Archive for the 'Open Science' Category

"Persistent, Global Identity for Scientists via ORCID"

Posted in Metadata, Open Science on February 24th, 2015

August E. Evrard et al. have self-archived "Persistent, Global Identity for Scientists via ORCID."

Here's an excerpt:

Scientists have an inherent interest in claiming their contributions to the scholarly record, but the fragmented state of identity management across the landscape of astronomy, physics, and other fields makes highlighting the contributions of any single individual a formidable and often frustratingly complex task. The problem is exacerbated by the expanding variety of academic research products and the growing footprints of large collaborations and interdisciplinary teams. In this essay, we outline the benefits of a unique scholarly identifier with persistent value on a global scale and we review astronomy and physics engagement with the Open Researcher and Contributor iD (ORCID) service as a solution.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

"Why Principal Investigators Funded by the U.S. National Institutes of Health Publish in the Public Library of Science Journals"

Posted in Open Science, Publishing, Scholarly Journals on January 23rd, 2015

Nancy Pontika has published "Why Principal Investigators Funded by the U.S. National Institutes of Health Publish in the Public Library of Science Journals" in Information Research.

Here's an excerpt:

The Institutes-funded investigators submitted to the Public Library of Science journals because they favour the high impact factor, fast publication speed, fair peer-review system and the articles/ immediate open access availability.

Conclusions. The requirements of the National Institutes' public access policy do not influence the investigators' decision to submit to one of the Public Library of Science journals and do not increase their familiarity with open access publishing options.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

"Science 2.0 Repositories: Time for a Change in Scholarly Communication"

Posted in Digital Repositories, Open Science on January 19th, 2015

Massimiliano Assante, et al. have published "Science 2.0 Repositories: Time for a Change in Scholarly Communication" in D-Lib Magazine.

Here's an excerpt:

Information and communication technology (ICT) advances in research infrastructures are continuously changing the way research and scientific communication are performed. Scientists, funders, and organizations are moving the paradigm of "research publishing" well beyond traditional articles. The aim is to pursue an holistic approach where publishing includes any product (e.g. publications, datasets, experiments, software, web sites, blogs) resulting from a research activity and relevant to the interpretation, evaluation, and reuse of the activity or part of it. The implementation of this vision is today mainly inspired by literature scientific communication workflows, which separate the "where" research is conducted from the "where" research is published and shared. In this paper we claim that this model cannot fit well with scientific communication practice envisaged in Science 2.0 settings. We present the idea of Science 2.0 Repositories (SciRepos), which meet publishing requirements arising in Science 2.0 by blurring the distinction between research life-cycle and research publishing. SciRepos interface with the ICT services of research infrastructures to intercept and publish research products while providing researchers with social networking tools for discovery, notification, sharing, discussion, and assessment of research products.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

"Nevermind the Data, Where Are the Protocols?"

Posted in Data Curation, Open Data, and Research Data Management, Open Science on November 19th, 2014

David Crotty has published "Nevermind the Data, Where Are the Protocols?" in The Scholarly Kitchen.

This is more complicated than you might think. The smallest variations in technique or reagents can lead to major differences in results. The scant information offered by most journals' Materials and Methods sections makes replication fairly impossible. Often when describing a technique, an author will merely cite a previous paper where they used that technique…which also cites a previous paper, which also cites a previous paper and the wild goose chase is on. Methodologies evolve over time, and even if you can track down the original source of the technique, it likely has changed a great deal over the years.

Digital Scholarship | "A Quarter-Century as an Open Access Publisher"

Open Science Commons

Posted in Data Curation, Open Data, and Research Data Management, Open Science on November 13th, 2014

The European Grid Infrastructure has released Open Science Commons.

Here's an excerpt:

With this paper, the European Grid Infrastructure (EGI) proposes the Open Science Commons as a new approach to digital research, tackling policy challenges and embracing open science as a new paradigm for knowledge creation and collaboration. EGI invites organisations from the research landscape to join it in this journey to develop these concepts, and through them to advance the implementation of the European Research Area.

Digital Scholarship | "A Quarter-Century as an Open Access Publisher"

All Harvard Schools Now Have Open Access Policies

Posted in Open Access, Open Science, Publishing, Self-Archiving on October 24th, 2014

With the adoption of an open access policy in June by the Harvard Medical School, all Harvard schools now have open access policies.

Here’s an excerpt from the announcement:

Harvard Medical School adopted an open-access policy on June 18, 2014, by a unanimous vote of the Faculty Council. The new policy covers both "quad"-based and clinical faculty. Now all Harvard schools have open-access policies.

Like the other Harvard policies, the Medical School policy insures that faculty members automatically retain a license to share their research papers freely through DASH (Digital Access to Scholarship at Harvard), the University’s open-access repository. Faculty also have the option to waive this license for any article, preserving their freedom to submit new work to the journals of their choice. When faculty write articles covered by the Medical School policy and the policy at the National Institutes of Health (NIH), they need only deposit once to comply with both.

Digital Scholarship | "A Quarter-Century as an Open Access Publisher"

"Journals and ‘Journals': Taking a Deeper Look"

Posted in Open Science, Publishing, Scholarly Journals on October 14th, 2014

Walt Crawford has published "Journals and 'Journals': Taking a Deeper Look" in Cites & Insights: Crawford at Large.

Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

This essay builds on the July 2014 Cites & Insights investigation by including full article counts for the thousands of OA journals in Beall's lists (that is, those that actually publish articles!) and those published by OASPA members, extending the article counts back to 2011, and modifying the groups of journals to be more meaningful.

It also introduces the rough numbers for the new set of Gold OA journals that will form the heart of Part 2 of this two-part essay (the December 2014 C&I), namely more than three thousand journals in the Directory of Open Access Journals as of May 7, 2014 that aren't in one of the other two sets, that do have enough English in the interface for me to analyze them and that are not on biology-related or human medicine-related topics.

Digital Scholarship | "A Quarter-Century as an Open Access Publisher"

"Putting Open Science into Practice: A Social Dilemma?"

Posted in Open Access, Open Science on September 10th, 2014

Kaja Scheliga and Sascha Friesike have published "Putting Open Science into Practice: A Social Dilemma?" in First Monday.

Here's an excerpt from the press release:

Digital technologies carry the promise of transforming science and opening up the research process. We interviewed researchers from a variety of backgrounds about their attitudes towards and experiences with openness in their research practices. We observe a considerable discrepancy between the concept of open science and scholarly reality. While many researchers support open science in theory, the individual researcher is confronted with various difficulties when putting open science into practice. We analyse the major obstacles to open science and group them into two main categories: individual obstacles and systemic obstacles. We argue that the phenomenon of open science can be seen through the prism of a social dilemma: what is in the collective best interest of the scientific community is not necessarily in the best interest of the individual scientist. We discuss the possibilities of transferring theoretical solutions to social dilemma problems to the realm of open science.

Digital Scholarship | "A Quarter-Century as an Open Access Publisher"


DigitalKoans

DigitalKoans

Digital Scholarship

Copyright © 2005-2015 by Charles W. Bailey, Jr.

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.