Archive for the 'Self-Archiving' Category

"Stepping Back from Sharing"

Posted in Open Access, Publishing, Scholarly Journals, Self-Archiving on May 5th, 2015

Kevin Smith has published "Stepping Back from Sharing" in Scholarly Communications @ Duke.

Here's an excerpt:

Two major features of this retreat from openness need to be highlighted. First, it imposes an embargo of at least one year on all self-archiving of final authors' manuscripts, and those embargoes can be as long as four years. Second, when the time finally does roll around when an author can make her own work available through an institutional repository, Elsevier now dictates how that access is to be controlled, mandating the most restrictive form of Creative Commons license, the CC-BY-NC-ND license for all green open access.

See also: "Elsevier Updates Its Article-Sharing Policies, Perspectives and Services" and "GET IT IN WRITING: On Elsevier's Revised Sharing/Hosting Policies."

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

Be Sociable, Share!

    "Global Scholarship: The Role of Subject Repositories in Advancing Research from the Developing World"

    Posted in Digital Repositories, Disciplinary Archives, Open Access, Self-Archiving on May 5th, 2015

    Julia Kelly and Linda Eells have published "Global Scholarship: The Role of Subject Repositories in Advancing Research from the Developing World" in College & Research Libraries News.

    Here's an excerpt:

    While subject repositories successfully fill a scholarly communication niche in particular disciplines, they have not been recognized for the important role they play in promoting global scholarship. Repositories such as AgEcon Search make valuable and unique contributions by increasing publishing options for researchers and thus exposing and distributing research produced in the developing world.

    Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

    Be Sociable, Share!

      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!

        "A Network Approach to Scholarly Communication Infrastructure"

        Posted in Open Access, Publishing, Self-Archiving on April 28th, 2015

        Rebecca Kennison and Lisa Norberg have published "A Network Approach to Scholarly Communication Infrastructure" in EDUCAUSE Review.

        Here's an excerpt:

        The open-access movement, fueled by the digital revolution, is transforming the business of scholarly communication, affecting the entire value chain. Rapidly emerging technologies have been crucial enablers of this transformation, blurring traditional roles and attracting new participants. The infrastructure and the economic framework established to support a centuries-old model of scholarly publishing are no longer adequate to the task. We believe that a radically different approach is required-one that is open, flexible, collaborative, and networked.

        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!

                    Department of Defense Releases Draft Plan to Establish Public Access to the Results of Federally Funded Research

                    Posted in Legislation and Government Regulation, Open Access, Publishing, Self-Archiving on March 19th, 2015

                    The Department of Defense has released a draft Plan to Establish Public Access to the Results of Federally Funded Research .

                    Here's an excerpt from the SPARC announcement:

                    It calls for all DoD-funded researchers to deposit final peer-reviewed manuscripts into the Department's "Defense Technical Information Center" (DTIC) repository. All articles will be made available to the public with no longer than a 12 embargo period. . . .

                    The DoD draft plan doesn't elaborate on reuse rights for articles in the DTIC database, other than to note that articles will be subject to copyright and related license terms. Articles authored by DoD employees, however, will carry a full government use license. . . .

                    One significant place where the DoD's draft plan differs from others released to date is in the area of compliance. The Department indicates that it plans to develop its own "compliance monitor," that will issue "certification tokens" to authors who submit articles and datasets to the DoD under the new policies. The current document doesn't provide any additional details, but the concept of tokens is an intriguing one.

                    Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

                    Be Sociable, Share!

                      "What Factors Influence Where Researchers Deposit their Data? A Survey of Researchers Submitting to Data Repositories"

                      Posted in Data Curation, Open Data, and Research Data Management, Digital Curation & Digital Preservation, Digital Repositories, Self-Archiving on February 25th, 2015

                      Shea Swauger and Todd J. Vision have published "What Factors Influence Where Researchers Deposit their Data? A Survey of Researchers Submitting to Data Repositories" in the International Journal of Digital Curation.

                      Here's an excerpt:

                      In order to better understand the factors that most influence where researchers deposit their data when they have a choice, we collected survey data from researchers who deposited phylogenetic data in either the TreeBASE or Dryad data repositories. Respondents were asked to rank the relative importance of eight possible factors. We found that factors differed in importance for both TreeBASE and Dryad, and that the rankings differed subtly but significantly between TreeBASE and Dryad users. On average, TreeBASE users ranked the domain specialization of the repository highest, while Dryad users ranked as equal highest their trust in the persistence of the repository and the ease of its data submission process. Interestingly, respondents (particularly Dryad users) were strongly divided as to whether being directed to choose a particular repository by a journal policy or funding agency was among the most or least important factors. Some users reported depositing their data in multiple repositories and archiving their data voluntarily.

                      Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

                      Be Sociable, Share!

                        "PeerJ—A PLOS ONE Contender in 2015?"

                        Posted in Open Access, Publishing, Scholarly Journals, Self-Archiving on February 2nd, 2015

                        Phil Davis has published "PeerJ—A PLOS ONE Contender in 2015?" in The Scholarly Kitchen.

                        Here's an excerpt:

                        In my last post, I reported that PeerJ was growing, publishing more papers and attracting more authors, although it was not clear whether the company was moving toward financial stability. In a crowded market of multidisciplinary open access journals, I argued that the success (or failure) of PeerJ would be determined when it received its first Impact Factor, which will be announced in mid-June with the publication of Thomson Reuters' Journal Citation Report. The purpose of this post is to estimate PeerJ's first Impact Factor and discuss its implications.

                        Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

                        Be Sociable, Share!

                          Page 1 of 2012345...1020...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.