Attitudes towards open peer review, open data and use of preprints influence scientists’ engagement with those practices. Yet there is a lack of validated questionnaires that measure these attitudes. The goal of our study was to construct and validate such a questionnaire and use it to assess attitudes of Croatian scientists. We first developed a 21-item questionnaire called Attitudes towards Open data sharing, preprinting, and peer-review (ATOPP), which had a reliable four-factor structure, and measured attitudes towards open data, preprint servers, open peer-review and open peer-review in small scientific communities. We then used the ATOPP to explore attitudes of Croatian scientists (n = 541) towards these topics, and to assess the association of their attitudes with their open science practices and demographic information. Overall, Croatian scientists’ attitudes towards these topics were generally neutral, with a median (Md) score of 3.3 out of max 5 on the scale score. We also found no gender (P = 0.995) or field differences (P = 0.523) in their attitudes. However, attitudes of scientist who previously engaged in open peer-review or preprinting were higher than of scientists that did not (Md 3.5 vs. 3.3, P<0.001, and Md 3.6 vs 3.3, P<0.001, respectively). Further research is needed to determine optimal ways of increasing scientists’ attitudes and their open science practices.

Background: Although opinions of scientists about open access and the importance of their skills in information literacy have been investigated earlier but not, to our knowledge, of those in Croatia. Objective: The objective was to analyse the opinions on open access and on open-science practices before implementing open-science policies. Methods: Scientists at the University of Rijeka (N = 1256) were invited to complete, anonymously, an online questionnaire on open science (Google Forms) in 2020 and their responses were analysed. Results: Altogether 192 participants (a response rate 15%) were involved in this study, of which 110 (57%) were women. The mean age of the participants was 42 years (stand-ard deviation 11). The participants pursued careers in biomedical (37%), social (31%), or technical (14%) sciences; 20% were early-career researchers or postdoctoral research-ers, and 80% held the rank of assistant professor or higher. Most of them (88%) agreed that journals should be open access and 77% said they would choose the open-access journal if they had to choose between two journals with similar impact factors. Most (83%) considered publishing fees (article processing charges) to be too high; fewer than half (45%) considered the impact factor to be more important than open access; and 28% believed open access journals to be of lower quality. Nearly three-fourths (74%) had published at least one article in an open access journal, and 45%, without paying any fee. Only a few (10.9%) archived their articles in institutional or national repositories; more than a quarter (27%), on their web pages; and close to half (43%), on their social networks. To obtain papers not available to read online, more than half (56%) used Sci-Hub; slightly more than half (51%) wrote to the authors; 40% asked col-leagues for help; and 35% approached a librarian. Conclusions: Most of the scientists in our study were in favour of open access but con-sidered the publication fees to be too high. Their archiving was inadequate: few used any institutional or national repositories. Therefore, the scientists need to be more information literate and require guidance and help from librarians and will benefit from training in information literacy including the principles of open access.

Academic libraries in Croatia for the past fifteenth years have started implementing information literacy programmes for their users. Most frequent forms of information literacy programme delivery are library workshops with voluntary participation, conducted by librarians, either independently or through informal cooperation with academic staff on various courses. However, it can be assumed, because of non-systematic and sporadic information literacy programmes, that students of all years possess different levels of both generic and contextual information literacy skills in the field of law. Because of the small number of studies and the insufficient number of evidence, it can be assumed that there is not enough awareness regarding the promotion and relevance of the information literacy programmes. Thus, it can be concluded that the programmes are insufficient, or if they exist, they do not rely on the real needs of students, teachers and other participants in the educational process. The aim of the paper is to point to some of the most important models and standards of information literacy in the field of law and medicine in the world by using qualitative method of analysing the content of relevant literature in the area of information literacy in the field of law and medicine. The purpose of the research is to broaden theoretical knowledge and to improve the teaching of information literacy in the field of law and medicine in the Republic of Croatia. On a practical level, the explored models and standards can serve as a theoretical framework for creating formal programmes of information literacy in law libraries’ practice, as well as for improving practice in libraries with similar experience in other countries.

Attitudes towards open peer review, open data and use of preprints influence scientists’ engagement with those practices. Yet there is a relatively small number of validated questionnaires that measure these attitudes. The goal of our study was to construct and validate such a questionnaire. Using a sample of Croatian scientists (N=541), from a wide range of disciplines, we developed a questionnaire titled Attitudes towards Open data sharing, preprinting, and peer-review (ATOPP). The questionnaire has 21 item with a four-factor structure (attitudes towards: open data, preprint servers, open peer-review and open peer-review in small scientific communities). Based on the questionnaire, the attitudes of Croatian scientists towards these topics were generally neutral, with a median of 3.3 out of 5 of the total attitude score. Croatian scientist attitudes were lowest for open peer-review in small scientific communities (Md 2.0) and highest for open data (Md 3.9).

Background: Open science is „the opening of the entire research process, i.e., conducting scientific research in an open and collaborative manner that allows for the participation and use of all results of research activities in a transparent manner“(1). It is very important that institutions adopt open science policies and implement open science practices in order to raise quality of their scientific output. Rijeka University was the first institution in Croatia with a declaration on open science (2), open science policy and open science office. Croatia is one of the top open access countries (3). Aim: We have compared open-access articles in different scientific fields before and after implementing open science policies in order to measure their implementation at the University of Rijeka, Croatia. Methods: We have searched Scopus bibliographic database and compared open-access articles before (2017-2019) and after (2020-2022) implementing open science policies at the University of Rijeka, Croatia. The Scopus search was done through a query string that includes affiliation field code (University of Rijeka). The data were further refined according to range of years (2017-2019 / 2020-2022), document type (article) and subject area field code. We have also compared the open-access articles by field before and after the implementation. The proportions were compared with test of proportions. Results: Overall, there has been 1370 articles published in 2017-2019 and 1945 in 2020-2022, which is an increase of 42% (Table 1). Fifty-five percent (755 out of 1370) of articles are in open-access for the period 2017-2019, while there are significantly more open-access articles (p<0.001) – 70% (1370 out of 1945) in 2020-2022. Proportion of open-access articles were larger in 2020-2022 in all fields except for biomedicine and art and humanities. Conclusion: It seems that implementation of open science policies at the University of Rijeka gave positive results in regards to open-access articles. Open science promotion may have influenced authors to publish more open-access articles. References:University of Rijeka. Open science policy of the University of Rijeka. 2021; Avaliable at: https://uniri.hr/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/UNIRI-Policy-OS-EN-FINAL_svkri.pdfUniversity of Rijeka. European Open Science Declaration. 2019: Avaliable at: https://svkri.uniri.hr/images/Deklaracija_Europska_otvorena_znanost.pdfVan Noorden R. Indonesia tops open-access publishing charts. Nature. 2019 May 15. doi: 10.1038/d41586-019-01536-5. https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-01536-5