Scholarly Journals – DigitalKoans

"What Have We Learned from Subscribe to Open?"

As we enter the 2025 renewal season, which marks the sixth year since the first S2O journals were launched, we come together here as two early S2O publishers to share our different applications of and experiences with the model: In 2020, Berghahn, of which Vivian is managing director, followed in Annual Reviews’ footsteps to become the second publisher to implement the Subscribe to Open model with their Berghahn Open Anthro initiative. EDP Sciences, of which Charlotte is director of marketing and communications, was another early adopter of the model in 2021 for several of their journals across astronomy, mathematics, and radioprotection. . . .

As of 2024, thanks to the Subscribe to Open model, over 180 journals have been able to publish entire volumes in open access, which would never have been possible otherwise because of the shortcomings of the APC models for these journals and their respective disciplines. The S2O model continues to grow, with more publishers set to launch their S2O offerings in 2025. The model is supported by a thriving cross-stakeholder S2O Community of Practice (CoP) that was formed in August 2020 by Annual Reviews and some of the earliest S2O publishers (including Berghahn and EDP Sciences), supporting libraries, funders, subscription agents, and other interested stakeholders. The CoP now has nearly 100 members (individuals and organizations alike) and meets on a monthly basis to discuss experiences, achievements, and concerns, share advice, and pool feedback.

https://tinyurl.com/mvavvvw3

"From Black Open Access to Open Access of Color: Accepting the Diversity of Approaches towards Free Science"

The aim of this article is to shed some light on ‘black open access’ model, that still remains poorly understood and largely neglected in the literature, despite being widely adopted in practice. I give an overview of the historical development of black OA and its most important projects: Sci-Hub and Library Genesis. Arguments are provided for why the term ‘black OA’ is misleading and the term ‘RGB OA’ (red, green and blue) would better describe a diverse landscape of open access projects that emerged after 2001. While practical approaches towards OA evolved dramatically in the past 20 years, theoretical discussion is still operating the same two-color scheme of ‘green’ and ‘gold’ open access from BOAI declaration of 2001: novel approaches are either not recognized as OA at all or are neglected as ‘black’. A new and more inclusive OA declaration might be needed to account for greater diversity of approaches.

https://tinyurl.com/nha7tsxd

"Intelligent Summaries: Will Artificial Intelligence Mark the Finale for Biomedical Literature Reviews?"

Manuscripts that only flatly summarize knowledge in a field could become superfluous, as AI-powered systems will become better and better at generating more comprehensive and updated summaries automatically. Furthermore, the use of A.I. technologies in data analysis and synthesis will greatly reduce human tasks, enabling more efficient and timely production of preliminary findings. What kind of reviews will still find room in an academic journal? It is reasonable to believe that reviews that provide critical analysis, unique interpretations of existing literature, which connect different areas, shed novel light on available data, that are aware of their human partiality, will continue to be valuable in academic journals.

https://doi.org/10.1002/leap.1648

"PLOS Receives $3.3M Grant to Support Open Access Publishing & Business Model Transformation"

PLOS has been awarded a $3.3million grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, underscoring its commitment to pioneer a shift away from traditional publishing models. The 3-year funding package from the Gates Foundation will support PLOS’ transition towards APC-free publishing by enabling authors, funded by the foundation, to publish with PLOS without facing APC barriers, and to contribute to open access publishing options for authors who do not have access to funding. This 3-year grant offers support while PLOS is actively working on new publishing models grounded in open science starting with an ongoing research & design project.

The grant will also support improvements to enhance the capture and dissemination of funding metadata and to experiment with the posting of peer reviews alongside preprints during the evaluation process, promoting greater transparency in scholarly communication.

https://tinyurl.com/3a79595s

"Publishers are Selling Papers to Train AIs — and Making Millions of Dollars"

[Roger] Schonfeld [VP of Ithaka S+R] and his colleagues launched the Generative AI Licensing Agreement Tracker in October. It includes information about licensing deals — confirmed and forthcoming — between technology companies and six major academic publishers, including Wiley, Sage and Taylor & Francis. Schonfeld says that the list documents only public agreements, and that there are probably several others that remain undisclosed. . . .

Some scholars have been apprehensive about deals being made without their knowledge on content they produced. To address this issue, a few publishers have taken steps to involve authors in the process.

https://tinyurl.com/56zwe54p

India: "One Nation One Subscription: Boon and Bane?"

A single-window purchasing entity, INFLIBNET, has been tasked with negotiating with the top 30 publishers out of a pool of 70+ originally identified publishers. The balance 40+ are expected to be closed in due course. . .

In Phase1, approximately 6,300 institutions and 18 million students will gain access to all the resources of the 30 publishers, at no cost. . . .

There is a budgetary allocation of around US$ 750 million for three years.

https://tinyurl.com/376k2dsa

See also: “Can ONOS Transform Indian Research?“

"Cancelling the ‘Big Deal’ at a Public University: A Discussion of STEM Faculty Perceptions of Cancellation and Post-Cancellation Usage Data "

This article discusses how faculty, staff, and students at the University at Buffalo (UB), a public Carnegie R1 university, were impacted by the cancellation of the Elsevier ScienceDirect Big Deal package. After the cancellation, UB participated in a multi-site study which included interviewing faculty about the effect of the cancellation on their research and teaching. In general, the faculty were supportive of the cancellation. There was frustration expressed with the current structure of the publishing industry, particularly with the exorbitant pricing of journal subscriptions. Later analysis of usage data at UB post-cancellation was conducted; unsurprisingly, the data showed a decrease in usage on the ScienceDirect platform and increase in requests for unavailable articles. Although the cancellation of the ScienceDirect Big Deal package had a direct impact on UB, the initial outcome was not exceedingly harmful and could be addressed through mitigating measures such as the quick fulfilment of requests for unavailable articles.

https://tinyurl.com/4duy8k8f

"Early Electronic Journals: A Preservation Survey"

In 1994, the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) published a print directory containing information on every electronic journal that could be identified, anywhere in the world. Thirty years later, this study surveys the current availability and preservation status of those 443 journals. While a significant number of these journals are no longer available, the results indicate that independent preservation efforts by individuals and small groups were a major factor in preserving many of the remaining publications.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2024.102989

Search Journal Open Access Policies: "Sherpa Services Combined Into New User-Friendly Platform: Open Policy Finder"

The new platform will allow users to:

Check if compliance with funder open access policies can be achieved with a particular journal

Get a summary of publishers’ open access archiving conditions for individual journals and books

To see funders’ conditions for open access publication

https://tinyurl.com/tzjpnu46

Search Polices

The Cost and Price of Public Access to Scholarly Publications: A Synthesis

As part of our project to investigate “reasonable costs” for public access to United States federally funded research and scientific data, we have developed a synthesis report focused on the multi-model scholarly publication ecosystem that facilitates public access as required by the Nelson Memo. This paper outlines the historical developments that have shaped the current landscape, the key financial (cost and payment) stakeholders in the system, and the models and approaches that have developed in the continued shift to public and open access.

This paper is a companion to the February 2024 report, The Cost and Price of Public Access to Research Data: A Synthesis.

https://tinyurl.com/232vaw49

Report

Ithaka S+R: A Third Transformation? Generative AI and Scholarly Publishing

What is not yet clear is how disruptive this [AI] growth will be. To this end, we interviewed 12 leaders in stakeholder communities ranging from large publishers and technology disruptors to academic librarians and scholars. The consensus among the individuals with whom we spoke is that generative AI will enable efficiency gains across the publication process. Writing, reviewing, editing, and discovery will all become easier and faster. Both scholarly publishing and scientific discovery in turn will likely accelerate as a result of AI-enhanced research methods. From that shared premise, two distinct categories of change emerged from our interviews. In the first and most commonly described future, the efficiency gains made publishing function better but did not fundamentally alter its dynamics or purpose. In the second, much hazier scenario, generative AI created a transformative wave that could dwarf the impacts of either the first or second digital transformations [URL added].

https://doi.org/10.18665/sr.321519

Paywall: "Detecting New Hijacked Journals by Using a List of Known Hijacked Journals and the Diagnosis of Web Domain Data"

This paper presents a new method for hijacked journals detection that uses the web domain data and list of known hijacked journals to identify new ones. By implementing this method, nine new hijacked journals were identified. This method can be used for detecting new hijacked journals and preventing additional victims – authors who submit papers to the hijacked instead of the legitimate journal.

https://doi.org/10.1080/00987913.2024.2411664

Paywall: "A ‘Delve’ into the Evidence of AI in Production of Academic Business Literature"

The author performed a t-test using the average growth rates of articles published in the database ProQuest ABI/INFORM Global containing keywords or phrases purported to be commonly used in content generated by AI during the years before and after common generative AI availability. Results show evidence that publication rates after generative AI availability experienced an improbably high deviation from the norm.

https://doi.org/10.1080/08963568.2024.2420300

"Public Launch of the European Diamond Capacity Hub and the ALMASI Project"

The European Diamond Capacity Hub (EDCH) will hold its public launch on the 15 January 2025 in Madrid, Spain. . . .

The EDCH aims to strengthen the Diamond OA community in Europe by supporting European institutional, national and disciplinary capacity centres and Diamond publishers and service providers in their mission of Diamond OA scholarly publishing. The EDCH will provide these Diamond stakeholders with coordination, sustainability, training modules, technical tools, and services at scale. The EDCH thus answers the need for capacity building in the Diamond OA community that was expressed in the Action Plan for Diamond Open Access. . . .

The EDCH will be launched in conjunction with a public event on 14 January 2025 announcing the EU-funded ALMASI project. This three-year project with 15 partners from three continents will seek a better understanding of the situation of non-profit OA publishing in three world regions – Africa, Latin America, and Europe – co-designing and aligning measures for quality alignment, training materials, and institutional and national policy development.

https://tinyurl.com/2s45urbm

"Geographical and Disciplinary Coverage of Open Access Journals: OpenAlex, Scopus and WoS"

This study aims to compare the geographical and disciplinary coverage of OA journals in three databases: OpenAlex, Scopus and the WoS. We used the ROAD database, managed by the ISSN International Centre, as a reference database which indexes 62,701 OA active resources (as of May 2024). Among the 62,701 active resources indexed in the ROAD database, the Web of Science indexes 6,157 journals, while Scopus indexes 7,351, and OpenAlex indexes 34,217. A striking observation is the presence of 25,658 OA journals exclusively in OpenAlex, whereas only 182 journals are exclusively present in WoS and 373 in Scopus. The geographical analysis focusses on two levels: continents and countries. As for disciplinary comparison, we use the ten disciplinary levels of the ROAD database. Moreover, our findings reveal a striking similarity in OA journal coverage between WoS and Scopus. However, while OpenAlex offers better inclusivity and indexing, it is not without biases. WoS and Scopus predictably favor journals from Europe, North America and Oceania. Although OpenAlex presents a much more balanced indexing, certain regions and countries remain relatively underrepresented. Typically, Africa is proportionally as under-represented in OpenAlex as it is in WoS, and some emerging countries are proportionally less represented in OpenAlex than in WoS and Scopus. These results underscore a marked similarity in OA journal indexing between WoS and Scopus, while OpenAlex aligns more closely with the distribution observed in the ROAD database, although it also exhibits some representational biases.

https://cnrs.hal.science/hal-04745665v1

"Web of Science Index Puts eLife ‘On Hold’Because of Its Radical Publishing Model"

The Web of Science, a leading bibliometric indexing service, yesterday suspended the journal eLife from its listings because its novel publishing model adopted last year—which includes public peer review but no final decision on whether a manuscript is accepted or rejected—conflicts with the Web of Science’s standards for assuring quality.

https://tinyurl.com/2s4cad42

"cOAlition S Announces the Release of an Independent Study on the Impact of Plan S"

The authors of the study highlight that Plan S has opened new avenues for achieving full and immediate Open Access, successfully placing Open Access high on policymakers’ agendas and bringing publishers to the negotiating table with institutions. The study underscores the potentially game-changing effect of the rights retention strategy, which institutions have since expanded into their own Rights Retention Policies. It also notes the contribution to the current momentum around Diamond Open Access, and the role of cOAlition S in raising awareness of the inequities of article-based charges publishing models.

The authors note that it may be too early to fully assess Plan S’s quantitative impact, as many policies only took effect in 2021 or later, and they recommend revisiting the study in 5-10 years. However, observing significant progress in the push towards full and immediate Open Access since Plan S was first announced and the influential role of the alliance of research funders, they recommend continuing cOAlition S beyond 2025.

https://tinyurl.com/2ecyu8ce

Report

"Market Sizing Update 2024: Has OA Hit a Peak?"

The data suggest that OA’s share of output has likely peaked in 2023.

Our earlier sneak peek at the market suggested it peaked at 49% of output in 2022, falling to 48% in 2023. Our latest data here suggests OA just peaked at 50% share in 2022-2023 and may fall a few percentage points in the coming years.

Results from our survey and anecdotal feedback suggest more of the same for 2024: large OA-only publishers are likely to see continued declines, while established publishers will see continued growth.

The market will consolidate further. Long-term OA growth is likely to be less that it has been – perhaps mid-to-high single digits – but with increasing shares going to the larger publishers.

https://deltathink.com/news-views-market-sizing-update-2024-has-oa-hit-a-peak/

"Leveraging Transformative Agreements for Research Integrity "

Specifically, publishers could incorporate clauses that require the institution to identify a designated contact to handle research integrity investigations, just as they would for access-related matters like login issues or security breaches. Likewise, institutions may wish to negotiate for parallel requirements from publishers.

For example, in cases of suspected misconduct or ethical concerns related to publications, publishers could rely on designated university personnel to respond and engage with these issues directly. Additional contractual clauses could include agreed-upon investigatory procedures, such as a mutual commitment to follow COPE’s guideline on “Cooperation between research institutions and journals on research integrity and publication misconduct cases,” and penalties for failure to respond.

https://tinyurl.com/4twzs2w

"When Researchers Pay to Publish: Results from a Survey on APCs in Four Countries"

This paper provides an empirical overview of the impact and practices of paying Article Processing Charges (APCs) by four nationally categorized groups of researchers in Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, and South Africa. The data was collected from 13,577 researchers through an online questionnaire. The analysis compares the practice of publishing in journals that charge APCs across different dimensions, including country, discipline, gender, and age of the researchers. The paper also focuses on the maximum amount APC paid and the methods and strategies researchers use to cover APC payments, such as waivers, research project funds, payment by coauthors, and the option to publish in closed access, where possible. Different tendencies were identified among the different disciplines and the national systems examined. Findings show that Argentine researchers apply for waivers most frequently and often use personal funds or international coauthors for APCs, with younger researchers less involved in APC payments. In contrast, Brazil, South Africa, and Mexico have more older researchers, yet younger researchers still publish more in APC journals. South African researchers lead in APC publications, likely due to better funding access and read and publish agreements. This study lays the groundwork for further analysis of gender asymmetries, funding access, and views on the commercial Open Access model of scientific dissemination.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.12144

Forthcoming: Publishing Beyond the Market: Open Access, Care, and the Commons

Publishing Beyond the Market argues that the move to open access should focus less on the free accessibility of research outputs and more on who controls the publications and infrastructures for scholarly communication. . . . Through critical engagement with the open access landscape, the book reveals the shortcomings of market-centric and policy-based approaches to open access book and journal publishing, particularly their tendency to reinforce conservatism, commercialism, and private control of publishing. . . .

It suggests that developing a commons-based, scholar-led publishing landscape through a series of presses that are each managed by working academics could offer a productive counterpoint to marketised systems of open access and subscription publishing. . . . By illustrating how these projects build towards a commons-based publishing future, and how they may complement other approaches to publishing within university presses and libraries, the book culminates in an argument for the infrastructures, policies, and forms of governance needed to nurture such a collective vision.

Samuel A. Moore [the author] is the Scholarly Communication Specialist at Cambridge University Libraries and a College Research Associate at King’s College Cambridge.

https://tinyurl.com/3wp4z5s5

"SPARC Releases Second Vendor Privacy Report Urging Action to Address Concerns with SpringerLink Data Privacy Practices"

SpringerLink provides a case study in the encroachment of the broader surveillance-based data brokering economy into academic systems. Among other findings, the report documents risks related to the 200 named third parties that are allowed to collect information from users of the site (along with what appear to be additional unlisted companies found only in our public website analysis). . . .

To fully understand how data may be used, librarians would need to read the 200 additional privacy policies from third parties that would likely stretch into the thousands of pages, a task complicated by numerous broken links to these policies at the time of publication.

https://tinyurl.com/wdkmha3z

Navigating Risk in Vendor Data Privacy Practices: An Analysis of Springer Nature’s SpringerLink

"Implementing Free Persistent Identifiers in a Scientific Journal Management System Alternatively to DOI "

The use and assignment of most persistent identifiers have an associated cost. Journals sometimes have difficulty covering this cost or transferring it to the authors of the articles, causing barriers to publishing scientific articles. This work aims to implement free persistent identifiers in a scientific journal management system. To accomplish this, software components for managing the persistent identifiers Archival Resource Key and Persistent Uniform Resource Locator are implemented for the Open Journal System. The results of implementing these persistent identifiers in a scientific journal are analyzed, as well as the implementation by the scientific community of 15 countries in 32 journals. Implementing free persistent identifiers in scientific journals allows for greater visibility and savings in publication costs.

https://tinyurl.com/2bsh2z6b

"Officially Launched! The New University-Based Publishing Futures Community Is Forming."

On Monday, September 30, the University Based Publishing Futures [UBPF] community officially launched with an open virtual meeting attended by 150 colleagues. UBPF is a new, multi-community coalition made up of the professionals who work at university presses, library publishers, and other academy-affiliated programs that support the infrastructure of scholarly publishing. The purpose of this “community of communities” is to share knowledge among university-based publishers and align our outreach and advocacy efforts for maximum impact. To learn more about this new community, watch the meeting recording, or visit the UBPF website on Knowledge Commons.

https://tinyurl.com/4b9eepr8

"Trapped in Transformative Agreements? A Multifaceted Analysis of >1,000 Contracts"

Transformative agreements between academic publishers and research institutions are ubiquitous. The ‘Efficiency and Standards for Article Charges’ (ESAC) Initiative lists more than 1,000 contracts in its database. We make use of this unique dataset by web-scraping the details of every contract to substantially expand the overview spreadsheet provided by the ESAC Initiative. Based on that hitherto unused data source, we combine qualitative and quantitative methods to conduct an in-depth analysis of the contract characteristics and the TA landscape. Our analysis demonstrates that research institutions seem to be ‘trapped’ in transformative agreements. Instead of being a bridge towards a fully Open Access world, academia is stuck in the hybrid system. This endows the legacy (non-Open Access) publishing houses with substantial market power. It raises entry barriers, lowers competition, and increases costs for libraries and universities.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.20224