Transcript Prior Pub Survey 2012 Results
NDLTD Prior Publications Working Group Gail McMillan, Marisa Ramirez, Joan Dalton, Ann Hanlon, Chelsea Kern, Heather Smith CNI Fall Membership Meeting Dec. 12, 2012
Publishers previously surveyed 2000/2002.
Questions continue to arise. ETD-L Chronicle of Higher Education Perceptions, not data, are usually reported.
LSU ETD by Ursula Goldsmith VT ETD author surveys VT Authors are restricting access to the ETDs.
Faculty are advising students to restrict access.
VT graduate student alumni survey (2000) Ohio U ETD by Angla McCutcheon (2010) NDLTD Board’s support ProQuest NDLTD SoSci/Hum survey 2011
Thompson Reuter’s Journal Performance Indicators (JPI), 2005-2009 16,455 journals in 171 subject categories Relative Impact Factor (RPI): top 5 723 science journals--sampling 290 journal editors surveyed (40%) Cal Poly Human Subjects Committee approved (IRB—Institutional Review Board)
Which of the following statements best reflects the editorial policy or practice governing your enterprise? Manuscripts that are revisions derived from openly accessible electronic theses and dissertations (ETDs) are… Always welcome for submission.
Considered on a case-by-case basis.
Considered ONLY IF the contents and conclusions in the manuscript are substantially different from the ETD.
Considered ONLY IF the ETD has access limited to the campus or institution where it was completed.
Not considered under any circumstances.
Other (please elaborate)
Pretested w/8 editors SurveyMonkey Free Web survey tool Emailed 290 journal editors Aug. 9-27, 2012: online survey period Aug. 14 and 21: 2 reminder emails Sept. 7-14: Follow-up phone calls by LIS students to non-respondents
27.9%
responded to the
Science
survey 53 original SurveyMonkey respondents 28 follow-up phone interviews
17.0%
survey responded to the 2011 1 follow-up email
Hum/SoSci
60% 25% 10% 4% Commercial publishing company Academic society University press Other
69% Editors-in-chief 16% Managing Editors 7% Members of Editorial Boards 3% Assistant Editors 6% Others
Only if limited access 2% Only if different 9% Never 13% Case by case 21% Always welcome 55%
Always welcome Case by case If different 9% 14% If restricted access 3% 2% Won't consider 0% 4% 10% 13% 20% 21% 27% 30% 40% 45% 50% 55% 60%
33% OA is OK 21% No issue/no policy 12% Case by case 9% Wouldn't consider 6% 6% If different Out of scope 12% General comments
“A peer-reviewed publication that comes out of a dissertation or thesis should not only be encouraged but is crucially important for the scholar's development and advancement of scientific knowledge.” “It is our job to archive and publish the best research. Thus we are quite happy to publish material which otherwise would sit languishing on an online archive.”
“Our journal has essentially ignored any potential conflict arising from publication of ETDs, because the situation is really not different from the days of hard copy thesis holdings by University libraries. They … are simply more easily available now… thesis without peer review in an open access format will never be considered “double publishing.””
“While we recognise theses as legitimate and citeable publications, they are considered gray literature because they do not go through blind external peer review and are not published in a recognized peer reviewed outlet. They are not considered prepublication...” “Work which has not been published in archival peer reviewed journals is considered appropriate for submission, even if it is accessible elsewhere.”
Gail McMillan Marisa L. Ramirez Joan Dalton Ann Hanlon Chelsea Kern Heather Smith [email protected]