scholarly journals Anthropology and Open Access

2014 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 236-263 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason Baird Jackson ◽  
Ryan Anderson

In an article coauthored in interview format, the authors introduce open-access practices in an anthropological context. Complementing the other essays in this special section on open access, on the occasion of Cultural Anthropology’s move to one version of the gold open access business model, the focus here is on practical information needed by publishing cultural anthropologists. Despite this limitation, the authors work to touch on the ethical and political contexts of open access. They argue for a critical anthropology of scholarly communication (inclusive of scholarly publishing), one that brings the kinds of engaged analysis for which Cultural Anthropology is particularly well known to bear on this vital aspect of knowledge production, circulation, and valuation.

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Bowering Mullen

Scholarly communication and open access practices in psychological science are rapidly evolving. However, most published works that focus on scholarly communication issues do not target the specific discipline, and instead take a more “one size fits all” approach. When it comes to scholarly communication, practices and traditions vary greatly across the disciplines. It is important to look at issues such as open access (of all types), reproducibility, research data management, citation metrics, the emergence of preprint options, the evolution of new peer review models, coauthorship conventions, and use of scholarly networking sites such as ResearchGate and Academia.edu from a disciplinary perspective. Important issues in scholarly publishing for psychology include uptake of authors’ use of open access megajournals, how open science is represented in psychology journals, challenges of interdisciplinarity, and how authors avail themselves of green and gold open access strategies. This overview presents a discipline-focused treatment of selected scholarly communication topics that will allow psychology researchers and others to get up to speed on this expansive topic. Further study into researcher behavior in terms of scholarly communication in psychology would create more understanding of existing culture as well as provide early career researchers with a more effective roadmap to the current landscape. As no other single work provides a study of scholarly communication and open access in psychology, this work aims to partially fill that niche.


Author(s):  
Markus Wust

This qualitative study investigates how faculty gather information for teaching and research and their opinions on open access approaches to scholarly communication. Despite generally favorable reactions, a perceived lack of peer review and impact factors were among the most common reasons for not publishing through open-access forums.Cette étude qualitative examine comment les membres du corps professoral recueillent l’information pour l’enseignement et la recherche, et leurs opinions envers les approches de la communication scientifique à libre accès. Malgré des réactions généralement favorables, le manque perçu de révision par les pairs et les facteurs d’impact comptent parmi les motifs habituellement évoqués pour ne pas publier sur ces tribunes à libre accès. 


1996 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 111-122
Author(s):  
Joseph R. Stimpfl

The literature annotated here is from a subset of literature in cultural anthropology that deals with ethnographic fieldwork: the basic research exercise of cultural immersion. This bibliography is meant to offer a representative sample of literature in anthropology that deals with the fieldwork experiences of researchers. Cultural anthropology is devoted to the concept of “discovering the other.” Its method of inquiry is often referred to as participant/observation: the researcher lives the culture while observing it. Since so much of the fieldwork experience deals with personal adjustments to living in different cultures, the literature is charged with the problems of adjustment and understanding so common to study abroad experiences. This literature is particularly relevant to those interested in cross-cultural learning and issues in cultural adjustment. 


2020 ◽  
pp. 135050682097915
Author(s):  
Zuzana Maďarová ◽  
Veronika Valkovičová

Thirty years after the Velvet Revolution, Slovak feminist activists look back to the 1990s and early 2000s as the time of exceptional capacity building and knowledge production which was barely sustained in later years. The last decade of feminist organizing has been marked by waning financial resources for civil society organizations, and appropriation of feminist and gender equality agenda by the state, which led to the hollowing out of its content. What is more, strong and pervasive conservative pressure with the aid of ‘gender ideology’ rhetoric has been successful in delegitimizing gender equality policies and is consistently threatening sexual and reproductive rights in the country. Facing such prospects, this article examines newfound alliances and diverse forms of broadly understood feminist praxis, which go beyond institutionalized civil society, but have developed to counter neoconservative and far-right political pressure in Slovakia.


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (4) ◽  
pp. 389-397
Author(s):  
Meghan J. Dudley ◽  
Jenna Domeischel

ABSTRACTAlthough we, as archaeologists, recognize the value in teaching nonprofessionals about our discipline and the knowledge it generates about the human condition, there are few of these specialists compared to the number of archaeologists practicing today. In this introductory article to the special section titled “Touching the Past to Learn the Past,” we suggest that, because of our unique training as anthropologists and archaeologists, each of us has the potential to contribute to public archaeology education. By remembering our archaeological theory, such as social memory, we can use the artifacts we engage with on a daily basis to bridge the disconnect between what the public hopes to gain from our interactions and what we want to teach them. In this article, we outline our perspective and present an overview of the other three articles in this section that apply this approach in their educational endeavors.


Author(s):  
Marta Margeta ◽  
Peter Gould ◽  
Lili-Naz Hazrati ◽  
Veronica Hirsch-Reinshagen ◽  
Werner Paulus

Scholarly communication faces increasing economical and ethical challenges, including pricing policies and overbearing behavior of commercial publishing houses. Based on the hypothesis that a diamond open access neuropathology journal of a high scientific and technical quality can be run entirely by neuropathologists, we launched Free Neuropathology (FNP; freeneuropathology.org) in January 2020. Classical publisher activities, such as copyediting, layout, website maintenance, and journal promotion, are undertaken by neuropathologists and neuroscientists using free open access software. The journal is free for both readers and authors, and papers are published under a Creative Commons BY SA licence, where copyright remains with the authors. Based on 26 articles published by August 2020, it takes FNP 11.1 days from submission to first, and 19.9 days to final, decision. High-quality copyediting, layout, and online publishing in the final format is accomplished in only 8 days. Absence of a commercial publisher enables prioritization of democratic and scientifically-driven decisions on editorial structure, website design, journal promotion, paper formatting, special article series, and number of accepted papers. This new model of journal publishing, which returns the control of scholarly communication to scientists, will be of interest to neuropathologists and wider scientific community alike.Learning ObjectivesSummarize the current state and driving forces behind commercial and non-commercial scientific publishing in neuropathology.Describe the advantages and challenges of a non-commercial publishing platform for neuropathology.


2009 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
F.W. Dulle ◽  
M.K. Minishi-Majanja

This research explored the awareness, usage and perspectives of Tanzanian researchers on open access as a mode of scholarly communication. A survey questionnaire targeted 544 respondents selected through stratified random sampling from a population of 1088 university researchers of the six public universities in Tanzania. With a response rate of 73%, the data were analysed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences. The study reveals that the majority of the researchers were aware of and were positive towards open access. Findings further indicate that the majority of researchers in Tanzanian public universities used open access outlets more to access scholarly content than to disseminate their own research findings. It seems that most of these researchers would support open access publishing more if issues of recognition, quality and ownership were resolved. Thus many of them supported the idea of establishing institutional repositories at their respective universities as a way of improving the dissemination of local content. The study recommends that public universities and other research institutions in the country should consider establishing institutional repositories, with appropriate quality assurance measures, to improve the dissemination of research output emanating from these institutions.


2005 ◽  
Vol 57 (6) ◽  
pp. 481-497 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian Rowlands ◽  
David Nicholas

PurposeThis paper aims to make a substantial contribution to the ongoing debate about the potential of open access publishing and institutional repositories to reform the scholarly communication system. It presents the views of senior authors on these issues and contextualises them within the broader framework of their journal publishing behaviour and preferences.Design/methodology/approachA highly representative online opinion survey of more than five and half thousand journals authors, building on an earlier (January 2004) benchmarking study carried out by CIBER.FindingsSenior researchers are rapidly becoming more informed about open access publishing and institutional repositories but are still a long way off reaching a consensus on the likelihood that these new models will challenge the existing order, nor are they in agreement whether this would be a positive or a negative development. Disciplinary culture and, to a less extent, regional location are key determinants of author attitudes and any policy response should avoid “one‐size‐fits‐all” solutions.Research limitations/implicationsThis survey reflects the opinions of senior corresponding authors who have recently published in a “top” (i.e. ISI‐indexed journal) with 95 per cent confidence. The findings should not be generalised to represent the views of all authors in all journals, open access or otherwise.Originality/valueThe journal publishing sector is facing enormous challenges and opportunities as content increasingly migrates to the web. The value of this research is that it provides an objective, non‐partisan, assessment of the attitudes and opinions of more than 5,000 senior researchers, a key stakeholder group, and thus contributes both to the development of public policy as well as more realistic commercial strategies.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-10
Author(s):  
Heather Joseph

This paper is based upon the 2021 Miles Conrad Award Lecture that was given by Heather Joseph at the second annual NISO Plus conference held virtually from February 22–25, 2021. The lecture provided a brief look back at the emergence of the Open Access (OA) movement in scholarly communication beginning with the E-biomed proposal in 1999 that was shortly followed by the Budapest Declaration released on February 14, 2002, through how far it has come in almost two decades. The author notes that the initial reaction to OA was often just a quick dismissal of it as an idealistic pipe dream and as the idea began to grow in popularity, skepticism changed into hostility. OA was criticized as being too disruptive to the then-existent publishing paradigm. Yet, far from disappearing, the movement towards the open sharing of knowledge steadily advanced. Today conversations about “why” or “whether” to open up the scholarly communication system have evolved into conversations about how best to do it. The author notes that the Budapest Declaration underscored that the end goal of OA is to empower individuals and communities around the world with the ability to share their knowledge as well as to share in accessing the knowledge of others. She warns that members of the global scholarly communication community must look critically at who currently can participate in the production of knowledge, and whose voices are represented in the “global intellectual conversation” that need to be facilitated. Whose voices are still are left out because structural barriers – be they technical, financial, legal, cultural, or linguistic – prevent them from joining?


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document