scholarly journals AS INSTRUÇÕES AOS AUTORES PODEM ESTIMULAR O ACESSO ABERTO NO BRASIL?

2015 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 54-59
Author(s):  
Juliana Gonçalves Reis ◽  
Helio Kuramoto ◽  
Pascal Aventurier ◽  
Rodrigo Murtinho

Um recurso imprescindível ao desenvolvimento da Ciência Aberta é ter padrões mínimos de informação sobre Política de Acesso Aberto nas instruções aos autores. Foram analisadas n=93 instruções aos autores de periódicos de Ciências da Saúde da Coleção SciELO Brasil.  Observou-se que os periódicos estão disponíveis na Web, possuem ISSN Versão online, não contemplam informações divulgação em recursos digitais, refletem o modelo impresso em suas diretrizes, não informam sobre a disseminação da produção científica por meio de redes sociais, revistas secundárias e repositórios institucionais ou temáticos.  A ausência de tais estímulos nas instruções aos autores não apoia as Políticas de Acesso Aberto. INSTRUCTIONS TO AUTHORS CAN ENCOURAGE THE OPEN ACCESS IN BRAZIL?AbstractAn essential resource for the development of the Open Science is to have minimum standards of information about Open Access Policy in the guidelines. Were analyzed n = 93 instructions to journal authors of Health Sciences Collection SciELO Brazil. It was observed that the journals are available on the web, have ISSN online version, does not include disclosure information in digital resources, reflect the printed pattern in its guidelines, do not report on the dissemination of scientific production through social networks, secondary journals and repositories institutional or thematic. The absence of such stimuli in the guidelines does not support the Open Access Policies.

Author(s):  
Angélica Conceição Dias Miranda ◽  
Milton Shintaku ◽  
Simone Machado Firme

Resumo: Os repositórios têm se tornado comum nas universidades e institutos de pesquisa, como forma de ofertar acesso à produção científica e, com isso, dar visibilidade à instituição. Entretanto, em muitos casos ainda estão restritos aos conceitos do movimento do arquivo aberto e acesso aberto, sendo que já se discute o Movimento da Ciência Aberta, revelando certo descompasso, requerendo estudos que apoiem a atualização dessa importante ferramenta. Nesse sentido, o presente estudo verifica os requisitos envolvidos nos movimentos abertos, de forma a apoiar a discussão técnica e tecnológica. Um estudo bibliográfico, que transforma as informações sobre os movimentos em critérios para avaliação de ferramentas para criação de repositórios, apresentando a implementação da interação como um novo desafio. Nas considerações procura-se contribuir com a discussão sobre a Ciência Aberta, de forma mais aplicada bem como o ajuste dos repositórios a esse movimento.Palavras-chave: Repositórios.  Critérios de avaliação. Arquivo aberto. Acesso aberto. Dados abertos. Ciência aberta.SURVEY OF CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION OF REPOSITORY TOOLS ACCORDING TO OPEN SCIENCE Abstract: Repositories have become common in universities and research institutes, as a way of offering access to scientific production, thereby giving visibility to the institution. Meanwhile, in many cases, repositories are restricted to the concepts of open movement and open access considering that the Open Science Movement is already being discussed. Regarding this matter, this study verifies the requirements involved in the open movements, in order to support a technical and technological discussion.  A bibliographic study that transforms information about movements into criteria to evaluate tools used to create repositories, presenting an implementation of interaction as a new challenge. In the considerations, we contribute with a discussion about an Open Science, in a more applied way, as well as the adjustment of the repositories to this movement.Keywords: Repositories. Evaluation Criteria. Open File. Open Access. Open Data. Open Science.


2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-2
Author(s):  
Mehmet Toran ◽  
Mesut Saçkes ◽  
Mine Gol-Guven

Journal of Childhood, Education & Society (JCES) was founded as a product of collective thought under the leadership of Dr. Mehmet Toran in July 2019 by a group of early childhood researchers who conduct both collaborative and independent academic research. Under the light of scientific research, current publishing policies cannot eliminate inequalities in public access for transfer and access of knowledge that is generated for the public weal (Beall, 2013). Particularly, having a limited access to the knowledge in early childhood studies is acknowledged as the first step for constitution of JCES. In this context, we would like to underline that independent researchers who are voluntarily taking part in the emergence of JCES are involved in a very courageous endeavour. This collective constitution takes an important responsibility for the public as well, and we point out that to fulfil this responsibility, it embraces moral and ethical rules as a reference point. Objectives, scope and ethical principles of JCES are determined with the contribution of the editorial board. In addition, we make promise to the larger research community of early childhood area that we will make sure to contribute to the area by giving a priority to high quality of research with robust evidence. JCES adopts open science perspective in early childhood studies. Therefore, JCES has a high opinion of sharing the knowledge among people who are in children’s ecology democratically. Attaching importance to open science policy, JCES defends scientific knowledge as public property that should be shared with all without depressing its value (Tonta, 2015). In the light of this target, -as JCES editorial board- we believe that scientific information that has been produced as public property should be shared with everyone through open access. The scientific communication enhanced between researchers-practitioners-readers is aimed to put into practice through the “open access” method. In this context, as open access policy within JCES, we embraced non-profit, voluntary editorial operations without charging a fee either from the reader or authors. Our experiences during publishing our first issue promise that it can be put into practice with a collective movement voluntarily on a digital platform. Solidarity is possible to carry out editorial process not only in Turkey but also with a contribution from every corner of the world. We have given extra importance to research ethics as our publishing policy. While specifying ethical principles, we aimed to take researcher’s attention to this issue. In this sense, after discussions with EECERA and then with the permission from Trustees of EECERA, we decided to embrace EECERA Ethical Code for Early Childhood Researchers that is formulated by Chris Pascal, Tony Bertram, Julia Formosinho, Colette Gray and Margy Whalley (2012). The ethical code bears qualification as a guide for researchers working in the early childhood area. We would like to indicate that applicant articles to the JCES are also evaluated in terms of those ethical codes during the editorial preliminary consideration process. After calling for papers for the inaugural issue, we had a considerable amount of article applications. Those applications studiously evaluated by the referees after preliminary considerations. In this process, constructive feedback from the referees and the revisions authors made in consideration to given feedback contributed to quality of articles concurrently to the quality of the journal. Peer review process that is held studiously, on time and constructively demonstrated that solidarity is built correctly and truthfully. Therefore, we would like to especially thank the referees for the inaugural issue. As you will see in the journal, there are six articles for the inaugural issue from five different countries: Belgium, Colombia, Israel,  Tanzania and the USA. This variety is a result of effective publicity of the journal by editorial board and efficient use of digital platforms with open access policy. Besides that, especially the call for papers announcements by EECERA in their member mail groups and social media accounts demonstrated once more how important solidarity is. As a result of this solidarity and cooperation, we would like to underline that the geographical variety of applicant articles strengthen our faith and self-confidence as well. After publishing first issue, we will continue pertinaciously working to strengthen international collaborations and to ensure continuity of the journal. Being aware of responsibility we are carrying and the risks we may face in the process, we would like to state that we have already taken necessary precautions. To ensure long running path and continuity of publishing for the journal, Gizem Alvan, Kerem Avcı and Taibe Kulaksız - doctorate students- have already started gaining experience in journal publishing and editorial administration process. These experiences would play an important role to provide sustainable publication of the journal. We would like to congratulate them to take part in a constitution courageously. We would like to thank all partners who contributed to spreading information to publish interest with open access with their articles and their supports in the editorial process for the inaugural issue. We would like to state that the call for papers continues for the second issue of JCES which will be published in August 2020 and we are open to early childhood researchers’ original contributions.


F1000Research ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 ◽  
pp. 649
Author(s):  
Olatz Arrizabalaga ◽  
David Otaegui ◽  
Itziar Vergara ◽  
Julio Arrizabalaga ◽  
Eva Méndez

Background: The COVID-19 outbreak has made funders, researchers and publishers agree to have research publications, as well as other research outputs, such as data, become openly available. In this extraordinary research context of the SARS CoV-2 pandemic, publishers are announcing that their coronavirus-related articles will be made immediately accessible in appropriate open repositories, like PubMed Central (PMC), agreeing upon funders’ and researchers’ instigation. Methods: This work uses Unpaywall, OpenRefine and PubMed to analyse the level of openness of the papers about COVID-19, published during the first quarter of 2020. It also analyses Open Access (OA) articles published about previous coronavirus (SARS CoV-1 and MERS CoV) as a means of comparison. Results: A total of 5,611 COVID-19-related articles were analysed from PubMed. This is a much higher amount for a period of 4 months compared to those found for SARS CoV-1 and MERS during the first year of their first outbreaks (337 and 125 articles, respectively).  Regarding the levels of openness, 97.4% of the SARS CoV-2 papers are freely available; similar rates were found for the other coronaviruses. Deeper analysis showed that (i) 68.3% of articles belong to an undefined Bronze category; (ii) 72.1% of all OA papers don’t carry a specific license and in all cases where there is, half of them do not meet Open Access standards; (iii)  there is a large proportion that present a copy in a repository, in most cases in PMC, where this trend is also observed. These patterns were found to be repeated in most frequent publishers: Elsevier, Springer and Wiley. Conclusions: Our results suggest that, although scientific production is much higher than during previous epidemics and is open, there is a caveat to this opening, characterized by the absence of fundamental elements and values ​​on which Open Science is based, such as licensing.


Author(s):  
Ratnaria Wahid ◽  
Bakri Mat

Scholarly publishing is central to the efficiency of research, dissemination of research findings and diffusion of scientific and technical knowledge. Studies however reported that gaining access to published research findings is still a problem due to the increasing costs of journal subscription, a system protected by copyright law. This chapter briefly explains open access and explores its strengths and weaknesses. It further explains why the UK accepted the Finch Report recommendations to encourage innovations by enabling more people to read and use research publications. This chapter emphasizes that the benefit of open access policy as an incentive to enhance innovation must be encountered with caution as it will bring varying implications for different countries and disciplines. It also argues that although those involved in scholarly publishing have the right to be fairly compensated, they also have the moral obligation to ensure its dissemination for the benefit of public interest.


Author(s):  
Rosana López-Carreño ◽  
Ángel M. Delgado-Vázquez ◽  
Francisco-Javier Martínez-Méndez

This paper analyses the set of scientific publications in open access, other than journals (monographs, conferences proceedings, teaching materials and grey literature), published by Spanish public universities, studying their volume, documentary typology, level of description and open access policies with the aim of measuring their degree of incorporation and compliance with the principles of Open Science. An exhaustive review of the disposed material in open access by these publishers has been carried out, which has allowed to make a diagnosis of their level of open access publishing. Grey literature is the most common documentary type followed by the monograph, in the open publication of these publishers that does not reach even 5% of the average editorial production. The results allow us to conclude that the academic publishing, and more specifically the academic books in open access, still has a very reduced presence within the editorial production of these institutions. Resumen Este trabajo analiza el conjunto de las publicaciones científicas en acceso abierto, distintas de las revistas científicas (monografías, actas de congresos, materiales didácticos y literatura gris), dispuestas para su consulta por las editoriales universitarias públicas, estudiando su volumen, tipología documental, nivel de descripción y políticas de acceso abierto con el objetivo de medir el grado de incorporación y cumplimiento de los principios de Ciencia Abierta. Se ha llevado a cabo una exhaustiva revisión del material publicado en acceso abierto por estas editoriales que ha permitido establecer un diagnóstico de su nivel de edición en acceso abierto. La literatura gris es el tipo documental más frecuente seguido de la monografía, en la publicación en abierto de las editoriales universitarias que no alcanza ni el 5% de la producción editorial universitaria. Los resultados permiten concluir que la publicación académica, y más concretamente el libro en acceso abierto, sigue teniendo una presencia muy reducida dentro de la producción editorial de estas instituciones.


2016 ◽  
Vol 44 (4) ◽  
pp. 155-160 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernard Rentier

Purpose This paper aims to describe the evolution of scientific communication, largely represented by the publication process. It notes the disappearance of the traditional publication on paper and its progressive replacement by electronic publishing, a new paradigm implying radical changes in the whole mechanism. It aims also at warning the scientific community about the dangers of some new avenues and why, rather than subcontracting an essential part of its work, it must take back full control of its production. Design/methodology/approach The paper reviews the emerging concepts in scholarly publication and aims to answer frequently asked questions concerning free access to scientific literature as well as to data, science and knowledge in general. Findings The paper provides new observations concerning the level of compliance to institutional open access mandates and the poor relevance of journal prestige for quality evaluation of research and researchers. The results of introducing an open access policy at the University of Liège are noted. Social implications Open access is, for the first time in human history, an opportunity to provide free access to knowledge universally, regardless of either the wealth or the social status of the potentially interested readers. It is an essential breakthrough for developing countries. Originality/value Open access and Open Science in general must be considered as common values that should be shared freely. Free access to publicly generated knowledge should be explicitly included in universal human rights. There are still a number of obstacles hampering this goal, mostly the greed of intermediaries who persuade researchers to give their work for free, in exchange for prestige. The worldwide cause of Open Knowledge is thus a major universal issue for the twenty-first century.


2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandros Nafpliotis ◽  
Victoria Tsoukala ◽  
Vasso Kalatizi

See video of the presentation.Toward the end of the two-year EC-funded project Mediterranean Open Access Network (MedOANet; www.medoanet.eu) this presentation offers a summary of its activities and specifically focuses on the culminating outcome of the project,  the guidelines for policy development, directed to research performing organizations and research funders in six countries: Greece, Italy, Turkey, France, Spain and Portugal. The guidelines are to be released in English in all six languages of the project partners in September 2013.Purpose of the project is to support and strengthen coordinated policy development among funders and research organizations of the six countries (www.medoanet.eu). For two years the project has enabled open access policy developments through activities at the national level, such as the development of task forces and national conferences that brought together major stakeholders and policymakers, as well as regional developments through a European workshop in Braga, Portugal in early spring 2013. The project has, further, mapped the open access policy situation in the six countries, the results of which are to be published in the early fall 2013. Three surveys carried in six countries among research funders, research performing organizations and publishers demonstrate that the momentum towards open access requires specific policy actions to actually render publicly funded research openly accessible to all.The guidelines under preparation by the project discuss the key principles and processes to be followed by funding and research performing organizations in establishing open access policies, highlighting the most important steps necessary in defining and implementing effective policies. Significantly, they also offer model policies for research funders and research performing organizations. The model policies have been elaborated on the basis of current models and recent relevant developments, and emphasize mandatory green open access. The proposed presentation will discuss their components in detail. The effect of the guidelines and model policies are eagerly awaited and already expected to be significant as a number of institutions in Greece and other countries are discussing adopting them together.


Author(s):  
Lilian Aguilar Teixeira ◽  
Rogério Ferreira Marques ◽  
Robson de Paula Araújo ◽  
Ana Cláudia Lopes de Almeida

The study aims to identify open access policies and books made available by university publishers from the first ten Brazilian universities in the Folha de São Paulo University Ranking (RUF) in 2019. Through documentary and exploratory research with a qualitative approach, we sought to analyze how the university publishers make policies and books available in open access. The result presents an analysis of the information contained in the websites and of direct contacts with these publishers and shows that most of these provide works with open access and that only one has an open access policy in progress to be published. The conclusion is that university publishers seek to share publications with open access, carry out scientific dissemination, contribute with quality information for the cultural and scientific development of society, however, they do not have defined and published open access policies.


2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susanne Blumesberger

Watch the VIDEO of the presentation.The Way to Open Science contains many  components. One of these  components would be open repositories based on open source software  with free access to researchers. Open access policies are essential, as are open infrastructures and open contents. Repositories can support this openness by offering open licenses, open metadata , the possibility to use open formats  and open thesauri.  Another principal point is transparency. Open peer review should be possible, and the description of processes should also be transparent. Of course, an open license should provide all data types and metadata as well.It is important to help researchers to make their results visible and accessible and to encourage them to publish in OA-Journals and use repositories for the underlying data. Open Access Policies are supporting these efforts. Open data can be freely used, modified, and shared by anyone for any purpose. In order to do so, Open Licenses are required.Also Metadata are important components of the Way  to Open Science. Metadata are data about data which should be free of all restrictions on access, structured and based on standards.Open formats are defined by a published specification and are not restricted in their use. They are mainly used by open-source software. Open Thesauruses are freely accessible for everyone without costs and with a free license.Open Processes should be documented, transparent, repeatable and reusable.An open peer review process is also  a step  forward to Open Science. Authors and referees are no longer anonymous. The whole process and the decision letters are open.Of course Open licenses allow the reuse of any work or data without any restrictions.The lecture will deal with various aspects of open science and focus on the role of repositories – with all chances and challenges.


2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 79-87
Author(s):  
Atif Latif ◽  
Fidan Limani ◽  
Klaus Tochtermann

Federated Research Data Infrastructures aim to provide seamless access to research data along with services to facilitate the researchers in performing their data management tasks. During our research on Open Science (OS), we have built cross-disciplinary federated infrastructures for different types of (open) digital resources: Open Data (OD), Open Educational Resources (OER), and open access documents. In each case, our approach targeted only the resource “metadata”. Based on this experience, we identified some challenges that we had to overcome again and again: lack of (i) harvesters, (ii) common metadata models and (iii) metadata mapping tools. In this paper, we report on the challenges we faced in the federated infrastructure projects we were involved with. We structure the report based on the three challenges listed above.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document