Category: Publishing

"Elsevier Introduces Geographical Pricing Pilot to Support Authors in Low- And Middle-Oncome Countries with Equitable Open Access Publishing Options"


The GPOA [Geographical Pricing for Open Access] model, a publishing industry first, is set to take effect from January 2024. As part of the pilot, Elsevier will structure its article publishing charges for this subset of journals based on countries’ local economic conditions and average income. By tailoring pricing structures according to Gross National Income (GNI) per capita, a transparent and well-established measure used by many international organisations including Research4Life, Elsevier aims to reduce financial barriers that have traditionally hindered researchers and institutions from low and middle-income countries from publishing the latest research in Gold Open Access journals. Elsevier’s approach to GPOA and country banding based on GNI are outlined on our website. A full list of the journals taking part in this novel pilot can be found here. Elsevier will continue to waive APCs for authors in the lowest economic band and already provides affordable access to over 100,000 peer-reviewed resources for institutions in 120 low- and middle-income countries through Research4Life.

https://tinyurl.com/jxzt8d7e

| Research Data Curation and Management Works |
| Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works |
| Open Access Works |
| Digital Scholarship |

"Springer Nature and Authors Successfully Use Generative AI to Publish Academic Book"


As part of an innovative experiment, Springer Nature has become the first publisher to create a whole new academic book by empowering authors to use GPT as part of the integrated workflow. Developed during a —Hack Day— in the Spring which brought together authors, editors and experts from across Springer Nature, the German-language book Einsatzmöglichkeiten von GPT in Finance, Compliance und Audit (Applications of GPT in finance, compliance and audit) has now been published. It took less than five months from inception to publication — about half the time normally taken. . . .

The process was as follows:

  1. Working simultaneously on six screens, the team defined commands which GPT then executed chapter by chapter to create the first version of the manuscript
  2. At each stage of the process, the content generated by the Large Language Model (LLM) was reviewed by the authors, who then asked the machine to adapt the text
  3. This "prompt ping pong" ensured that the knowledge expertise of the authors renowned in their field was combined with the language expertise of the LLM
  4. After the Hack Day, the authors and Springer Nature’s editorial team further checked, corrected and supplemented the text
  5. The team then linked the relevant data sources to ensure proper attribution

https://tinyurl.com/4x7nvvks

| Artificial Intelligence and Libraries Bibliography |
Research Data Curation and Management Works |
| Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works |
| Open Access Works |
| Digital Scholarship |

Using Altmetric Data Responsibly: A Guide to Interpretation and Good Practice

This guide focuses specifically on data from the data provider and company, Altmetric, but other types of altmetrics are mentioned and occasionally used as a comparison in this guide, such as the Open Syllabus database to find the educational engagement with scholarly outputs. This guide opens with an introduction followed by an overview of Altmetric and the Altmetric Attention Score, Altmetrics and Responsible Research Assessment, Output Types Tracked by Altmetric, and the Altmetric Sources of Attention, which include: News and Mainstream Media, Social Media (X (formerly Twitter), Facebook, Reddit, and historical data from Google+, Pinterest, LinkedIn, and Sina Weibo); Patents, Peer Review, Syllabi (historical data only), Multimedia, Public Policy Documents, Wikipedia, Research Highlights, Reference Managers, and Blogs; finally, there is a conclusion, a list of related resources and readings, two appendices, and references. This guide is intended for use by librarians, practitioners, funders, and other users of Altmetric data or those who are interested in incorporating altmetrics into their bibliometric practice and/or research analytics. It can also help researchers who are going up for annual evaluations and promotion and tenure reviews, who can use the data in informed and practical applications. It can also be a useful reference guide for research managers and university administrators who want to understand the broader online engagement with research publications beyond traditional scholarly citations, also known as bibliometrics, but who also want to avoid misusing, misinterpreting, or abusing Altmetric data when making decisions, creating policies, and evaluating faculty members and researchers at their institutions.

http://hdl.handle.net/10919/116448

| Research Data Curation and Management Works |
| Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works |
| Open Access Works |
| Digital Scholarship |

"Springer Nature Introduces Curie, Its AI-powered Scientific Writing Assistant"


Springer Nature today announced a new AI-powered in-house writing assistant to support researchers, particularly those whose first language is not English, in their scientific writing. . . .

It has been specifically trained on academic literature, spanning 447+ areas of study, more than 2,000 field-specific topics and on over 1 million edits on papers published including those in leading Nature journals. It combines the power of large language models (LLMs) with specialised AI digital editing developed in-house and designed specifically for scientific writing. Unlike generalist AI writing apps, Curie focuses on the unique pain points of researchers in their professional writing, including translation to English and English language editing to address grammatical errors and improve phrasing and word choice.

https://tinyurl.com/msvc28ra

| Artificial Intelligence and Libraries Bibliography |
Research Data Curation and Management Works | | Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works |
| Open Access Works |
| Digital Scholarship |

"How ChatGPT and Other AI tools Could Disrupt Scientific Publishing"


In the age of LLMs, [Michael] Eisen pictures a future in which findings are published in an interactive, "paper on demand" format rather than as a static, one-size-fits-all product. In this model, users could use a generative AI tool to ask queries about the experiments, data and analyses, which would allow them to drill into the aspects of a study that are most relevant to them. It would also allow users to access a description of the results that is tailored to their needs. "I think it’s only a matter of time before we stop using single narratives as the interface between people and the results of scientific studies," says Eisen.

https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-03144-w

| Artificial Intelligence and Libraries Bibliography |
Research Data Curation and Management Works | | Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works |
| Open Access Works |
| Digital Scholarship |

Access to Science and Scholarship: Key Questions about the Future of Research Publishing


The health of the research enterprise is closely tied to the effectiveness of the scientific and scholarly publishing ecosystem. Policy-, technology-, and market-driven changes in publishing models over the last two decades have triggered a number of disruptions within this ecosystem:

  • Ongoing increases in the cost of journal publishing, with dominant open access models shifting costs from subscribers to authors
  • Significant consolidation and vertical (supply chain) integration in the publishing industry, and a decline in society-owned subscription journals that have long subsidized scientific and scholarly societies
  • A dramatic increase in the number of "predatory" journals with substandard peer review
  • Decline in the purchasing power of academic libraries relative to the quantity and cost of published research

To illustrate how researcher behavior, funder policies, and publisher business models and incentives interact, this report presents an historical overview of open access publishing. The report also provides a list of key questions for further investigation to understand, measure, and best prepare for the impact of new policies related to open access in research publishing, categorized into six general areas: access and business models, research data, preprint publishing, peer review, costs to researchers and universities, and infrastructure.

https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/152414

| Research Data Curation and Management Works |
| Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works |
| Open Access Works |
| Digital Scholarship |

"How ChatGPT and Other AI Tools Could Disrupt Scientific Publishing"


More broadly, generative AI tools have the potential to change how research is published and disseminated, says Patrick Mineault, a senior machine-learning scientist at Mila — Quebec AI Institute in Montreal, Canada. That could mean that research will be published in a way that can be easily read by machines rather than humans. "There will be all these new forms of publication," says Mineault.

https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-023-03144-w

| Artificial Intelligence and Libraries Bibliography |
Research Data Curation and Management Works |
| Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works |
| Open Access Works |
| Digital Scholarship |

"IFLA ARL Section’s ‘Inclusiveness through Openness’ Conference Proceedings Now Available!"


All videos and slides from this August IFLA Academic & Research Libraries Section (ARL) Satellite conference to the 2023 WLIC in Rotterdam IFLA conference are now available:

https://tinyurl.com/4cywvp9h

| Research Data Curation and Management Works |
| Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works |
| Open Access Works |
| Digital Scholarship |

"2024 EBSCO Serials Price Projection Report"


Each year, EBSCO strives to help its academic and academic medical library customers plan their library budgets by projecting publisher price increases for the upcoming year. We use recent information received from publishers, as well as historical price data to calculate these projections. As of now, we expect the overall effective publisher price increases for academic and academic medical libraries in 2024 to be in the range of three to four percent for individual titles and two to three percent for e-journal packages.

https://tinyurl.com/2s3akjmw

| Research Data Curation and Management Works |
| Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works |
| Open Access Works |
| Digital Scholarship |

"A Large Scale Perspective on Open Access Publishing: Examining Gender and Scientific Disciplines in 38 OECD countries"


Gender inequality is a persistent issue in scientific publishing. Recent studies suggest that Open Access (OA) publishing can increase the visibility and impact of female scientists’ research. Despite the growing acceptance of OA as a means of disseminating research results, there is a notable gap in studies focusing on the role of gender in OA publishing trends. The presented research offers a comprehensive analysis of OA publishing with a focus on gender differences and specific scientific disciplines in 38 OECD countries. Our study using the OpenAlex database included over 20 million publications from 1990-2021 and revealed that 39.3 percent of these were freely available in some form of OA. Results showed, over time, a decline in Bronze OA and Green OA but also an increase in Gold OA and, as of 2018, a rapid increase in Hybrid OA. The results also showed that females are more likely to publish in gold OA than males, both in cases of female-only authorship and mixed-gender authorship. Disciplinary analysis showed that Biology, Physics and Mathematics had the most OA publications. The results also showed the influence of major OA initiatives on publication trends. This study highlights the need for a more inclusive scientific publishing system that promotes gender equality and wider accessibility.

https://doi.org/10.55835/6442b2f80dd9c5d18e7caff8

| Research Data Curation and Management Works |
| Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works |
| Open Access Works |
| Digital Scholarship |

"Which Database with Article Processing Charges Should Be Used?"


This study investigated the characteristics of three databases compiling article processing charges—price lists on publishers’ official websites, Directory of Open Access Journals, and OpenAPC—for open access journals published by Elsevier, Springer Nature, and Wiley. Although many article processing charges listed on Directory of Open Access Journals are identical to those listed on price lists for 2023, several article processing charges on the Directory are not updated. . . . journals on OpenAPC are not representative of open access journals in general. Nevertheless, the correlation between list prices and actual article processing charges paid indicates a strong positive relationship, implying that even if empirical studies on article processing charges use different databases, the database chosen might not significantly influence their conclusions.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-023-04841-z

| Research Data Curation and Management Works |
| Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works |
| Open Access Works |
| Digital Scholarship |

"What Happens When a Journal Converts to Open Access? A Bibliometric Analysis"


In recent years, increased stakeholder pressure to transition research to Open Access has led to many journals converting, or "flipping," from a closed access (CA) to an open access (OA) publishing model. Changing the publishing model can influence the decision of authors to submit their papers to a journal, and increased article accessibility may influence citation behaviour. In this paper we aimed to understand how flipping a journal to an OA model influences the journal’s future publication volumes and citation impact. We analysed two independent sets of journals that had flipped to an OA model, one from the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) and one from the Open Access Directory (OAD), and compared their development with two respective control groups of similar journals. For bibliometric analyses, journals were matched to the Scopus database. We assessed changes in the number of articles published over time, as well as two citation metrics at the journal and article level: the normalised impact factor (IF) and the average relative citations (ARC), respectively. Our results show that overall, journals that flipped to an OA model increased their publication output compared to journals that remained closed. Mean normalised IF and ARC also generally increased following the flip to an OA model, at a greater rate than was observed in the control groups. However, the changes appear to vary largely by scientific discipline. Overall, these results indicate that flipping to an OA publishing model can bring positive changes to a journal.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03972-5

| Research Data Curation and Management Works |
| Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works |
| Open Access Works |
| Digital Scholarship |

"Preprints Are Now Searchable on Scopus!"


In total, we have 1.8M preprint records in Scopus (as of June 2023) from the following seven preprint servers:

  1. arXiv
  2. ChemRxiv
  3. bioRxiv
  4. medRxiv
  5. SSRN
  6. TechRxiv
  7. Research Square

https://tinyurl.com/4jp2nayv

| Research Data Curation and Management Works |
| Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works |
| Open Access Works |
| Digital Scholarship |

"The Strain on Scientific Publishing"


Scientists are increasingly overwhelmed by the volume of articles being published. Total articles indexed in Scopus and Web of Science have grown exponentially in recent years; in 2022 the article total was 47% higher than in 2016, which has outpaced the limited growth, if any, in the number of practising scientists. Thus, publication workload per scientist (writing, reviewing, editing) has increased dramatically. We define this problem as the strain on scientific publishing. To analyse this strain, we present five data-driven metrics showing publisher growth, processing times, and citation behaviours. We draw these data from web scrapes, requests for data from publishers, and material that is freely available through publisher websites. Our findings are based on millions of papers produced by leading academic publishers. We find specific groups have disproportionately grown in their articles published per year, contributing to this strain. Some publishers enabled this growth by adopting a strategy of hosting special issues, which publish articles with reduced turnaround times. Given pressures on researchers to publish or perish to be competitive for funding applications, this strain was likely amplified by these offers to publish more articles. We also observed widespread year-over-year inflation of journal impact factors coinciding with this strain, which risks confusing quality signals. Such exponential growth cannot be sustained. The metrics we define here should enable this evolving conversation to reach actionable solutions to address the strain on scientific publishing.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.15884

| Research Data Curation and Management Works |
| Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works |
| Open Access Works |
| Digital Scholarship |

"Toward Non-human-Centered Design: Designing an Academic Article with ChatGPT"


Non-human-centered design tools, such as ChatGPT, have shown potential as effective aids in academic article design. This study conducts a comparative evaluation of ChatGPT-3.5 and ChatGPT-4, examining their capabilities and limitations in supporting the academic article design process. The study aims to demonstrate the utility of ChatGPT as a writing tool and investigate its applicability and efficacy in the context of academic paper design. The author interacted with both versions of ChatGPT, providing prompts and analyzing the generated responses. In addition, a different expert academic was consulted to assess the appropriateness of the ChatGPT responses. The findings suggest that ChatGPT, despite its limitations, could serve as a useful tool for academic writing, particularly in the design of academic articles. Despite the limitations of both GPT-3.5 and GPT-4, GPT-3.5 offers a broader perspective, whereas GPT-4 provides a more in-depth and detailed approach to the design of articles. ChatGPT exhibits capabilities in aiding the design process, generating ideas aligned with the overall purpose and focus of the paper, producing consistent and contextually relevant responses to various natural language inputs, partially assisting in literature reviews, supporting paper design in terms of both content and format, and providing reasonable editing and proofreading for articles. However, limitations were identified, including reduced critical thinking, potential for plagiarism, risk of misinformation, lack of originality and innovation, and limited access to literature.

https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2023.sep.12

| Artificial Intelligence and Libraries Bibliography |
Research Data Curation and Management Works |
| Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works |
| Open Access Works |
| Digital Scholarship |

"Introducing the Journal of the Medical Library Association’s Policy on the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Submissions"


With the arrival of ChatGPT, the academic community has expressed concerns about how generative artificial intelligence will be used by students and researchers alike. After consulting policies from other journals and discussing among the editorial team, we have created a policy on the use of AI on submissions to JMLA. This editorial provides a brief background on these concerns and introduces our policy.

https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2023.1826

| Artificial Intelligence and Libraries Bibliography |
Research Data Curation and Management Works |
| Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works |
| Open Access Works |
| Digital Scholarship |

"JSTOR releasing First 100 Path to Open Books"


Launched as a pilot in January 2023, Path to Open is a delayed open access model where new books are made available to supporting libraries upon publication and become open access after three years. Thirty-seven university presses have joined the initiative along with over sixty academic libraries, including consortia like the Big Ten Academic Alliance who are looking to develop sustainable open access solutions. . . .

JSTOR recently released forty-three of the first 100 Path to Open titles. These books, all peer-reviewed, were selected by the participating university presses and JSTOR, and explore topics in thirty-six subjects like Public Health, Religion, Education, Communications, Literature, Conflict Resolution, and Film Studies.

https://tinyurl.com/2p92439j

| Research Data Curation and Management Works |
| Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works |
| Open Access Works |
| Digital Scholarship |

Scholarly Communication Librarianship and Open Knowledge


The book consists of three parts. Part I offers definitions of scholarly communication and scholarly communication librarianship and provides an introduction to the social, economic, technological, and policy/legal pressures that underpin and shape scholarly communication work in libraries. These pressures, which have framed ACRL’s understanding of scholarly communication for the better part of the past two decades, have unsettled many foundational assumptions and practices in the field, removing core pillars of scholarly communication as it was practiced in the twentieth century. These pressures have also cleared fresh ground, and scholarly communication practitioners have begun to seed the space with values and practices designed to renew and often improve the field. Part II begins with an introduction to "open," the core response to the pressures described in part I. This part offers a general overview of the idea of openness in scholarly communication followed by chapters on different permutations and practices of open, each edited by a recognized expert of these areas with authors of their selection. Amy Buckland edited chapter 2.1, "Open Access." Brianna Marshall edited chapter 2.2, "Open Data." Lillian Hogendoorn edited chapter 2.3, "Open Education." Micah Vandegrift edited chapter 2.4, "Open Science and Infrastructure." Each of them brought on incredible expertise through contributors whom they identified, through both original contributions and repurposing existing openly licensed work, which is something we want to model where possible. Part III consists of twenty-four concise perspectives, intersections, and case studies from practicing librarians and closely related stakeholders, which we hope will stimulate discussion and reflection on theory and implications for practice. In every single case, we’re really excited by the editors and authors and the ideas they bring to the whole. Each contribution features light pedagogical apparatuses like suggested further reading, discussion or reflection prompts, and potential activities. It’s all available for free and openly licensed with a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial (CC BY-NC) license, so anyone is encouraged to grab whatever parts are useful and to adapt and repurpose and improve them to meet specific course goals and student needs within the confines of the license.

https://bit.ly/SCLAOK

| Research Data Curation and Management Works |
| Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works |
| Open Access Works |
| Digital Scholarship |

"Now You Have to Pay! A Deeper Look At Publishing Practices of Predatory Journals"


In this study, by using Beall’s (Scholarly open-access, 2014; Beall’s list of predatory journals and publishers, 2018) predatory journal lists as well as direct e-mail solicitations from journals, we intentionally submitted a poorly written manuscript to 58 open-access journals using counterfeit names and affiliations. . . . Regarding "positive responses," we point to five common flaws associated with such journals, namely that (1) they lack any interest in the researchers who are submitting manuscripts; (2) they do not judge academic writing in accordance with expected conventions; (3) they appear to be indifferent to scholarship including research design, plagiarism issues, and citation quality; (4) their review process is opaque and overly hasty, and (5) the tone they use in correspondence e-mail messages is highly inappropriate. Based upon the investigation, it is clear that such journals’ primary aim is in securing the article processing fee.

https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1583

| Research Data Curation and Management Works |
| Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works |
| Open Access Works |
| Digital Scholarship |

"The Quantification of Open Scholarship — A Mapping Review"


This mapping review addresses scientometric indicators that quantify open scholarship. The goal is to determine what open scholarship metrics are currently being applied and which are discussed, e.g. in policy papers. The paper contributes to a better understanding on how open scholarship is quantitatively recorded in research assessment and where gaps can be identified. The review is based on a search in four databases, each with 22 queries. Out of 3385 hits, we coded 248 documents chosen according to the research questions. The review discusses the open scholarship metrics of the documents as well as the topics addressed in the publications, the disciplines the publications come from and the journals they were published. The results indicate that research and teaching practices are unequally represented regarding open scholarship metrics. Open research material is a central and exhausted topic in publications. Open teaching practices, on the other hand, play a role in the discussion and strategy papers of the review, but open teaching material is not recorded using concrete scientometric indicators. Here, we see a research gap and discuss potentials for further research and investigation.

https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_a_00266

| Research Data Curation and Management Works |
| Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works |
| Open Access Works |
| Digital Scholarship |

"Can ChatGPT Be an Author? A Study of Artificial Intelligence Authorship Policies in Top Academic Journals"


Academic publishers have quickly responded to the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) tools on authorship and academic integrity. However, there remains a lack of understanding about AI authorship policies and the attitude of academic journals towards these tools. This study aims to address this gap by examining the AI authorship policies of 300 top academic journals during the period of late-spring 2023. Over half of the journals examined have an AI authorship policy and guidelines for acknowledging AI usage in manuscript preparation. These acknowledgments are typically made in the methods or acknowledgement sections, although some journals have introduced a new, special section on AI usage. The study also found that AI authorship policies may differ depending on the publisher and discipline of the journal. Many publishers have adopted uniform AI authorship policies that are implemented across all journals that they publish.

https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1582

| Research Data Curation and Management Works |
| Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works |
| Open Access Works |
| Digital Scholarship |

Reviewed Preprints Published Change: "eLife New Model at Six Months: An ICOR analysis"


  1. Submissions are steady, and the proportion of papers sent for review is similar in the two models.
  2. Reviewed Preprints are visible earlier than traditionally peer-reviewed articles, which provides a middle ground between unreviewed preprints and published VORs.
  3. Author demographics have not changed significantly with regard to discipline or geography.
  4. Authors, Senior Editors, and Reviewing Editors are reporting largely favorable experiences with the new model, with some concerns about quality and suggestions regarding process being voiced.

https://tinyurl.com/3u9w46fe

| Research Data Curation and Management Works |
| Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works |
| Open Access Works |
| Digital Scholarship |

"A Critical Examination of the Ethics of AI-Mediated Peer Review"


Recent advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) systems, including large language models like ChatGPT, offer promise and peril for scholarly peer review. On the one hand, AI can enhance efficiency by addressing issues like long publication delays. On the other hand, it brings ethical and social concerns that could compromise the integrity of the peer review process and outcomes. However, human peer review systems are also fraught with related problems, such as biases, abuses, and a lack of transparency, which already diminish credibility. While there is increasing attention to the use of AI in peer review, discussions revolve mainly around plagiarism and authorship in academic journal publishing, ignoring the broader epistemic, social, cultural, and societal epistemic in which peer review is positioned. . . . The discussion here emphasizes the need to critically assess the legitimacy of AI-driven peer review, addressing the benefits and downsides relative to the broader epistemic, social, ethical, and regulatory factors that sculpt its implementation and impact.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.12356

| Research Data Curation and Management Works |
| Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works |
| Open Access Works |
| Digital Scholarship |

Ebook from SciELO: We So Loved Open Access


In this book, the origins and evolution of the open access movement are explored from the perspective of individuals who actively participated. These pioneers of open access shared their experiences, successes, collaborations, and visions for the future on the occasion of SciELO’s 25th anniversary. The book pays tribute to their pioneering efforts and the crucial role played by SciELO in supporting open access and spotlighting regions of the world that were previously underrepresented in global academic communication. This celebration demonstrates how SciELO firmly placed these regions on the map of global academic communication and contributed to strengthening the open access movement throughout its successful journey.

https://tinyurl.com/4v2f9dzk

| Research Data Curation and Management Works |
| Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works |
| Open Access Works |
| Digital Scholarship |

"Supporting Open Access for 20 Years: Five Issues That Have Slowed the Transition to Full and Immediate OA"


Current estimates suggest that more than 50% of the world’s research articles are published open access and that there are around 20,000 fully OA journals. Data also indicates that publishing OA is, on average, cheaper than publishing in subscription journals. For example, an analysis by Delta Think shows that around 45% of all scholarly articles were published as paid-for open access in 2021, but this accounted for just under 15% of the total journal publishing revenue.

However, after two decades of discussions, advocacy, policy development and strategy, can this level of OA be considered a success, particularly when half of all research articles published today is hidden behind a paywall? I think not.

https://tinyurl.com/2s396wh7

| Research Data Curation and Management Works |
| Digital Curation and Digital Preservation Works |
| Open Access Works |
| Digital Scholarship |