scholarly journals A snapshot of attitudes towards open access monograph publishing in the humanities and social sciences – part of the OAPEN-UK project

2012 ◽  
Vol 25 (2) ◽  
pp. 192-197 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ellen Collins ◽  
Caren Milloy
Publications ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan Erik Frantsvåg ◽  
Tormod Eismann Strømme

Much of the debate on Plan S seems to concentrate on how to make toll-access journals open access, taking for granted that existing open access journals are Plan S-compliant. We suspected this was not so and set out to explore this using Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) metadata. We conclude that a large majority of open access journals are not Plan S-compliant, and that it is small publishers in the humanities and social sciences (HSS) not charging article processing charges (APC) that will face the largest challenge with becoming compliant. Plan S needs to give special considerations to smaller publishers and/or non-APC based journals.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-26
Author(s):  
Lars Wenaas

This paper studies a selection of eleven Norwegian journals in the humanities and social sciences and their conversion from subscription to open access, a move heavily incentivized by governmental mandates and open access policies. By investigating the journals’ visiting logs in the period 2014-2019, the study finds that a conversion to open access induces higher visiting numbers; all journals in the study had a significant increase which can be attributed to the conversion. Converting a journal had no spillover in terms of increased visits to previously published articles still behind the paywall in the same journals. Visits from previously subscribing Norwegian higher education institutions did not account for the increase in visits, indicating that the increase must be accounted for by visitors from other sectors. The results could be relevant for policymakers concerning the effects of strict polices targeting economically vulnerable national journals, and could further inform journal owners and editors on the effects of converting to open access. Peer Review https://publons.com/publon/10.1162/qss_a_00126


2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johannes Løvhaug ◽  
Rune Rambæk Schølberg

See video of the presentation.Theory and Practice in OA-policies: The Research Council of Norway is currently revising its policy on Open Access. At the same time the Council is looking at ways to support Norwegian journals within  humanities and social sciences in order to promote OA-publishing. As a funding agency, the Research Council is looking at ways to implement OA-policies. The key question is: How to move from principle  declarations on Open Access to practical tools for achieving OA-goals? Schjølberg and Løvhaug will present a model for financial support to OA-journals within humanities and social sciences as a joint venture between the Research Council and research institutions in Norway.


2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eelco Ferwerda

See video of the presentation.Ferwerda will talk about the various ways in which the transition to OA is taking place within HSS and STEM disciplines. He will discuss the specific features of many HSS disciplines that need to be taken into account for a successful transition to OA. HSS has different publishing profiles, in some disciplines monographs are still the dominant format. Authors in HSS have different values and a different perspective on Creative Commons licenses. A key driver in the current publication culture is the reputation and reward system. In many countries the way research is funded is also an important issue. Ferwerda will also look at business models for OA publishing and discuss the models that may work for HSS. These and other issues will lead him to the conclusion that a successful transition to OA will require the involvement of all stakeholders in scholarly communication.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
John G. Dove

It is well recognized that one of the hardest problems in the Open Access arena is how to ‘flip’ the flagship society journals in the humanities and social sciences. Their revenue from a flagship journal is critical to the scholarly society. On the one hand, it is true that the paywall which guards the subscription system from unauthorized access is marginalizing whole categories of scholars and learners. On the other hand, “flipping”to an APC based model simply marginalizes some of the same people and institutions on the authorship side. Various endowment or subsidy models of flipping create the idea of Samaritans and “freeloaders” which bring into question their sustainability. I propose re-thinking the relationship between publisher and author. The publisher should act as the experts in dissemination and should take on the responsibility of maximizing the dissemination of the author’s work by providing the author’s accepted manuscript (AAM) to an appropriate repository and taking down the paywall. When requests for an article come to the publisher instead of presenting non-subscribers with a paywall, they instead direct the request to the repository in which the AAM has been archived. This walk-through of Maximum Dissemination is followed by: A statement from Princeton’s Professor Stanley Katz, president emeritus of the American Council of Learned Societies A youtube video by Associate Professor of Sociology Smith Radhakrishnan which is attached to this submission, is available at http://youtu.be/sPO66vuTFJ0.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document