Faculty Opinions recommendation of The deal with DEAL for open access: The recent publish-and-read deals have increased momentum for open-access publishing but may not solve the challenge of open science.

Author(s):  
Markus Engstler ◽  
Brooke Morriswood
2020 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-28
Author(s):  
C. Rossel ◽  
L. van Dyck

The movement towards an Open Science is well engaged and irreversible. It includes Open Access publishing, Open Data and Open Collaborations with several new orientations, among which citizen science. Indeed, in the digital era, the way research is performed, its output shared and published is changing significantly, as are the expectations of policy makers and society at large.


Author(s):  
Shaghayegh Abdolahzadeh ◽  
Peter G. Braun ◽  
Christina Elsenga ◽  
Marijke Folgering-van der Vliet ◽  
Babette Knauer ◽  
...  

The academic landscape of the Netherlands has been influenced in recent years by new governmental policies regarding open access and open science, national and European legal guidelines, developments in ICT, and changes in how researchers are assessed. The University of Groningen Library (UB) has seized the opportunity in these developments, providing research support in the domains of registration and archiving of research output, open access publishing, research data management, and research analytics. Increased efficiency in traditional library procedures and the introduction of project-based funding have provided staff capacity for these developments. Full-service customization, to meet the needs of researchers and alleviate their time and work pressure, lies at the heart of the UB's research support.


2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bård Smedsrød ◽  
Eirik Reierth ◽  
Lars Moksness ◽  
Leif Longva

Watch the VIDEO of the presentation.Journal coordinated peer reviewing, a hallmark of scholarly publishing, is also a pivotal part of other central academic processes, such as evaluation of research grant applications, and ranking of applicants for faculty/research positions. Hence, journal coordinated peer reviewing may be viewed as “the mother of academic peer reviewing”. On this background, it is astonishing that universities and other public R&D institutions take only a very limited interest in the management and policy shaping of this cornerstone of scholarly publishing.We suggest that the universities need to become more aware of the pivotal role of the peer reviewing jobs carried out by their professors and researchers. The peer reviewing should be viewed as a partial, in kind payment from the institutions involved to the journal publishers. The advantages of this are manifold: i) negotiating power that may lead to easier and quicker implementation of open access publishing and/or ii) reducing costs, in particular the unjustifiably high subscription and licensing rates set by the big commercial publishing houses; iii) better control of how scientific staff use their time for the good of the university; iv) managing a unified policy shaping of peer reviewing, reducing fraud and flaws. This will in turn increase quality of the research produced by the universities.    The EU has recently announced their goal of making all European scientific articles freely accessible by 2020. This announcement was made unanimously by the EU ministers responsible for research and innovation. The ministers have not announced what means to use in achieving their announced goal. We suggest a united approach whereby taking control of the peer review job could be an interesting road to follow. Such a unified international action among universities and grant agencies would be very beneficial in order to make the changes needed to establish peer reviewing as a truly academically based responsibility. The increasing international agreements and actions to implement open access publishing are indications that such changes are possible. By standing together universities will be able to break the economic grip that the big commercial publishing houses have on academic research.Some may argue that it is the right of each individual scientist to decide on the extent and for what journal to perform peer reviewing. However, if an employer for some reason limits the amount of time used to do peer reviewing for certain commercial publishing houses, it would not interfere with the academic freedom to do research and to choose freely where and how to publish. After all, work contracts include instructions on how to perform a certain amount of teaching, administration and research. The option of directing where to do or not to do peer review should not be very controversial.By taking control of and organizing peer reviewing universities would obtain a means to regain the academic freedom that was lost when commercial enterprises took over the society driven journals, introducing heavy paywalls. And it may facilitate a development towards an open science regime.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helene N. Andreassen ◽  
Erik Lieungh

In this episode, we are discussing how to teach open science to PhD students. Helene N. Andreassen, head of Library Teaching and Learning Support at the University Library of UiT the Arctic University of Norway shares her experiences with the integration of open science in a special, tailor-made course for PhD's that have just started their project. An interdisciplinary, discussion-based course, "Take Control of Your PhD Journey: From (P)reflection to Publishing" consists of a series of seminars on research data management, open access publishing and other subject matters pertaining to open science. First published online February 26, 2020.


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.


Publications ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 45
Author(s):  
Huyen Thanh T. Nguyen ◽  
Minh-Hoang Nguyen ◽  
Tam-Tri Le ◽  
Manh-Toan Ho ◽  
Quan-Hoang Vuong

Open access (OA) publishing is beneficial for researchers to improve recognition, representation, and visibility in academia. However, few studies have been conducted for studying the association between gender and OA publishing likelihood. Therefore, the current study explores the impacts of gender-based authorship structures on OA publishing in Vietnamese social sciences and humanities. Bayesian analysis was performed on a dataset of 3122 publications in social sciences and humanities. We found that publications with mixed-gender authorship were most likely to be published under Gold Access terms (26.31–31.65%). In contrast, the likelihood of publications with the solely male or female author(s) was lower. It is also notable that if female researcher(s) held the first-author position in an article of mixed-gender authorship, the publication would be less likely to be published under Gold Access terms (26.31% compared to 31.65% of male-first-author structure). In addition, publications written by a solo female author (14.19%) or a group of female authors (10.72%) had lower OA publishing probabilities than those written by a solely male author(s) (17.14%). These findings hint at the possible advantage of gender diversity and the disadvantage of gender homophily (especially female-only authorship) on OA publishing likelihood. Moreover, they show there might be some negative impacts of gender inequality on OA publishing. As a result, the notion of gender diversity, financial and policy supports are recommended to promote the open science movement.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stein Høydalsvik ◽  
Erik Lieungh

What is Open Science and why do we need it? And can Open Access publishing deliver the same quality as traditional subscription-based journals do? This episode's guest is Stein Høydalsvik, senior adviser for publishing and research support at the University Library at UIT – The Arctic University in Tromsø, Norway. And in this episode of the podcast, he’ll give us an introduction to the world of open science. This episode was first published 26 September 2018.


2021 ◽  
pp. 074193252110191
Author(s):  
Bryan G. Cook ◽  
Jesse I. Fleming ◽  
Sara A. Hart ◽  
Kathleen Lynne Lane ◽  
William J. Therrien ◽  
...  

Open-science reforms, which aim to increase credibility and access of research, have the potential to benefit the research base in special education, as well as practice and policy informed by that research base. Awareness of open science is increasing among special education researchers. However, relatively few researchers in the field have experience using multiple open-science practices, and few practical guidelines or resources have been tailored to special education researchers to support their exploration and adoption of open science. In this article, we described and provided guidelines and resources for applying five core open-science practices—preregistration, registered reports, data sharing, materials sharing, and open-access publishing—in special education research.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bradley David McAuliff ◽  
Melanie B. Fessinger ◽  
Anthony Perillo ◽  
Jennifer Torkildson Perillo

As the field of psychology and law begins to embrace more transparent and accessible science, many questions arise about what open science actually is and how to do it. In this chapter, we contextualize this reform by examining fundamental concerns about psychological research—irreproducibility and replication failures, false-positive errors, and questionable research practices—that threaten its validity and credibility. Next, we turn to psychology’s response by reviewing the concept of open science and explaining how to implement specific practices—preregistration, registered reports, open materials/data/code, and open access publishing—designed to make research more transparent and accessible. We conclude by weighing the implications of open science for the field of psychology and law, specifically with respect to how we conduct and evaluate research, as well as how we train the next generation of psychological scientists and share scientific findings in applied settings.


Author(s):  
C. Willmes ◽  
D. Becker ◽  
J. Verheul ◽  
Y. Yener ◽  
M. Zickel ◽  
...  

Paleoenvironmental studies and according information (data) are abundantly published and available in the scientific record. However, GIS-based paleoenvironmental information and datasets are comparably rare. Here, we present an Open Science approach for creating GIS-based data and maps of paleoenvironments, and Open Access publishing them in a web based Spatial Data Infrastructure (SDI), for access by the archaeology and paleoenvironment communities. We introduce an approach to gather and create GIS datasets from published non-GIS based facts and information (data), such as analogous maps, textual information or figures in scientific publications. These collected and created geo-datasets and maps are then published, including a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) to facilitate scholarly reuse and citation of the data, in a web based Open Access Research Data Management Infrastructure. The geo-datasets are additionally published in an Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) standards compliant SDI, and available for GIS integration via OGC Open Web Services (OWS).


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document