Open Access in the Social Sciences / By Ulrich Herb, Saarland University and State Library
社会科学的开放获取 / 乌利希·赫布（萨尔兰大学与州立图书馆）

The social sciences can only be vaguely defined: for example, the Brockhaus encyclopaedia provides a broader definition than the classification adopted by DFG (German Research Foundation). In addition, some subjects can be classified as social sciences, natural sciences and humanities. This conglomerate of subjects explains why there are different attitudes towards Open Access within the social sciences.
社会科学只能做模糊的定义，比如布鲁克豪斯百科全书的定义较德国研究基金会的分类更加宽松，甚至还有些学科可以归入社会科学、自然科学及人文科学。这种学科的联合性质，说明了为何在社会科学中，对开放获取有着不同的态度。

However, a DFG study published in 2005(56) provides some insight: compared to other disciplines, German social scientists have scarce knowledge of Open Access, and of relevant initiatives and declarations(57). They have less knowledge about relevant Open Access journals and they almost never publish in these kinds of journals(58). These characteristics are not just evident with respect to first publications with Open Access publishers or in Open Access journals; German social scientists also rarely use Open Access servers for second publications of published documents or of preprints. International inquiries confirm these findings(59): social scientists publish work on Open Access servers less often than is average in other disciplines and are often not familiar with any Open Access journals in which they could publish their work.
然而，德国研究基金会于2005年发表的研究报告（注56）指出：相对于其它学科，德国的社会科学家对开放获取认识不足，也不知道相关的倡议与声明（注57）。他们不太了解相关的开放获取期刊，几乎不曾在这类期刊上发表论文（注58）。从开放获取出版社的最初出版物与开放获取期刊，很容易看出这些特征。德国的社会科学家也很少使用开放获取服务器，用于已问世文件的再次发表或预印本。国际性的调查研究证实了这些发现（注59）：与其它学科相比，社会科学家在开放获取服务器上发表作品的，远底于平均水平，而且不熟悉任何可发表其作品的开放获取期刊。

注56: Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Publikationsstrategien im Wandel? Ergebnisse einer Umfrage zum Publikations- und Rezeptionsverhalten unter besonderer Berücksichtigung von Open Access, Bonn 2005.
德国研究基金会：出版战略的变化？转变中的出版策略？就开放获取对出版习惯及信息获取的研究结果. 波恩，2005
注57: 这里的社会科学指的是: 社会学、社会研究、政治学、教育学、心理学、经济学及法学等, 也包括更中广泛的媒体研究、民族学与人类学。
注58: 或许可归咎于没有像科学公共图书馆或生物医中心之类的出版社。
注59：Swan, Alma & Brown, Sheridan, Open Access self-archiving: An author study = [开放获取自存档：作者研究], Truro (UK) 2005.

This lack of knowledge stands in contrast to the numerous services that are available: in Germany, the institutional Open Access server coverage for authors at the local university is exemplary(60). However, fewer than 20% of the documents on these servers(61) come from the social sciences. According to a DFG study, social scientists, more than other academics, request discipline-based servers. Already existing examples in the social sciences are the Munich Personal RePEc Archive MPRA of the Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität of Munich for economists (http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de), and PsyDok, the psychology server of the Saarland University and State Library (http://psydok.sulb.uni-saarland.de). Similar servers are being set up with the Social Science Open Access Repository (SSOAR) at the Centre for Digital Systems (CediS) of the Freie Universität Berlin in cooperation with the Social Science Information Centre (IZ Sozialwissenschaften) in Bonn, or Pedagogical Documents (PeDoc) by the German Institute for International Pedagogical Research (DIPF).
与缺乏了解状况形成对照的，是有多种服务可用：在德国，机构的开放获取服务器覆盖了本大学的作者即是一个例证（注60）。然而，这些服务器上的文件，只有不到20％来自于社会科学（注61）。据德国研究基金会的研究，社会科学家比其它领域的学者更期望使用学科型的服务器。社会科学的例子有：路德维希-马克西米利安慕尼黑大学供经济学家使用的“慕尼黑个人存档处”MPRA（http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de），以及萨尔兰大学与州立图书馆的“心理学服务器”PsyDok（http://psydok.sulb.uni-saarland.de）。其它类似的服务器还有：与波恩的社会科学信息中心（IZ Sozialwissenschaften）合作，柏林自由大学数字系统中心建立的“社会科学开放获取典藏库”（SSOAR），以及德国国际教育研究所的“教育文献”PeDoc。

注60：Van Westrienen, Gerard & Lynch, Clifford, 'Academic Institutional Repositories. Deployment Status in 13 Nations as of Mid 2005' = [学术机构库，2005年中在13个国家的建置情况], in: D-Lib Magazine 11 (2005), http://www.dlib.org/dlib/september05/westrienen/09westrienen.html.
注61：参见 Deutsche Initiative für Netzwerkinformation DINI e.V. (http://www.dini.de).

Of more than 2 600 journals listed in the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ: http://www.doaj.org), approximately 23% can be attributed to the social sciences, and fewer than 20 are published in Germany. The frontrunner is the trilingual journal Forum: Qualitative Social Research FQS (http://www.qualitative-research.net/fqs/), which has already been accessed some 16 million times. It is probably the most important online journal for qualitative social research. Others to be mentioned are Survey Research Methods (http://surveymethods.org), the psychology journal Brains, Minds & Media (http://www.brains-minds-media.org) and the education journal Bildungsforschung (http://www.bildungsforschung.org).
开放获取期刊目录（DOAJ，http//www.doaj.org）收录2600多种期刊，约有23％属于社会科学领域，其中在德国出版的不到20种。领先者是三语期刊论坛《定性社会研究FQS》（http://www.qualitative- research.net/fqs/），已被访问约1600万次，可能是定性社会研究领域里最重要的在线期刊。其它被提到的期刊还有：《调查研究方法》（http://surveymethods.org）、心理学期刊《大脑、思维与媒体》（http://www.brains-minds-media.org）和教育期刊《教育研究》（http:// www.bildungsforschung.org）。

The acceptance of Open Access depends on its recognition within a specific area of expertise. There are some positive signals here: the German Sociological Association (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Soziologie, DGS), the German Educational Research Association (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Erziehungswissenschaft, DGfE) and the German Psychological Society (Deutsche Gesellschaft für Psychologie, DGPs) are represented on the advisory committee of the Information Platform on Open Access. (http://www.open-access.net), which addresses scientists and scholars, universities and learned societies. The DGPs even makes recommendations regarding Open Access. As the DFG study shows, this is the right way to go: the more knowledge of and experience with Open Access there is, the fewer the reservations.
对公开获取的接受度，取决于特定专业领域对它的认识。有一些正面的讯息：德国社会学学会（Deutsche Gesellschaft für Soziologie, DGS）、德国教育研究学会（Deutsche Gesellschaft für Erziehungswissenschaft, DGfE）和德国心理学会(Deutsche Gesellschaft für Psychologie, DGPs），派代表参加由科学家与学者、大学与学会组成的开放获取信息平台（http://www.open-access.net）的咨询委员会。德国心理学会甚至推荐开放获取。如德国研究基金会研究所示，正确的方向是：对开放获取的了解及经验越多，持保留态度的就越少。

p. 84-85
开放获取 : 机会及挑战, http://tinyurl.com/dck7v9

Open Access : Opportunities and Challenges. A handbook [开放获取 : 机会及挑战] / European Commission, German Commission for UNESCO. -- Luxembourg : Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 2008. -- 144 p., 14.8 x 21.0 cm. -- ISBN 978-92-79-06665-8. -- EUR 23459, http://tinyurl.com/3q8wo5

Open Access : Chancen und Herausforderungen : ein Handbuch. -- Bonn : Deutsche UNESCO-Kommission, 2007. -- 136 Seiten. -- ISBN 3-927907-96-0. http://www.unesco.de/fileadmin/medien/Dokumente/Kommunikation/Handbuch_Open_Access.pdf