生物醫學領域研究人員投稿開放近用期刊經驗之研究

Abstract

「開放近用」(Open Access)是近幾年熱門發展的學術傳播模式議題，其興起主因是圖書館經費預算縮減、電子期刊興起、以及大型出版社壟斷造成之期刊價格危機(price crisis)，為因應這日益艱難的學術傳播環境，「開放近用期刊」(open access journal，簡稱OA期刊)利用網際網路提供大眾免費開放近用全文，其企圖去除期刊價格和使用的限制，讓研究成果更容易被使用者使用，加速學術研究發展，然而國外學者Poynder分析OA期刊目前並未達成目標，OA期刊研究社群甚至認為OA模式無法節省成本，並可能導致期刊價格危機逐漸轉變為作者危機，OA期刊要達到最終目的，仍須持續進行相關研究，作者的看法與投稿意向對OA期刊之發展有舉足輕重之影響力，瞭解作者的觀點與想法是必要的。本研究以各種投稿OA期刊經驗之研究人員為個案，並設定為發展較蓬勃之生物醫學領域OA期刊的投稿者，研究場域限制在北部某設有附設醫院之醫學大學，以開放式深入訪談法，探討促成與阻礙本研究個案作者投稿OA期刊意願之狀況、得知OA期刊之管道與方法，以及探討影響投稿OA期刊意願之個人因素與社會因素。希望本研究能作為國內作者投稿OA期刊之參考，另一方面，也希望讓擬推廣OA期刊之單位如圖書館等，瞭解作者之考量，進而採取合宜之宣導措施。 本研究透過開放式深入訪談法訪談12位不同OA期刊投稿經驗之作者，包括正面投稿經驗、負面投稿經驗、以及正反經驗並陳與無明顯好惡之作者，歸納分析訪談內容，得到以下結論：(1)生物醫學領域受訪者選擇投稿期刊之考量和文章、期刊與個人有關；(2) 得知OA期刊可區別為「瞭解OA這種期刊之型態」，和「取得某OA期刊」的差別，兩者有不同的途徑；(3)對於投稿特別重視處理速度的「對投稿之認知」，以及肯定OA期刊免費開放近用全文的「對OA期刊之看法」等個人因素，讓部份受訪者未來有意願投稿OA期刊；(4)期許自己以投稿至某權威性期刊為目標的「對期刊聲譽之要求」、偏好將一系列研究主題持續投稿在固定期刊上的「對投稿之認知」，以及向作者收取昂貴費用、OA期刊的存在只是多了一種投稿選擇、OA期刊處理速度不比其他期刊快、不知領域中有那些適合的OA期刊的「對OA期刊之看法」等個人因素，讓部份受訪者因而未來沒有投稿OA期刊的意願；(5)次分科可投稿之期刊數量太少、研究議題的研究人口少，研究議題重視新穎度，資訊更新快速的「研究議題之學科結構」，以及面臨升等或考評的時間壓力、若能夠實施機構補助，更有意願投稿OA期刊的「所屬單位之行政政策」等社會因素，讓部份受訪者願意投稿OA期刊；(6)作者也因為某種條件才願意投稿OA期刊，例如身為中堅份子的自我要求，若OA期刊IF值達到3以上才考慮投稿的「對期刊聲譽之要求」個人因素、屬於弱勢的學科領域，自行支付OA期刊投稿費用，未來擬以申請之國科會計畫經費支付，雖然金額不多的「學科領域之資源分配」社會因素等；(7)期刊的品質和出版表現以及個人的經驗和所處情境，再加上受訪者對OA期刊的考量，分別促成或阻礙受訪者投稿OA期刊之狀況。 最後根據文獻及訪談結果分析，對擬推廣OA期刊之單位例如圖書館提出以下具體之建議：(1)提供並即時更新各學科領域期刊的SCI排名清單，並清楚標示哪些是OA期刊以及相關補助訊息；(2)針對學科屬於次領域的作者，進行客製化推廣服務；(3)以問題導向的方式列出各種投稿OA期刊之效益；(5)針對各學科關鍵學者推廣OA理念；(6)建議學校單位加入OA平台之會員，補助作者投稿費用。

In recent years, the publication of open access journals (OA journals) in the biomedical field grows rapidly. OA journals emerged in response to library budget cuts and the journal price crisis due to the monopoly of a few major publishers. Today, the idea of open access has been enthusiastically discussed and embraced in some fields. More and more OA journals also appear in the landscape of scholarly publishing. However, how do authors who serve an important role in the chain of scholarly communication understand and perceive open access? Existing research has not studied this question extensively. This study used a multiple case study design to understand twelve biomedical researchers’ publishing experiences with OA journals, how they chose a journal to submit their papers, and the personal and situational factors influencing their selection of journals. Particularly this study focused on how they perceive OA journals and how their experiences may influence selection of OA journals in the future. The major findings include the followings. (1) The interviewees’ selection of a journal to submit their papers were based on whether the target journal and the paper to be submitted was a good match, the overall performance of the target journal, and their past experiences. (2) The interviewees learned of the existence of OA journals in two directions – they either knew of the idea of OA first then intentionally looked for an OA journal, or they encountered an OA journal without knowing it was an OA journal. (3) Most of the interviewees chose OA journals to submit their articles mainly because of organizational reasons, e.g., their organizations encourage submissions to OA journals; their specific domains lacked sufficient publication outlets so that OA journal became an alternative for them. (4) Most of the interviewees with negative experiences with OA journals did not intend to publish in OA journals again unless they are pressured to do so. (5) Several conditions encouraged the submission of articles to OA journals, for example, when an OA journal is considered as of high quality even it charges publication fee, when an OA journal is considered as of lower quality but it processes the submissions quickly, or when the interviewee had acquired a positive experience with OA journals. (6) In contrast, some conditions discouraged the submissions to OA journals. For instance, when an OA journal charges publication fee and its process time was longer than what the interviewee had expected, then, even the journal was considered as of high quality, one may hesitate to submit articles to it again, or, when an author is free from outer pressures such as competing for promotion, etc.