scholarly journals How Can I Share My Work? A Review of the Open Access Policies of IS Journals

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cathal Doyle

The traditional route of publishing an article and moving on to the next project is changing, where authors need to consider making their research more open. Open access (OA) is one open science concept that is often put forward as an approach that should be adopted to make research freely available to the public. However, while different entities can offer guidance, help, and nudges to authors to try and promote the practice of OA, it will not become a norm until the authors themselves adopt it into their own practices. In this study, we explain the components of OA; conduct a review of the OA policies of IS journals; and then discuss how IS researchers can improve the impacts of their research outputs and develop their academic profile by practicing OA...................................................................................................................................................This paper is a preprint of a paper accepted at HICSS 2021 which can be viewed here: http://hdl.handle.net/10125/70692.

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cathal Doyle

We conducted a literature review of the open access (OA) policies of IS journals which indicates they are adapting to the evolving research landscape that incorporates open science practices. And just as the IS journals are changing, IS researchers need to change too. However, while different entities can offer guidance, help, and nudges to authors to try and promote the practice of OA, it will not become a norm until the IS researchers themselves adopt it into their own practices. That is, they need to reconsider their practices by moving beyond the academic paper as the only output of a research project and consider how other research components they create can be made freely available as an open artefact. In doing so, not only can they increase their research outputs but also develop their academic profile while making opportunities for new projects and collaborations.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cathal Doyle

We conducted a literature review of the open access (OA) policies of IS journals which indicates they are adapting to the evolving research landscape that incorporates open science practices. And just as the IS journals are changing, IS researchers need to change too. However, while different entities can offer guidance, help, and nudges to authors to try and promote the practice of OA, it will not become a norm until the IS researchers themselves adopt it into their own practices. That is, they need to reconsider their practices by moving beyond the academic paper as the only output of a research project and consider how other research components they create can be made freely available as an open artefact. In doing so, not only can they increase their research outputs but also develop their academic profile while making opportunities for new projects and collaborations.


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.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tony Ross-Hellauer ◽  
Stefan Reichmann ◽  
Nicki Lisa Cole ◽  
Angela Fessl ◽  
Thomas Klebel ◽  
...  

Open Science holds the promise to make scientific endeavours more inclusive, participatory, understandable, accessible, and re-usable for large audiences. However, making processes open will not per se drive wide re-use or participation unless also accompanied by the capacity (in terms of knowledge, skills, financial resources, technological readiness and motivation) to do so. These capacities vary considerably across regions, institutions and demographics. Those advantaged by such factors will remain potentially privileged, putting Open Science’s agenda of inclusivity at risk of propagating conditions of “cumulative advantage”. With this paper, we systematically scope existing research addressing the question: “What evidence and discourse exists in the literature about the ways in which dynamics and structures of inequality could persist or be exacerbated in the transition to Open Science, across disciplines, regions and demographics?” Aiming to synthesise findings, identify gaps in the literature, and inform future research and policy, our results identify threats to equity associated with all aspects of Open Science, including Open Access, Open/FAIR Data, Open Methods, Open Evaluation, Citizen Science, as well as its interfaces with society, industry and policy. Key threats include: stratifications of publishing due to the exclusionary nature of the author-pays model of Open Access; potential widening of the digital divide due to the infrastructure-dependent, highly situated nature of open data practices; risks of diminishing qualitative methodologies as “reproducibility” becomes synonymous with quality; new risks of bias and exclusion in means of transparent evaluation; and crucial asymmetries in the Open Science relationships with industry and the public, which privileges the former and fails to fully include the latter.


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.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wilhelmina van Dijk ◽  
Chris Schatschneider ◽  
Sara Ann Hart

The Open Science movement has gained considerable traction in the last decade. The Open Science movement tries to increase trust in research results and open the access to all elements of a research project to the public. Central to these goals, Open Science has promoted four critical elements: Open Data, Open Analysis, Preregistration, and Open Access. All Open Science elements can be thought of as extensions to the traditional way of achieving openness in science, which has been scientific publication of research outcomes in journals or books. Open Science in Education Sciences, however, has the potential to be much more than a safeguard against questionable research. Open Science in Education Science provides opportunities to (a) increase the transparency and therefore replicability of research, and (b) develop and answer research questions about individuals with learning disabilities and learning difficulties that were previously impossible to answer due to complexities in data analysis methods. We will provide overviews of the main tenets of Open Science (i.e., Open Data, Open Analysis, Preregistration, and Open Access), show how they are in line with grant funding agencies’ expectations for rigorous research processes, and present resources on best practices for each of the tenets.


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 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joshua Pearce ◽  
Alexis S. Pascaris ◽  
Chelsea Schelly

Abstract This study proposes a novel policy to provide incentives for open science: to offer open source (OS) endowed professorships. To hold an open source endowed chair, in addition to demonstrated excellence in their field, professors would need to agree to: 1) ensuring all of their writing is distributed via open access in some way, and 2) releasing all of their intellectual property in the public domain or under appropriate open source licenses. The results of this survey study of university professors in the U.S. show that a super majority (86.7%) of faculty respondents indicated willingness to accept an OS endowed professorship, while only 13.3% of respondents would not be willing to accept the terms of an OS endowed professorship. The terms of accepting an OS endowed professorship that were the most popular among respondents were increased salary, annual discretionary budget, as a term of tenure and annual RA or TA lines. Although it should be pointed out that more than a quarter of respondents would require no additional compensation. The results demonstrate a clear willingness of academics to expand open access to science, which would hasten scientific progress while also making science more just and inclusive. It is clear that science funders have a large opportunity to move towards open science by offering open source endowed chairs.


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Leon De Vries

Watch the VIDEO.In 2015 the Dutch parliament passed an amendment to the national copyright laws that – at least in theory – significantly expanded the scope for publishing in green open access. Known for its main sponsor, Joost Taverne, this amendment grants the author of any ‘short work of science’ that has been ‘funded by the Dutch government’ a legal right to make this work ‘freely available to the public’, following ‘a reasonable term’ after its original publication. Crucially, the author retains this right regardless of the terms and conditions of the original publisher. Although this amendment has been in force for over three years, it has not had much practical effect to date. On the one hand this is due to competing institutional priorities at that time and on the other hand because the amendment’s terms are too vague to be of much use to individual researchers.In order to harness the potential of the law, the Association of Universities in the Netherlands (VSNU) and the National Platform Open Science have launched a project that aims to:Establish clear and concrete guidelines for interpreting the amendment;Make roughly 5% of all academic output in the Netherlands that falls within these guidelines freely available through university repositories;Test the response of publishers to the implementation of the amendment;Establish jurisprudence in case publishers decide to take legal action against either the universities or individual scholars; andUltimately accelerate a broader shift toward universal and affordable gold open access as the default standard in academic publishing.Ultimately this project thus seeks to use the power of green open access not for its own sake, but as a wedge to encourage publishers to make the transition to an efficient and affordable Gold Open Access model. Meanwhile it offers a workable alternative to researchers who encounter obstacles to publishing gold.This presentation will discuss the unique opportunities this amendment provides to radically change the publishing landscape, as well as the legal, technical and organizational challenges involved in practically implementing the amendment’s potential, based on the (ongoing) experience of the VU University’s local project team. Hopefully this will spark a discussion on the international implications and possible opportunities to develop similar initiatives in different national – and thus legal – contexts. At the same time international input and experiences can help further refine and improve the project.


2021 ◽  
pp. 036168432110309
Author(s):  
Mary M. Brabeck

Open science advocates argue that making data sets, studies, methodologies, and other aspects of research free from publication fees and available to scholars will increase collaborations, access, and dissemination of knowledge. In this article, I argue that open access policies and practices raise both feminist and ethical issues. I reflect on the five themes of feminist ethics identified 20 years ago by a task force of the Society for the Psychology of Women. I update the themes with recent scholarship of feminist philosophers and ethicists, and I use the themes to raise questions about the promises and challenges of open access. Throughout, I offer suggestions for all who seek to make knowledge of human psychology more complete and more accessible to more people. I conclude by offering recommendations informed by feminist ethics to those building the policies and practices of open access.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document