What Motivates Authors of Scholarly Articles? The Importance of Journal Attributes and Potential Audience on Publication Choice

Abstract

Abstract:In this article we examine what motivations influence academic authors in selecting a journal in which to publish. A survey was sent to approximately 15,000 faculty, graduate students, and postdoctoral researchers at four large North American research universities with a response rate of 14.4% (n = 2021). Respondents were asked to rate how eight different journal attributes and five different audiences influence their choice of publication output. Within the sample, the most highly rated attributes are quality and reputation of journal and fit with the scope of the journal; open access is the least important attribute. Researchers at other research-intensive institutions are considered the most important audience, while the general public is the least important. There are significant differences across subject disciplines and position types. Our findings have implications for understanding the adoption of open access publishing models.

Does the scholarly communication system satisfy the beliefs and aspirations of new researchers? Summarizing the Harbingers research

“…Open access publishing, as part of the wider ideology of Open Science, is certainly a case in point, said to have a host of societal and individual‐level benefits (Allen & Mehler, ; Enago Academy, ; McKiernan et al ., ). Indeed, junior researchers have been found to manifest much more positive views of open access than their senior counterparts (Nicholas et al ., ; Ruiz‐Pérez & Delgado‐López‐Cózar, ; Tenopir et al ., ), to the extent that they are even more interested than their older colleagues in replacing the traditional subscription‐based system with an open access one (Blankstein & Wolff‐Eisenberg, ; Wolff, Rod, & Schonfeld, ). However, as Segado‐Boj, Martín‐Quevedo, and Prieto‐Gutiérrez () found, it is more nuanced than that.…”

How to Choose Where to Publish Your Work

“…Well, the drivers of authors' journal-selection behavior 20 generally hold true for JOSPT authors. In our 2016 author survey, JOSPT authors rated a journal's scope or focus as the most important factor when selecting the journal(s) to which they choose to submit their work, followed by the quality of the peer-review process, the journal's IF, and its reputation with researchers.…”

“…In some cases, they will purposefully select a lower level of journal than might be achievable in order to reap other benefits in lieu of prestige or audience, notably lower risk of rejection (requiring time-consuming resubmission elsewhere) and faster time to publication. 20 Other times, an author might be driven to lower-quality journals out of frustration from serial rejection from higherprestige journals. 18 In such circumstances, an inexperienced author can be seduced by the spurious allure of predatory journals, which offer speedy (read: sham) peer review, fast publication, an "unlimited" audience (ie, freely accessible online, to anyone, but probably not indexed in the places your audience searches), and often bogus "quality signals" (eg, fake or, at best, dubious IF metrics).…”

“…With the rise of online, open-access journals, the publishing landscape changed dramatically, and the journal-selection behavior of authors began to change with it: the physical quality of the printed product became less important; refereeing speed and, in some disciplines, breadth of circulation became much more important. 14,20 The so-called "predatory journals" care little for the quality-assurance keystone of peer review, only about grabbing a payment for publishing articles online under false pretenses. Academic librarians and scholarly discipline leaders were quick to smell the rat, but the plague was rampant.…”

Is a Gold Open Access World Viable for Research Universities?

“…Open access rated the lowest in importance across all position types and subject disciplines (Table 2). Our recent article in Publications examines author motivations in choosing publication outlets (Tenopir, Dalton, Fish, Christian, Jones, & Fish, 2016). Perhaps because of the perceived stigma of "pay to publish" or predatory journals, or perhaps because the issue of open-or subscription-based journals did not resonate with many respondents, for most OA was not an important factor when choosing where to publish (Table 3.…”