Archive for the 'Scholarly Journals' Category

Elsevier: "Unleashing the Power of Academic Sharing"

Posted in Open Access, Publishing, Scholarly Journals, Self-Archiving on May 4th, 2015

Elsevier has released "Unleashing the Power of Academic Sharing."

Here's an excerpt:

Elsevier's updated sharing and hosting policies explain how articles published with Elsevier may be shared and made available. These provide a more clear and consistent framework that is aligned with the rest of the publishing industry, and which is based on feedback from our authors and institutional partners. While we know the policy changes will not go as far as some would like, we believe they strike an appropriate balance between the rights and responsibilities of sharing.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

Be Sociable, Share!

    "Four Facets of Privacy and Intellectual Freedom in Licensing Contracts for Electronic Journals"

    Posted in Licenses, Privacy, Publishing, Scholarly Journals on April 30th, 2015

    Alan Rubel and Mei Zhang have published "Four Facets of Privacy and Intellectual Freedom in Licensing Contracts for Electronic Journals" in College & Research Libraries.

    Here's an excerpt:

    This is a study of the treatment of library patron privacy in licenses for electronic journals in academic libraries. We begin by distinguishing four facets of privacy and intellectual freedom based on the LIS and philosophical literature. Next, we perform a content analysis of 42 license agreements for electronic journals, focusing on terms for enforcing authorized use and collection and sharing of user data. We compare our findings to model licenses, to recommendations proposed in a recent treatise on licenses, and to our account of the four facets of intellectual freedom. We find important conflicts with each.

    Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

    Be Sociable, Share!

      Disrupting the Subscription Journals’ Business Model for the Necessary Large-Scale Transformation to Open Access

      Posted in Open Access, Publishing, Reports and White Papers, Scholarly Journals on April 29th, 2015

      The Max Planck Digital Library has released Disrupting the Subscription Journals' Business Model for the Necessary Large-Scale Transformation to Open Access .

      Here's an excerpt:

      This paper makes the strong, fact-based case for a large-scale transformation of the current corpus of scientific subscription journals to an open access business model. The existing journals, with their well-tested functionalities, should be retained and developed to meet the demands of 21st century research, while the underlying payment streams undergo a major restructuring. There is sufficient momentum for this decisive push towards open access publishing. The diverse existing initiatives must be coordinated so as to converge on this clear goal. The international nature of research implies that this transformation will be achieved on a truly global scale only through a consensus of the world's most eminent research organizations. All the indications are that the money already invested in the research publishing system is sufficient to enable a transformation that will be sustainable for the future. There needs to be a shared understanding that the money currently locked in the journal subscription system must be withdrawn and re-purposed for open access publishing services. The current library acquisition budgets are the ultimate reservoir for enabling the transformation without financial or other risks. The goal is to preserve the established service levels provided by publishers that are still requested b y researchers, while redefining and reorganizing the necessary payment streams. By disrupting the underlying business model, the viability of journal publishing can be preserved and put on a solid footing for the scholarly developments of the future.

      Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

      Be Sociable, Share!

        "Whole Lotta Shakin’ Goin’ On | Periodicals Price Survey 2015"

        Posted in Open Access, Publishing, Scholarly Journals, Serials Crisis on April 24th, 2015

        Stephen Bosch and Kittie Henderson have published "Whole Lotta Shakin' Goin' On | Periodicals Price Survey 2015" in Library Journal.

        Here's an excerpt:

        Open access (OA) continues to develop, but some financial analysts, such as Sami Kassab, executive director at investment firm Exane BNP Paribas, now believe that OA may no longer be a pressure point on commercial publishing. OA has not been the disruptive force on commercial publishing for which many had hoped.

        Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

        Be Sociable, Share!

          50 Universities or University Units Have Now Adopted Open Access Policies by Unanimous Faculty Votes

          Posted in Open Access, Publishing, Scholarly Journals, Self-Archiving on April 20th, 2015

          With recent votes by Boston University and University of Delaware faculty, 50 universities or university units, such as schools, have now adopted open access policies by unanimous faculty votes.

          Here's a list from Unanimous Faculty Votes. See the original document for omitted details, and see the recently revised (and praised) Registry of Open Access Repositories Mandatory Archiving Policies (ROARMAP) for a complete list of over 670 open access policies.

          1. February 12, 2008. Harvard University, Faculty of Arts and Sciences
          2. April 27, 2008. Macquarie University
          3. May 7, 2008, Harvard University, School of Law
          4. June 10, 2008, Stanford University, School of Education
          5. October 2008, University College London (UCL)
          6. February 11, 2009. Boston University
          7. March 6, 2009, Oregon State University, Library Faculty
          8. March 18, 2009, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT)
          9. May 2009. University of Calgary, division of Library and Cultural Resources
          10. May 2009. University of Pretoria
          11. May 7, 2009, University of Oregon, Library Faculty
          12. May 14, 2009, University of Oregon, Department of Romance Languages
          13. May 14, 2009, Gustavus Adolphus College, Library Faculty
          14. October 1, 2009, York University, librarians and archivists
          15. October, 2009. Universidad de Oriente (Venezuela)
          16. November 18, 2009, Oberlin College
          17. December 2, 2009, University of Northern Colorado, Library Faculty
          18. February 1, 2010, Wake Forest University, Library faculty
          19. February 9, 2010, California Polytechnic State University
          20. February 12, 2010, Oregon State University College of Oceanic and Atmospheric Sciences (COAS)
          21. February 24, 2010, University of Virginia
          22. February 25, 2010, Rollins College Faculty of Arts and Sciences
          23. March 18, 2010, Duke University
          24. March 24, 2010, University of Puerto Rico School of Law
          25. April 19, 2010, San Jose State University
          26. September 27, 2010, University of Northern Colorado
          27. October 2010, Trinity College Dublin
          28. December 22, 2010, Columbia University's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory
          29. March 15, 2011, Emory University
          30. May 11, 2011, University of Pennsylvania
          31. September 2011, Princeton University
          32. October 19, 2011, Florida State University
          33. December 8, 2011, Pacific University
          34. January 27, 2012, Bifröst University
          35. February 15, 2012, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education at the University of Toronto
          36. April 2012, Utah State University
          37. May 21, 2012, University of California, San Francisco
          38. February 6, 2013, Wellesley College
          39. March 4, 2013, College of Wooster
          40. March 5, 2013, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, Library faculty
          41. March 21, 2013, University of Rhode Island
          42. April 2013, Mailman School of Public Health at Columbia University
          43. June 13, 2013, Oregon State University
          44. December 2013, Télé-université (TELUQ), Université du Québec
          45. December 2, 2013, Columbia University, School of Social Work
          46. June 18, 2014, Harvard Medical School
          47. October 7, 2014, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI)
          48. October 9, 2014, Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University
          49. February 11, 2015, Boston University
          50. April 6, 2015, University of Delaware

          Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

          Be Sociable, Share!

            "Open Access Policy: Numbers, Analysis, Effectiveness"

            Posted in Legislation and Government Regulation, Open Access, Publishing, Reports and White Papers, Scholarly Journals, Self-Archiving on April 13th, 2015

            A. Swan et al. have self-archived "Open Access Policy: Numbers, Analysis, Effectiveness".

            Here's an excerpt:

            The PASTEUR4OA project analyses what makes an Open Access (OA) policy effective. The total number of institutional or funder OA policies worldwide is now 663 (March 2015), over half of them mandatory. ROARMAP, the policy registry, has been rebuilt to record more policy detail and provide more extensive search functionality. Deposit rates were measured for articles in institutions' repositories and compared to the total number of WoS-indexed articles published from those institutions. Average deposit rate was over four times as high for institutions with a mandatory policy. Six positive correlations were found between deposit rates and (1) Must-Deposit; (2) Cannot-Waive-Deposit; (3) Deposit-Linked-to-Research-Evaluation; (4) Cannot-Waive-Rights-Retention; (5) Must-Make-Deposit-OA (after allowable embargo) and (6) Can-Waive-OA. For deposit latency, there is a positive correlation between earlier deposit and (7) Must-Deposit-Immediately as well as with (4) Cannot-Waive-Rights-Retention and with mandate age. There are not yet enough OA policies to test whether still further policy conditions would contribute to mandate effectiveness but the present findings already suggest that it would be useful for current and future OA policies to adopt the seven positive conditions so as to accelerate and maximise the growth of OA.

            Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

            Be Sociable, Share!

              "Next Up for Agency Public Access Plans: NOAA"

              Posted in Data Curation, Open Data, and Research Data Management, Legislation and Government Regulation, Open Access, Publishing, Scholarly Journals, Self-Archiving on April 10th, 2015

              SPARC has released "Next Up for Agency Public Access Plans: NOAA" by Heather Joseph.

              Here's an excerpt:

              The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has released its plan to create policies ensuring public access to articles and data resulting from its funded research, as required by the February 2013 White House directive. . . .

              The NOAA plan calls for all agency-funded intramural and extramural researchers to deposit final, accepted manuscripts into the agency's repository upon acceptance in a peer-reviewed journal. Unlike many of the other agencies that have released plans to date, NOAA will also require its investigators to submit technical reports, data reports, and technical memoranda into the repository as well—significantly increasing the scope of the materials covered by the agency's policy.

              NOAA will use the OSTP-suggested 12-month embargo period as its baseline. Like other agencies, it will provide stakeholders with a mechanism for petitioning the agency to change the embargo period. The plan indicates that requests must include evidence that outweighs the public benefit of having the embargo remain at one year. . . .

              Currently, funded researchers are required to make data "visible and accessible" within two years. The new plan calls for this time frame to be shortened to just one year. It also indicates that data underlying the conclusions of peer-reviewed articles will most likely be required to be made available at the time of the article's publication, in appropriate repositories (presumably to be designated by NOAA).

              Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

              Be Sociable, Share!

                "Dramatic Growth of Open Access 2015 First Quarter"

                Posted in Institutional Repositories, Open Access, Publishing, Scholarly Journals, Self-Archiving on April 9th, 2015

                Heather Morrison has published "Dramatic Growth of Open Access 2015 First Quarter" in The Imaginary Journal of Poetic Economics.

                Here's an excerpt:

                OpenDOAR added 129 repositories for a total of 2,857. The Bielefeld Academic Search Engine added close to 3 million documents for a total of over 71 million documents. Another 7,690 authors joined the Social Sciences Research Network for a total of over 275,000 authors.

                Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

                Be Sociable, Share!

                  "NIST Releases Public Access Plan: Agency will Partner with NIH to use PMC Platform"

                  Posted in Legislation and Government Regulation, Open Access, Publishing, Scholarly Journals, Self-Archiving on April 9th, 2015

                  SPARC has released "NIST Releases Public Access Plan: Agency will Partner with NIH to use PMC Platform" by Heather Joseph.

                  Here's an excerpt:

                  NIST's plan calls for the agency to partner with the National Institutes of Health (NIH), to use PubMed Central (PMC) as the repository for articles. The plan indicated that NIST selected this option in order to "leverage the well-established search, archival, and dissemination features of PMC."

                  All NIST-funded researchers will be required to deposit their final peer-reviewed manuscripts into PMC upon acceptance in a peer-reviewed journal and make them available to the public with no longer than a 12-month embargo period. NIST will also accept final published articles where allowed and will follow the NIH's current format requirements. As with the other agencies, NIST will provide stakeholders with a mechanism for petitioning the agency to "shorten or extend the allowable embargo period." NIST envisions that this process would take place through a public petition process run through the Federal Register. . . .

                  NIST's plan for providing public access to data consists of three components: requiring data management plans (DMPs), creating an Enterprise Data Inventory (EDI), and establishing a Common Access Platform providing a public access infrastructure.

                  Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

                  Be Sociable, Share!

                    "Should I Stay or Should I Go? Alternative Infrastructures in Scholarly Publishing"

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

                    Carl Lagoze, et al. have published "Should I Stay or Should I Go? Alternative Infrastructures in Scholarly Publishing" in the International Journal of Communication.

                    Here's an excerpt:

                    For more than three-and-a-half centuries, the scholarly infrastructure—composed of commercial publishers, learned societies, libraries, and the scholars themselves—has provided the foundation functions of certification, registration, access, preservation, and reward. However, over the last two decades, the stability of this infrastructure has been disrupted by profound changes in the technological, economic, cultural, and political climate. We examine the actions of scholars in response to this infrastructure instability through the lens of Hirschman's "exit, voice, and loyalty" framework. We describe the motivations and actions by scholars, especially those with tenure, who have chosen exit from the mainstream scholarly communication infrastructure to a proliferation of newly available alternative infrastructures. However, this option is not practical for all scholars due to the "enforced loyalty" imposed by reward systems based on metrics that are intricately tied to the traditional infrastructure. We examine the alternative of voice exercised by these scholars, combined with the threat of exit that has changed policies that are the source of dissatisfaction with the system.

                    Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

                    Be Sociable, Share!

                      CHORUS Progress Report, April 2015

                      Posted in Open Access, Publishing, Scholarly Journals on April 3rd, 2015

                      CHORUS has released the CHORUS Progress Report, April 2015.

                      Here's an excerpt:

                      As of this month, CHORUS is providing access to and information about tens of thousands of articles reporting on federally funded research. CHORUS was also named by the US Department of Energy as part of its public-access solution. The significant progress we've made in the eight months since we moved into full production mode is a great foundation for CHORUS to build on for the benefit of the scholarly community. This report is a summary of our achievements during this pivotal period.

                      Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

                      Be Sociable, Share!

                        Cogent OA Launches Experimental Freedom APCs Program Letting Authors Choose What to Pay

                        Posted in Open Access, Publishing, Scholarly Journals on April 3rd, 2015

                        Cogent OA has launched an experimental Freedom APCs Program.

                        Here's an excerpt from the announcement:

                        Through Cogent OA's Freedom APC model, authors are requested to explore all avenues for funding the publication of their article, such as their funding agency, institution or company and to select a fee from a range of options based on their circumstances and how much they can afford to pay. The final decision rests with the author.

                        Further information: Article Publishing Charges (APCs).

                        Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

                        Be Sociable, Share!

                          Page 10 of 46« First...89101112...203040...Last »

                          DigitalKoans

                          DigitalKoans

                          Digital Scholarship

                          Copyright © 2005-2016 by Charles W. Bailey, Jr.

                          Creative Commons License
                          This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International license.