Archive for the 'Scholarly Journals' Category

"The Impact of Open Access on Collection Management"

Posted in Open Access, Publishing, Research Libraries, Scholarly Books, Scholarly Journals on May 28th, 2015

Adelia Grabowsky has published "The Impact of Open Access on Collection Management" in Virginia Libraries.

Here's an excerpt:

This article examines if and how the integration of OA materials has changed collection and/or access management activities within academic libraries.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

Be Sociable, Share!

    Digital Video Recordings from the 2015 Conference: Creating and Supporting Sustainable Publishing Programs

    Posted in Publishing, Research Libraries, Scholarly Books, Scholarly Journals on May 28th, 2015

    The Library Publishing Coalition has released digital video recordings from the 2015 Conference: Creating and Supporting Sustainable Publishing Programs.

    Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

    Be Sociable, Share!

      DSpace@MIT Tops 3 Million Downloads

      Posted in Digital Repositories, Institutional Repositories, Open Access, Publishing, Scholarly Journals, Serials Crisis on May 26th, 2015

      MIT's DSpace@MIT repository has had over 3 million downloads as of the end of April.

      Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

      The Open Access Articles Collection in DSpace@MIT now contains over 16,600 articles, which collectively were downloaded over 90,000 times in April.

      Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

      Be Sociable, Share!

        "The OA Landscape in Summary Form: Act Now!"

        Posted in Open Access, Publishing, Scholarly Journals on May 22nd, 2015

        Walt Crawford has published "The OA Landscape in Summary Form: Act Now!" in Walt at Random.

        Here's an excerpt:

        The full set of 29 subject discussions that extend this summer's Library Technology Report issue "The State of Open Access Journals: Idealism and Opportunism" has been posted, and will appear on Fridays from now through September 11, 2015. (Oops: The actual title is Open Access Journals: Idealism and Opportunism.)

        Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

        Be Sociable, Share!

          23 Groups Oppose Elsevier’s New Sharing and Hosting Policy

          Posted in Open Access, Publishing, Scholarly Journals, Self-Archiving on May 21st, 2015

          SPARC has released "New Policy from Elsevier Impedes Open Access and Sharing."

          Here's an excerpt:

          [Statement]

          On April 30, 2015, Elsevier announced a new sharing and hosting policy for Elsevier journal articles. This policy represents a significant obstacle to the dissemination and use of research knowledge, and creates unnecessary barriers for Elsevier published authors in complying with funders' open access policies. In addition, the policy has been adopted without any evidence that immediate sharing of articles has a negative impact on publishers' subscriptions.

          Despite the claim by Elsevier that the policy advances sharing, it actually does the opposite. The policy imposes unacceptably long embargo periods of up to 48 months for some journals. It also requires authors to apply a "non-commercial and no derivative works" license for each article deposited into a repository, greatly inhibiting the re-use value of these articles. Any delay in the open availability of research articles curtails scientific progress and places unnecessary constraints on delivering the benefits of research back to the public.

          Furthermore, the policy applies to "all articles previously published and those published in the future" making it even more punitive for both authors and institutions. This may also lead to articles that are currently available being suddenly embargoed and inaccessible to readers.

          As organizations committed to the principle that access to information advances discovery, accelerates innovation and improves education, we support the adoption of policies and practices that enable the immediate, barrier free access to and reuse of scholarly articles. This policy is in direct conflict with the global trend towards open access and serves only to dilute the benefits of openly sharing research results.

          We strongly urge Elsevier to reconsider this policy and we encourage other organizations and individuals to express their opinions.

          The statement is available here and we welcome others to show their support by also endorsing it.

          The statement has been signed by the following groups:

          COAR: Confederation of Open Access Repositories
          SPARC: Scholarly Publishing and Academic Resources Coalition
          ACRL: Association of College and Research Libraries
          ALA: American Library Association
          ARL: Association of Research Libraries
          Association of Southeastern Research Libraries
          Australian Open Access Support Group
          IBICT: Brazilian Institute of Information in Science and Technology
          CARL: Canadian Association of Research Libraries
          CLACSO: Consejo Latinoamericano de Ciencias Sociales
          COAPI: Coalition of Open Access Policy Institutions
          Creative Commons
          Creative Commons (USA)
          EIFL
          Electronic Frontier Foundation
          Greater Western Library Alliance
          LIBER: European Research Library Association
          National Science Library, Chinese Academy of Sciences
          OpenAIRE
          Open Data Hong Kong
          Research Libraries UK
          SANLiC: South African National Licensing Consortium
          University of St Andrews Library

          Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

          Be Sociable, Share!

            University of Windsor Senate Adopts Open Access Policy

            Posted in Open Access, Publishing, Scholarly Journals, Self-Archiving on May 19th, 2015

            The University of Windsor Senate has adopted an open access policy.

            Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

            In recognition of the importance of providing open access to Windsor research, and building on the momentum of the Tri-Council Open Access Policy (CIHR, NSERC, SSHRC), University Senate passed the University of Windsor's own open access policy (OA), Friday May 8. . . .

            In Canada, the recent release of the Tri-Agency Open Access Policy on Publications requires grant recipients, as of May 2015, to take steps to ensure that peer-reviewed journal publications arising from supported research are made freely accessible within 12 months of publication.

            Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

            Be Sociable, Share!

              University of Colorado Boulder Adopts Open Access Policy

              Posted in Open Access, Publishing, Scholarly Journals on May 18th, 2015

              The University of Colorado Boulder has adopted an open access policy.

              Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

              "We are delighted that the Chancellor's Executive Committee has approved an Open Access policy for the campus that was endorsed by the Boulder Faculty Assembly, the Council of Deans, and the Office of the Provost and Executive Vice Chancellor," said University of Colorado Boulder Chancellor Philip P. DiStefano. "CU-Boulder proudly joins the ranks of other campuses in higher education that have created such policies in the interest of openly sharing their published intellectual assets."

              Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

              Be Sociable, Share!

                "Weighing Up Anonymity and Openness in Publication Peer Review"

                Posted in Publishing, Scholarly Journals on May 15th, 2015

                Hilda Bastian has published "Weighing Up Anonymity and Openness in Publication Peer Review" in Absolutely Maybe.

                Here's an excerpt:

                There are some consequences that flow inevitably from the choice of anonymity or naming, like workload for journals, or the ability for peer reviewer conflicts of interests unknown to editors to be revealed. I'll come back to that later. But first, what evidence do we have that masking the identities of authors and peer reviewers achieves what it is meant to? . . .

                So I've taken a deep dive into this literature. I found 17 relevant comparative studies, 12 of which are controlled trials. The quality of these studies varies greatly, especially the ability to control for variables. Some are in hypothetical situations. But there are some very good, decent-sized trials.

                Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

                Be Sociable, Share!

                  "The Open Access Interviews: John Willinsky"

                  Posted in Open Access, Open Source Software, Publishing, Scholarly Journals on May 11th, 2015

                  Richard Poynder has published "The Open Access Interviews: John Willinsky" in Open and Shut?.

                  Here's an excerpt:

                  I was fortunate enough to draw together a wonderful team, led by the Associate University Librarian Brian Owen and technical wonder Alec Smecher at Simon Fraser University Library, who, through the research and development funds we were able to raise, created open source systems for scholarly workflow management and publishing. Together, we created Open Journal Systems (OJS) beginning in 2002, to answer the question of what will it cost to put a journal online. . . .

                  Over the course of the next decade, the use of OJS has spread across the globe to the point where—with 8,000 journals actively using it in 2013—we now feel a considerable responsibility at PKP for ensuring that this system provides a high-quality editorial workflow and publishing environment, and all the more so with roughly half of those journals in the Global South.

                  So in terms of your question on what PKP has developed into, I would say that it has become primarily but not entirely an open source software development and community support project in a global scale.

                  Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

                  Be Sociable, Share!

                    "When Is an Article Actually Published? An Analysis of Online Availability, Publication, and Indexation Dates"

                    Posted in Publishing, Scholarly Journals on May 7th, 2015

                    Stefanie Haustein et al. have self-archived "When Is an Article Actually Published? An Analysis of Online Availability, Publication, and Indexation Dates."

                    Here's an excerpt:

                    With the acceleration of scholarly communication in the digital era, the publication year is no longer a sufficient level of time aggregation for bibliometric and social media indicators. Papers are increasingly cited before they have been officially published in a journal issue and mentioned on Twitter within days of online availability. In order to find a suitable proxy for the day of online publication allowing for the computation of more accurate benchmarks and fine-grained citation and social media event windows, various dates are compared for a set of 58,896 papers published by Nature Publishing Group, PLOS, Springer and Wiley-Blackwell in 2012. Dates include the online date provided by the publishers, the month of the journal issue, the Web of Science indexing date, the date of the first tweet mentioning the paper as well as the Altmetric.com publication and first-seen dates. Comparing these dates, the analysis reveals that large differences exist between publishers, leading to the conclusion that more transparency and standardization is needed in the reporting of publication dates. The date on which the fixed journal article (Version of Record) is first made available on the publisher's website is proposed as a consistent definition of the online date.

                    Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

                    Be Sociable, Share!

                      "Who Needs Open Access, Anyway?"

                      Posted in Open Access, Publishing, Scholarly Journals on May 6th, 2015

                      Walt Crawford has published "Who Needs Open Access, Anyway?" in Cites & Insights: Crawford at Large.

                      Here's an excerpt:

                      That title is not my own opinion or question—but it feels like the appropriate title for this odd roundup, covering several dozen items I've tagged over the last two years (or so) as " oa-anti. " The tag doesn't necessarily mean the item was a flat-out attack on open access (even with the typical "some of my best friends are OA, but… " nonsense that's usually now phrased as "I am/this publisher is/a big proponent of OA, however… "). It means that, in skimming the item initially, it seemed to register as something that either seemed to undermine OA or could be used as an attack on OA—or, in some cases, it's discussing somebody else attempting to undermine OA. At the end of this mostly-unsorted set of items, I note a handful of " oa-pro " items for a little balance.

                      You can help support Cites & Insights: Crawford at Large and Crawford's open access research by donating as little as $2 per month via PayPal.

                      Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

                      Be Sociable, Share!

                        "Thumbs Down for the Freemium Model? Researchers Reject Nature’s Fast Track Peer Review Experiment"

                        Posted in Open Access, Publishing, Scholarly Communication, Scholarly Journals on May 6th, 2015

                        David Crotty has published "Thumbs Down for the Freemium Model? Researchers Reject Nature's Fast Track Peer Review Experiment" in The Scholarly Kitchen.

                        Here's an excerpt:

                        NPG launched a four-week trial in their megajournal Scientific Reports. The journal features a Gold open access (OA) business model, where accepted authors pay a $1,495 article processing charge (APC). In the trial, authors willing to pay an additional $750 upfront would get their decision in three weeks. NPG would be able to offer this additional speed by outsourcing the peer review process to Rubriq, a service offered by the private company Research Square.

                        Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

                        Be Sociable, Share!

                          Page 1 of 3812345...102030...Last »

                          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 4.0 International license.