Category: Scholarly Journals

"Open Access Policy: Numbers, Analysis, Effectiveness"

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

"Next Up for Agency Public Access Plans: NOAA"

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

"Dramatic Growth of Open Access 2015 First Quarter"

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

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

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

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

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

CHORUS Progress Report, April 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

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

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

"When Data Sharing Gets Close to 100%: What Human Paleogenetics Can Teach the Open Science Movement"

Paolo Anagnostou et al. have published "When Data Sharing Gets Close to 100%: What Human Paleogenetics Can Teach the Open Science Movement" in .

Here's an excerpt:

This study analyzes data sharing regarding mitochondrial, Y chromosomal and autosomal polymorphisms in a total of 162 papers on ancient human DNA published between 1988 and 2013. The estimated sharing rate was not far from totality (97.6% ± 2.1%) and substantially higher than observed in other fields of genetic research (evolutionary, medical and forensic genetics). Both a questionnaire-based survey and the examination of Journals' editorial policies suggest that this high sharing rate cannot be simply explained by the need to comply with stakeholders requests. Most data were made available through body text, but the use of primary databases increased in coincidence with the introduction of complete mitochondrial and next-generation sequencing methods. Our study highlights three important aspects. First, our results imply that researchers' awareness of the importance of openness and transparency for scientific progress may complement stakeholders' policies in achieving very high sharing rates. Second, widespread data sharing does not necessarily coincide with a prevalent use of practices which maximize data findability, accessibility, useability and preservation. A detailed look at the different ways in which data are released can be very useful to detect failures to adopt the best sharing modalities and understand how to correct them. Third and finally, the case of human paleogenetics tells us that a widespread awareness of the importance of Open Science may be important to build reliable scientific practices even in the presence of complex experimental challenges.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

"ADS: The Next Generation Search Platform"

Alberto Accomazzi et al. have self-archived "ADS: The Next Generation Search Platform."

Here's an excerpt:

Starting in 2011, the ADS started to systematically collect, parse and index full-text documents for all the major publications in Physics and Astronomy as well as many smaller Astronomy journals and arXiv e-prints, for a total of over 3.5 million papers. Our citation coverage has doubled since 2010 and now consists of over 70 million citations. We are normalizing the affiliation information in our records and, in collaboration with the CfA library and NASA, we have started collecting and linking funding sources with papers in our system. . . . We have rolled out and are now enhancing a new high-performance search engine capable of performing full-text as well as metadata searches using an intuitive query language which supports fielded, unfielded and functional searches. We are currently able to index acknowledgments, affiliations, citations, funding sources, and to the extent that these metadata are available to us they are now searchable under our new platform. The ADS private library system is being enhanced to support reading groups, collaborative editing of lists of papers, tagging, and a variety of privacy settings when managing one's paper collection.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

"Beyond Beall’s List: Better Understanding Predatory Publishers"

Monica Berger and Jill Cirasella have published "Beyond Beall's List: Better Understanding Predatory Publishers" in College & Research Libraries News.

Here's an excerpt:

Although predatory publishers predate OA, their recent explosion was expedited by the emergence and success of fee-charging OA journals. No matter how strong our urge to support and defend OA, librarians cannot deny the profusion of predators in the OA arena; John Bohannon's recent "sting" made abundantly clear (despite methodological flaws) that there are many bad actors. Rather, we should seek to understand their methods, track their evolution, and communicate their characteristics to our patrons.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

"The OA Interviews: Alison Mudditt, Director, University of California Press"

Richard Poynder has published "The OA Interviews: Alison Mudditt, Director, University of California Press" in Open and Shut? in which Mudditt discusses the UC Press' Collabra and Luminos open access programs.

Here's an excerpt:

Collabra's model speaks to publishers, libraries, funders, and researchers who are seeking more cost transparency and greater recognition of the critical role that the academic and scientific community plays in journal publishing. In our model, the people who do the fundamental work of peer-review are recognized for this and are able to decide where to place that value.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

You Didn’t Think It Was Over, Did You? New Motion in GSU Copyright Case

According to "Publishers' Move Could Mean 'Whole New Trial' in GSU Copyright Case," the plaintiffs have filed a motion to "reopen the trial record, and have asked that new evidence be used to determine whether some of the university's online e-reserve course readings are infringing copyright."

The article also mentions a recent e-print by Brandon Butler, "Transformative Teaching and Educational Fair Use after Georgia State."

Here's an excerpt from the e-print:

The latest installment in the history of educational fair use, the 11th Circuit's opinion in the Georgia State e-reserves case, may be the last judicial word on the subject for years to come, and I argue that its import is primarily in its rejection of outdated guidelines and case law, rather than any affirmative vision of fair use (which the court studiously avoids). Because of the unique factual context of the case, it stops short of bridging the gap between educational fair use and modern transformative use jurisprudence. With help from recent scholarship on broad patterns in fair use caselaw, I pick up where the GSU court left off, describing a variety of common educational uses that are categorizable as transformative, and therefore entitled to broad deference under contemporary fair use doctrine. In the process, I show a way forward for vindicating fair use rights, and first amendment rights, by applying the transformative use concept at lower levels of abstraction to help practice communities make sense of the doctrine.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

"Research Data Explored II: the Anatomy and Reception of figshare"

Peter Kraker et al. have self-archived "Research Data Explored II: the Anatomy and Reception of figshare."

Here's an excerpt:

In this paper, we present an analysis of figshare, one of the largest multidisciplinary repositories for research materials to date. We analysed the structure of items archived in figshare, their usage, and their reception in two altmetrics sources (PlumX and ImpactStory). We found that figshare acts as a platform for newly published research materials, and as an archive for PLOS. Depending on the function, we found different bibliometric characteristics. Items archived from PLOS tend to be coming from the natural sciences and are often unviewed and non-downloaded. Self-archived items, however, come from a variety of disciplines and exhibit some patterns of higher usage. In the altmetrics analysis, we found that Twitter was the social media service where research data gained most attention; generally, research data published in 2014 were most popular across social media services. PlumX detects considerably more items in social media and also finds higher altmetric scores than ImpactStory.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

"Flipping, not Flopping: Converting Subscription Journals to Open Access"

Alice Meadows has published "Flipping, not Flopping: Converting Subscription Journals to Open Access" in The Scholarly Kitchen .

Here's an excerpt:

The question of whether—and, if so, when and how—to 'flip' a traditional, subscription-based journal to open access (OA) is one that comes up time and again in meetings with our society partners. It's also something that funders sometimes like to suggest as a quick route to a more open world—"Why not just convert all your journals to OA?" they ask.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

"The Educational Value of Truly Interactive Science Publishing"

Michael J. Ackerman has published "The Educational Value of Truly Interactive Science Publishing" in The Journal of Electronic Publishing.

Here's an excerpt:

Interactive Scientific Publishing (ISP) has been developed by the Optical Society of America with support from the National Library of Medicine at NIH. It allows authors to electronically publish papers which are linked to the referenced 2D and 3D original image datasets. These image datasets can then be viewed and analyzed interactively by the reader. ISP provides the software for authors to assemble and link their source data to their publication. But more important is that it provides readers with image viewing and analysis tools. The goal of ISP is to improve learning and understanding of the presented information. This paper describes ISP and its effect on learning and understanding. ISP was shown to have enough educational value that readers were willing to invest in the required set-up and learning phases. The social aspects of data sharing and the enlarged review process may be the hardest obstacles to overcome.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

"AHRQ, NASA, USDA Release Plans for Public Access to Funded Research"

ARL has released AHRQ, NASA, USDA Release Plans for Public Access to Funded Research.

Here's an excerpt:

Three US Government agencies-the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ), the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), and the US Department of Agriculture (USDA)-recently released their plans for increasing public access to federally funded research in response to the 2013 White House Office of Science & Technology Policy (OSTP) directive. The OSTP memorandum directed federal agencies with R&D budgets of $100 million or more to develop plans to make the published results of federally funded research freely available to the public within one year of publication.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

"Open Access Article Processing Charges: DOAJ Survey May 2014"

Heather Morrison et al. have published "Open Access Article Processing Charges: DOAJ Survey May 2014" in Publications.

Here's an excerpt:

As of May 2014, the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) listed close to ten thousand fully open access, peer reviewed, scholarly journals. Most of these journals do not charge article processing charges (APCs). This article reports the results of a survey of the 2567 journals, or 26% of journals listed in DOAJ, that do have APCs based on a sample of 1432 of these journals. Results indicate a volatile sector that would make future APCs difficult to predict for budgeting purposes. DOAJ and publisher title lists often did not closely match. A number of journals were found on examination not to have APCs. A wide range of publication costs was found for every publisher type. The average (mean) APC of $964 contrasts with a mode of $0. At least 61% of publishers using APCs are commercial in nature, while many publishers are of unknown types. The vast majority of journals charging APCs (80%) were found to offer one or more variations on pricing, such as discounts for authors from mid to low income countries, differential pricing based on article type, institutional or society membership, and/or optional charges for extras such as English language editing services or fast track of articles. The complexity and volatility of this publishing landscape is discussed.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

"A Proposal for Regularly Updated Review/Survey Articles: ‘Living Reviews’"

David L. Mobley and Daniel M. Zuckerman have self-archived "A Proposal for Regularly Updated Review/Survey Articles: 'Living Reviews'."

Here's an excerpt:

We propose and encourage the publication of review/survey articles that will be updated regularly, both in traditional journals and novel venues. We call these "living reviews." This idea naturally builds on the dissemination and archival capabilities present in the modern internet, and indeed living reviews exist already in some forms. Living review articles allow authors to maintain over time the relevance of non-research scholarship that requires a significant investment of effort. We also envision living reviews leading to the creation of a new category of review—review papers published as living reviews in a purely electronic format without space constraints. This will also permit more pedagogical scholarship and clearer treatment of technical issues that remain obscure in a brief treatment.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

"One More Chunk of DOAJ"

Walt Crawford has published "One More Chunk of DOAJ" in Cites & Insights Crawford at Large.

Here's an excerpt:

Because there will be a published concise version of all this stuff—out this summer from ALA's Library Technology Reports, working title "Idealism and Opportunism: The State of Open Access Journals"—I went through 2,200-odd additional DOAJ journals with English as one of the language options (but not the first one), and was able to add 1,507 more entries to my DOAJ master spreadsheet, which now includes 6,490 journals qualifying for full analysis and 811 that don't. This essay offers some summary information on the 1,507 added journals and some overall notes on the full DOAJ set-including some new and replacement tables (there may be errors in tables 2.66 b and c and 2.67 b and c in earlier issues).

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

"PeerJ—A PLOS ONE Contender in 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

"Ask The Chefs: What Do You Think Will Have the Biggest Impact on Scholarly Publishing In 2015?"

Ann Michael has published "Ask the Chefs: What Do You Think Will Have The Biggest Impact on Scholarly Publishing In 2015" in The Scholarly Kitchen.

Here's an excerpt:

According to the Chefs, we're looking at a year of mergers and acquisitions, the continuing growth of open access both in number of opportunities and in scale, the publication of data and objects (like multimedia, application code, etc.), and more start-ups.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

SciELO: 15 Years of Open Access

SciELO has released SciELO: 15 Years of Open Access.

Here's an excerpt:

The creation of SciELO 15 years ago and its further development were driven by two innovative and pioneering approaches: first, the indexing of national quality journals to complement international indexes and the publication of the full texts with free access on the Web in the modality known today as the "Golden Road", which took place about four years before the launch of the Budapest Declaration that is internationally agreed to as the beginning of the Open Access movement; and, second, the cooperative convergence of independent publishers, editors and national research agencies around a common objective to increase the visibility and quality of journals (Packer 1998; Meneghini, 2003; Packer 2009). During this development, SciELO became a standard of quality for the journals it indexes. As of June 2013, the SciELO network covers 15 Ibero-American countries plus South Africa, with each country publishing a national collection of journals in the network. There are also two multinational thematic collections in the network. Together these countries index about one thousand journal titles that publish more than 40 thousand articles per year. To date, the network has published a total of more than 400 thousand open access articles that receive a daily average of over 1.5 million article downloads, 65% as PDF files and 35% as HTML files.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

"The Open Access Citation Advantage"

SPARC Europe has released "The Open Access Citation Advantage."

Here's an excerpt:

The OpCit project has for many years kept up to date a list of studies on whether or not there is a citation advantage for Open Access articles. That project has now completed and the list is no longer being managed. SPARC Europe is pleased to maintain the list henceforth and has brought it up to date.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

"Why Principal Investigators Funded by the U.S. National Institutes of Health Publish in the Public Library of Science Journals"

Nancy Pontika has published "Why Principal Investigators Funded by the U.S. National Institutes of Health Publish in the Public Library of Science Journals" in Information Research.

Here's an excerpt:

The Institutes-funded investigators submitted to the Public Library of Science journals because they favour the high impact factor, fast publication speed, fair peer-review system and the articles/ immediate open access availability.

Conclusions. The requirements of the National Institutes' public access policy do not influence the investigators' decision to submit to one of the Public Library of Science journals and do not increase their familiarity with open access publishing options.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap

"Macmillan + Springer: Some Lessons to Learn, Some Twists to Watch"

Kent Anderson has published "Macmillan + Springer: Some Lessons to Learn, Some Twists to Watch" in The Scholarly Kitchen.

Here's an excerpt:

The competition this merger creates at the top of the market—turning a two-billionaire race into a three-billionaire race—is unlikely to trickle down in any helpful way. More Big Deals will leave fewer scraps for others. Some top-end titles may benefit from the increased competition on the acquisitions front, but I don't think a general bidding war will break out.

Digital Scholarship | Digital Scholarship Sitemap