Rachel E. Scott 635 A Selected Comparison of Music Librarians’ and 19.4. Musicologists’ Self-Archivingportal Practices Rachel E. Scott publication, for abstract: The importance of open access (OA) advocacy is well-documented in the literature of academic librarianship, but previous research shows that librarians’ OA behaviors are less conclusive. This article compares the self-archiving practices of music librarians and musicologists to see how librarians rank in OA adoption. Availabilityaccepted of articles published from 2013 to 2017 in six green OA journals in music librarianship and musicology indicates a need for continued advocacy and enhanced understanding of OA policiesand and opportunities. Introduction edited, uthors face an increasingly complex publishing landscape. Academics expected to publish to meet tenure and promotion requirements must negotiate a schol- arly communicationscopy environment that has evolved to account for digital pub- Alishing platforms, changing economic models, and demands for expanded author rights— Although the number of OA not to mention dynamic disciplinary and institutionalreviewed, preferences and expectations. journals continues to grow, their Open access (OA) models are diverse and quality and availability across rangepeer considerably in their level of copyright disciplines vary considerably. protectionsis and version accessibility. Even if authors do not choose to publish in an OA Many authors still choose to journal or to pay an article processing charge publish in subscription-based, mss.to publish their individual articles OA—both practices referred to as gold OA—they may rather than OA, journals. This still post their work to an online repository, portal: Libraries and the Academy, Vol. 19, No. 4 (2019), pp. 635–651. Copyright © 2019 by Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD 21218. 636 A Selected Comparison of Music Librarians’ and Musicologists’ Self-Archiving Practices which is called green OA. Although the number of OA journals continues to grow, their quality and availability across disciplines vary considerably. Many authors still choose to publish in subscription-based, rather than OA, journals. Journals funded by subscriptions increasingly support green OA. SHERPA/Ro- MEO (Securing a Hybrid Environment for Research Preservation and Access/Rights Metadata for Open Archiving), based at the University of Nottingham in the United Kingdom, reviews the open access 19.4. Many authors publishing in green OA policies of publishers. According to SHERPA/RoMEO, “81% of publish- journals do not take advantage of the ers on this list [its 2019 survey of portal opportunity to self-archive an autho- publishers] formally allow some form 1 rized version of their work. Authors of self-archiving.” However, research shows that many authors publish- in the sciences have shown strong OA ing in green OA journals do not take participation; in comparison, scholars advantage of the opportunity to self- publication, in the arts and humanities have lagged. archive an authorized version of their work. Authorsfor in the sciences have shown strong OA participation; in comparison, scholars in the arts and humanities have lagged.2 Subject librarians, familiar with the disciplines in which they serve as liaisons and with an understanding of best practices in information science, are seemingly well-situatedaccepted not only to advocate for broader adoption of OA to their disciplinary colleagues but also to lead the way through their own practices. This study asks whether a andselected group of subject librarians—music librarians—take advantage of the opportunity afforded by green OA policies to make their published content freely available to the public online. Librarians have advocated for more open policies in scholarly publishing, but such advocacy is not always reflected inedited, their behavior. This case study evaluates five years of data for three green OA journals in Librarians have advocatedcopy for more music librarianship and three in musi- open policies in scholarly publish- cology to determine if music librarians ing, but such advocacy is not always practice what their profession preaches. It seeks to answer the research question reflected in their behavior. reviewed, “When music librarians and musicolo- gists choose to publish in a journal that supports green OA, at what rates do both groups take advantage of the opportunity to self-archivepeer their work?” is Literature Review mss. Several studies have shown a positive correlation between OA availability and the This number of citations to the work in question.3 Stevan Harnad, a scientist who has written extensively about OA, noted that the citation advantage is not limited to gold: “The OA advantage is the OA advantage, whether Green or Gold.”4 Robert Heaton, Dylan Burns, and Becky Thoms surveyed faculty authors at Utah State University in Logan who had published OA in 2016 to explore their motivations for doing so.5 The three researchers Rachel E. Scott 637 found that positive attitudes toward OA within one’s discipline, feelings of altruism or social responsibility, and a desire for broader reach are powerful influences. They also found that finances are important; without funding for article processing charges, many respondents place their work in journals that ask no fee. Academic librarians are increasingly encouraged to advocate for the expansion of OA. In June 2016, the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) approved the Positive attitudes toward OA 19.4. “ACRL Policy Statement on Open Access to within one’s discipline, feelings Scholarship by Academic Librarians.” That document not only encourages academic of altruism or social responsi- portal librarians to publish in OA journals but also bility, and a desire for broader recommends “depositing the final accepted manuscript in a repository to make that ver- reach are powerful influences. sion openly accessible.”6 Although the ACRL statement favors OA journals, it also provides support for green OA self-archiving. Numerous studies have investigated the OA beliefs of informationpublication, professionals and found their opinions not necessarily aligned with their practices.for Howard Carter, Carolyn Snyder, and Andrea Imre’s 2007 survey finds low self-archiving rates among library faculty: only 12 percent of library faculty respondents had archived articles in an institutional repository or on a personal or departmental website.7 In their 2009 survey, Kristi Palmer, Emily Dill, and Charlene Christieaccepted describe the distance between academic librarians’ OA attitudes and practices by noting: “While all concepts related to education were agreed to or strongly agreedand to at a level of 70% or higher . only 7% of respondents were involved in education campaigns.”8 This finding highlights the disconnect between librarians’ stated views and their behavior; however, one could argue that an individual might agree that something is good without feeling compelled to campaign for it. edited, In 2015, Kate Lara surveyed librarians concerning their role in the management and funding of OA. She reportedcopy a variety of perceived contributions by librarians to OA publishing, including providing access to OA content, funding article processing charges, and offering education. When asked about their role in encouraging and sup- porting OA, several respondents indicated that the library should lead OA initiatives: “These respondentsreviewed, felt that librarians were likely to be the most educated about open access and well suited for this role.”9 Holly Mercer investigated the 2008 OA publishing behaviors of academic librar- ians andpeer found that they engage at “slightly higher ratesis than peer authors, but not as often as is allowed The literature conveys a under current publisher policies.”10 Importantly for strong expectation for aca- mss.the study at hand, she also noted the responsibility of liaison librarians for OA advocacy, including the demic librarians to advo- This expectation to “advise authors to retain enough rights cate for OA and to facilitate to their published work to use in the classroom, to the participation of others. share with colleagues, and to deposit in an institu- tional or subject repository.”11 The literature conveys a strong expectation for academic librarians to advocate for OA and to facilitate the 638 A Selected Comparison of Music Librarians’ and Musicologists’ Self-Archiving Practices participation of others. Several institutions offer library workshops or other formalized ways to teach faculty, student authors, or both about scholarly publishing platforms, copyright, and self-archiving.12 Jill Emery investigated the green OA deposit rates of five Taylor & Francis Library and Information Science (LIS) journals over a five-year period (2012–2016) and found that only 22 percent of articles were available in repositories. These results excluded content on social platforms, including Academia.edu and ResearchGate, an exception the author made, she says, because “there is also a question of legality as to whether [such content] is 19.4. truly ‘green.’”13 Two recent articles also investigated the OA availability of research on the topic of OA.14 The OA availability of LIS literature has been studied by several authors and is not the focus of the study at hand. Instead, this paper aims to compare the OAportal availability of content published in selected music library and musicology journals by librarians and music researchers. The OA availability