Lessons From Our Study of Attitudes and Behaviors Affecting Changes in Scholarly Publishing
September 2007

It is often taken for granted that new technology “changes everything.” But that is definitely not the case in scholarly publishing, as illustrated in a major study that Greenhouse Associates recently completed with the University of California, the largest university system in the US. Our study shows that despite a widespread view that the current system of scholarly communication needs to be changed, academic scholars overwhelmingly continue to publish in traditional outlets, such as print journals and books, rather than in alternative dissemination channels, such as open-access journals and institutional repositories.

Unlike much of our work, which is proprietary to our clients, this study has been made public by the UC’s Office of Scholarly Communication as part of its mission to leverage Internet technologies in support of innovation in all forms of scholarship. The study was aimed at gaining a deeper understanding of faculty attitudes and behaviors on a range of issues, including the health of current scholarly communication systems, alternative and emerging forms of publication and dissemination, and copyright. It also examines the role of tenure and promotion processes as well as policy interventions by the University in affecting changes in academic faculty’s publishing behavior. The study was based on both structured interviews with faculty and online survey responses from over 1,100 University of California professors from across the system’s ten campuses, making it one of the largest studies of its kind to date.

While this study should be of obvious interest to anyone involved in academic and scholarly publishing, it also provides lessons for the broader information industry. Here are a few highlights:

• There is a gap in scholars’ attitudes versus actual behaviors regarding where and how they disseminate their scholarly output. While UC faculty feel that the current scholarly communication systems need to be changed and updated, they generally conform to conventional behavior in their own chosen outlets, favoring traditional print journals over open-access journals or other alternatives. Lesson: Concern does not always translate into immediate changes in behavior.

• The current academic tenure and promotion system, which generally rewards faculty for publishing articles in well-established journals, impedes changes in faculty behavior. UC’s faculty consistently express concern about the existing promotion and tenure system, complain that it is not keeping up to date with new forms of dissemination, and say that the existing reward systems favor traditional publishing forms and venues. Lesson: The apparent advantages of new technology or other innovation do not always win out over established ways of doing business, especially when individual preferences may be subordinate to institutional rules.

• While faculty show interest in learning about dissemination modes occurring across the scholarly community, their awareness of alternative scholarly communication opportunities is generally low. Further, they express varying levels of concern about issues relating to commercial and society publishers, publishing costs, and copyright. Lesson: Where there’s smoke, there’s not necessarily fire. Despite an active dialogue in the press and on blogs about these issues, they are not yet part of the discourse among mainstream academic scholars.

• Despite widespread dissatisfaction with the current scholarly communications system, scholars are concerned about preserving their current publishing outlets, and few faculty members express willingness to engage actively in fomenting change within their academic institutions or academic societies or with commercial publishers. Lesson: Personal reward systems can be a strong factor affecting change.

• Senior faculty may be the most fertile targets for innovation in scholarly communication. Younger faculty, while likely to be more comfortable with new technologies, are less likely to adopt new forms of scholarly communication because tenure and promotion systems drive them to publish in traditional ways. Lesson: Even when a market (e.g., academic scholars) appears homogeneous, analyzing the market to understand different segments, their needs, and behaviors can yield important insights that are critical for fostering change (or marketing products).