An examination of North American Library and Information Studies faculty perceptions of and experience with open-access scholarly publishing

Open-access (OA) scholarly publishing has grown steadily in academia for the past few decades as an alternative to traditional, subscription-based journal publishing. This research presents the descriptive analysis of a systematic survey of North American library and information science (LIS) faculty about their attitudes toward and experience with OA publishing. The study reveals that LIS faculty tend to be more experienced with and knowledgeable about open access than their colleagues in other disciplines. A majority of LIS faculty is very critical of what is perceived to be detrimental control exercised by publishers over the scholarly communication system and agrees that major changes need to be made to this system. Although a majority of LIS faculty considers OA journals to be comparable to traditional journals, a sizable minority remains unconvinced of the purported benefits of open-access journals. The perceived constraints of the tenure and promotion system within the academy tend to limit LIS faculty engagement with open-access publishing in ways similar to other academic disciplines. There thus exists a disconnect between proclaimed support for and actual engagement with open access.