 JeDEM users
 Population: people who publish OA

12. Danube University Krems, CeDEM Asia 2016
www.donau-uni.ac.at
RQs
• Can we distinguish differences in motivation for
publishing in open access across disciplines or
countries?
• What type of users are JeDEM users? How can
users be classified according to their
motivations? What are users’ opinions on
different aspects of open access publishing, e.g.
open peer review etc.?
• How can these results help other e-publishers?

13. Danube University Krems, CeDEM Asia 2016
www.donau-uni.ac.at
Motivational Factors in OA
 Park (2009): Attitudes; Social influence; Perceived
control /ability to use OA (from innovation and
diffusions theory)
 Taylor and Francis Open Access Survey (Frass,
Cross, & Gardner, 2014): Attitudes; Values;
 Moksness (2015): Attitudes; Norms; Intentions
 McKiernan et al (2016): Benefits („Incentives“)

14. Danube University Krems, CeDEM Asia 2016
www.donau-uni.ac.at
Motivations to Publish
Borgman (1993): Dissemination of knowledge as
widely as possible;
Coles (1993) Disseminate results; further
career/funding; recognition;
Costello (2009): Demonstrate contribution to science;
peer-recognition influences reputation; employment
opportunities; promotion; research funding; personal
satisfaction in completing a study; enthusiasm about
communicating findings and opinions to society;

15. Danube University Krems, CeDEM Asia 2016
www.donau-uni.ac.at
Further activities
Questionnaire Development
Intrinsic/extrinsic motivations?
The nomenclature of „motivations“ makes it
difficult to compare results to previous studies.
Develop own questionnaire or re-use an existing
one?
Different practices within the field?
Qualitative exploration 

16. Danube University Krems, CeDEM Asia 2016
www.donau-uni.ac.at
Workshop
1. Academia 2. Policy-makers 3. Practitioners
 Why is it important to publish Open Access?
 What motivates to publish Open Access?
(green?)
 External vs. internal motivation factors?
 Myths and experiences?
 Aim/Quality/Costs/Disciplines/Policy/Role

17. Danube University Krems, CeDEM Asia 2016
www.donau-uni.ac.at
Discussion
Summary of the discussion
Questions?

18. Danube University Krems, CeDEM Asia 2016
www.donau-uni.ac.at
~THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION!~

19. Danube University Krems, CeDEM Asia 2016
www.donau-uni.ac.at
Practitioners
Aim ·Get the most out of your paper;
Quality ·Journal ranking is important;
·An important issue is quality vs. being better known;
Disciplines ·There is a big difference between the research fields;
Policy ·The institution’s policy on publishing is crucial;
Role ·There is only little support for the students in terms of
publishing (it is not normal that Professors publish with
the students);
Other

20. Danube University Krems, CeDEM Asia 2016
www.donau-uni.ac.at
Policy-makers
·It lacks evidence that there is added value in developing OA for the
benefit for the progress of knowledge in the scientific community;
·We don’t know if there is a correlation of the quality/numbers of OA
publications and the improvement within the research field;
·There is no clue about the correlation between quantity and quality in
the sense of developing a domain;
·Impact factor doesn’t need to mean anything. Some papers are always
cited, even though they are not good;
·Higher education institutions have to deal with this issue;
The EU and EU-funded projects require OA publications. There is de facto
a regulation for publications that doesn’t provide a lot of flexibility;
·There could be measures to increase readability of texts;

21. Danube University Krems, CeDEM Asia 2016
www.donau-uni.ac.at
Academics
·Get the most out of your paper;
·Reputation, ranking and impact factor are important issues;
·Working for a journal is also associated with the repuation of a journal: review work is done for
free;
·Look at where the high-name researchers publish;
·Repuation is the main issue, but you want your ideas to spread;
·The established channels are better known;
·Although non-OA journals are not better quality, they are simply better known;
·Free means lower quality;
·This makes OA a market issue Google scholar plays a vital role;
·There is no support for students;
·OA is good for publishing when you are a no-name, a student, you have no money, no
organisations/uni support;
·Publish in high value journals/conferences: if costs are not an issue, why aim for OA?
·There is a difference between research fields;
·Organisations tell you where to publish: in some case there may be restrictions, but not always;
·There is an institutional policy regarding where to publish;
·Asia always follows the US model;
·Differences depending on whether you are staff or a student;
·Tell people who want to cite/refer to you /your work that it can only be done if you publish in OA
journals. Radical or destroy your career?