209-OECD ISSA project

209-OECD ISSA project

• 1.
  BY SOURCE Not OA OA Difference (T-stat and sig- levels) Peer-reviewedsci. lit. - major index 0.81 0.81 0.30 Peer reviewed sci. lit - other 0.28 0.31 1.67 * Working papers 0.12 0.18 4.40 *** Technical documents 0.07 0.08 1.63 * Policy/government docu- ments 0.05 0.07 2.05 ** Practitioner's protocols 0.02 0.02 0.00 Media 0.06 0.07 1.88 * Legal proceedings 0.02 0.03 2.21 ** Other 0.06 0.05 -0.79 Coeffi- cient T-stat Female -0.171 (8.27)** Born in another country 0.085 (4.09)** # publications in 2011 0.026 (2.99)** FT, research part time 0.129 (6.23)** PT, research FT -0.233 (5.70)** PT, research PT -0.082 (2.61)** Fixed term contract -0.050 (2.51)* In Higher education -0.079 (4.02)** Journal prestige (SNIP) 0.049 (4.50)** Log citations to doc 0.032 (2.15)* Document open access 0.009 (0.52) Population • 1.9m docs in Scopus published in 2011 with corresponding author email address Target population • 856k docs in selected fields • 380k unique authors • Stratification by country*field, min stratum of 30 observations • Target sample= 61K Sample for analysis • Use Surveygizmo survey tool • Pre-test and piloting on 1K. • 12% bounce rate, 73% no click, 2% click but no response • 13% response rate, mostly complete • Country differences 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Arts and humanities Business Chemical engineering Immunology & microbiology Materials science Neuroscience Physics and astronomy All From publisher From both types of sources From repository Not available or NK DRIVERS AND IMPLICATIONS OF SCIENTIFIC OPEN ACCESS PUBLISHING FINDINGS FROM A PILOT INTERNATIONAL SURVEY OF SCIENTIFIC AUTHORS – ISSA Brunella Boselli* and Fernando Galindo-Rueda* (OECD)  Obtain statistical, micro-data based evidence on scientific publishing and open access (OA) to outputs of scientific research o Openness o Incentives, behaviour o Demographics and careers  Test feasibility of an OECD-run, online international survey of scien- tific authors (ISSA) as an addition to the OECD evidence infrastructure OBJECTIVES WORLDWIDE DISTRIBUTION OF SURVEY RESPONDENTS PILOT SURVEY DESIGN AND OUTCOMES  Leverage strengths and link administrative and survey data  Central, secure access to confidential microdata  Common questions and survey design across countries  A global study to address global policy issues  Focus on topical issues of high global policy priority  Complement/avoid overlap with NSO surveys  Pursuit of value for money Respondents enticed to participate by expected impact of evi- dence on global policy discussions  Approx. 55% of documents published in 2011 openly available in 2015  Publisher open access limited  Repository-based open access more important in developed countries  Different norms across fields 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% From publisher From both types of sources From repository Not available or NK ACCESS TO RESEARCH OUTPUTS: Open access of scientific documents, by field and by country HYPOTHETICAL DEALS PROPOSED TO AUTHORS:  Willing to pay “x” for open access?  Reveals value in excess of access cost  Amounts randomly allocated AN EXPERIMENT: VALUING OPEN ACCESS MAIN FINDINGS:  Willingness to pay for open access to document declines with amount requested  Evidence of sweet spot pricing effects (499 vs 500 USD)  Journal prestige and funding sources also mat- ter greatly MAIN FINDINGS:  No citation advantage in major scientific indi- ces for OA journals  Significant citation ad- vantage found in most other vehicles, esp. working papers OA does facilitate diffu- sion, esp. among non sci. communities MAIN FINDINGS:  Implied earnings penalty on female corresponding authors, despite similar ci- tations  Penalty to full time dedica- tion to research and high- er education  Premium to international mobile authors  Journal prestige matters, more than actual citations  Academic incentives THE ROLE OF OA IN ACCOUNTING FOR SELF-REPORTED CITATIONS EXPLAINING AUTHOR’S EARNINGS CONCLUSIONS AND FUTURE PLANS  Studies of open access need to look at incentives and consider link ac- cess/accreditation  Preparing anonymised microdata access plan for interested researchers  Further testing on lessons learned from pilot o Emphasis on respondent value proposition  Subject matter selection: o Insights on the digitalisation of scientific research. o Improved measures of scientific activity and impact * Economic Analysis and Statistics Division, OECD Directorate for Science, Technology and Innovation For more information about the ISSA project, please visit the dedicated website: oe.cd/issa Log annual earnings regression resultsWeighted estimates of citation probability and T-test for difference Significance levels: *=10%, **=5%, ***=1%. Willingness to pay for open access, fee-paying respondents Percentage, by amount proposed (USD) Comments and suggestions are welcome 99 299 499 500 999 0 10 20 30 40 50 0 200 400 600 800 1 000 Unweighted Weighted THE ISSA CONCEPT