Open access publishing: A developing country view

Author(s):  
Jennifer I. Papin-Ramcharan ◽  
Richard A. Dawe

This paper presents the experience with open access (OA) publishing by researchers in an academic research institution (The University of the West Indies (UWI) St. Augustine Campus) in a developing country — Trinidad and Tobago. It describes the two parallel but complimentary paths for authors to enable open access, i.e. of publishing in open access journals and/or self–archiving. The benefits to researchers of free access to information, increased research impact and possible solution to the “serials crisis” are highlighted. It suggests that advocates of OA should consider all possible difficulties that researchers may have with OA, so that these could be ameliorated. To this end, it considers the UWI researchers’ knowledge of OA, their access to the scholarly literature, open access archives/repositories at the UWI and related issues of research and library funding, Information and Communication Technologies (ICT), and infrastructure/Internet connectivity. It concludes that there are indeed obvious and well–documented benefits for developing country researchers. There are though some disincentives that make it difficult for researchers in developing countries to fully participate in the OA movement. Apart from author–side or “page” charges, the limited number of open access journals in many fields of study and inadequate and unreliable ICT infrastructure and Internet connectivity often limit access and publication in OA journals. Thus, because of technical, financial, human and infrastructural limitations, OA via self–archiving is sometimes difficult for developing country researchers. It concludes that much more should be done to ensure full participation in the open access knowledge community by developing country researchers, including direct technical assistance in implementing institutional repositories (IRs) and more financial assistance and support from international agencies to build the necessary human resource capabilities.

2016 ◽  
Vol 55 (06) ◽  
pp. 481-487 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefanie Kuballa ◽  
Mareike Schulze ◽  
Claudia Böhm ◽  
Olaf Gefeller ◽  
Jan Haaf ◽  
...  

SummaryBackground: Based on today‘s information and communication technologies the open access paradigm has become an important approach for adequately communicating new scientific knowledge.Objectives: Summarizing the present situa -tion for journal transformation. Presenting criteria for adequate transformation as well as a specific approach for it. Describing our exemplary implementation of such a journal transformation.Methods: Studying the respective literature as well as discussing this topic in various discussion groups and meetings (primarily of editors and publishers, but also of authors and readers), with long term experience as editors and /or publishers of scientific publications as prerequisite.Results: There is a clear will, particularly of political and funding organizations, towards open access publishing. In spite of this, there is still a large amount of scientific knowl edge, being communicated through subscription-based journals. For successfully transforming such journals into open access, sixteen criteria for a goal-oriented, stepwise, sustainable, and fair transformation are suggested. The Tandem Model as transformation approach is introduced. Our exemplary implementation is done in the Trans-O-MIM project. It is exploring strategies, models and evaluation metrics for journal transforma tion. As instance the journal Methods of Information in Medicine will apply the Tandem Model from 2017 onwards.Conclusions: Within Trans-O-MIM we will reach at least nine of the sixteen criteria for adequate transformation. It was positive to implement Trans-O-MIM as international research project. After first steps for transforming Methods have successfully been made, challenges will remain, among others, in identifying appropriate incentives for open access publishing in order to support its transformation.


2015 ◽  
Vol 39 (5) ◽  
pp. 637-648 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Osborne

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore the difference between Open Access and accessibility, to argue that accessibility is the most crucial feature, and to suggest some ways in which Open Access militates against accessibility. Design/methodology/approach – Analysis of best practice by journals and monograph publishers is used to highlight the degree to which accessibility is enhanced by input from readers and editors. The expense of this, both real and hidden, is shown to be compatible only with difficulty with publishing methods where keeping costs low is essential, and Open Access alternatives that make available manuscripts “as submitted” are shown to make available less accessible scholarship. Findings – Scholarship is markedly improved by referees and editors; the emphasis needs to be put on making available the most accessible scholarship, not on making more scholarship available. Practical implications – Journals and publishers should concentrate on, and research councils and similar bodies insist upon, ensuring high quality critical review and editing, not cost-free access. Originality/value – The debate on Open Access has put its emphasis in the wrong place. Rather than easier access to more scholarship, increased resource devoted to pre-publication review, revision and editing is the most important development to ensure the greatest advances in research and scholarship.


2019 ◽  
pp. 016555151986548
Author(s):  
Wilhelm Peekhaus

This article presents results from a survey of faculty in North American Library and Information Studies (LIS) schools about their attitudes towards and experience with open-access publishing. As a follow-up to a similar survey conducted in 2013, the article also outlines the differences in beliefs about and engagement with open access that have occurred between 2013 and 2018. Although faculty in LIS schools are proponents of free access to research, journal publication choices remain informed by traditional considerations such as prestige and impact factor. Engagement with open access has increased significantly, while perceptions of open access have remained relatively stable between 2013 and 2018. Nonetheless, those faculty who have published in an open-access journal or are more knowledgeable about open access tend to be more convinced about the quality of open-access publications and less apprehensive about open-access publishing than those who have no publishing experience with open-access journals or who are less knowledgeable about various open-access modalities. Willingness to comply with gold open-access mandates has increased significantly since 2013.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kimberly Pendell

Despite implicit and explicit expectations that research inform their practice, social workers are unlikely to have access to published research articles. The traditional publishing model does not support public access (i.e., no publisher paywall barrier) to scholarly journals. Newer models of publishing allow free access to research including open access publishing and deposit of scholarship in institutional or disciplinary repositories. This study examined public access to articles in the top 25 social work journals. A random sample of article citations from a total of 1,587 was assessed, with the result that 52% of citations had no full-text access. Of the remaining 48% of citations with full-text access, it is questionable most will remain available long term due to possible copyright violations. Citations from the random sample show only minimal usage of institutional or disciplinary repositories as a means of sharing research. Establishing this baseline measure of access to research is an important first step in understanding the barriers for social workers in accessing research to inform practice. Recommendations for increasing access to research include publishing in open access journals and utilizing full text repositories.


2019 ◽  
Vol 18 (4) ◽  
pp. 1041-1052
Author(s):  
Kimberly Pendell

Despite implicit and explicit expectations that research inform their practice, social workers are unlikely to have access to published research articles. The traditional publishing model does not support public access (i.e., no publisher paywall barrier) to scholarly journals. Newer models of publishing allow free access to research including open access publishing and deposit of scholarship in institutional or disciplinary repositories. This study examined public access to articles in the top 25 social work journals. A random sample of article citations from a total of 1,587 was assessed, with the result that 52% of citations had no full-text access. Of the remaining 48% of citations with full-text access, it is questionable most will remain available long term due to possible copyright violations. Citations from the random sample show only minimal usage of institutional or disciplinary repositories as a means of sharing research. Establishing this baseline measure of access to research is an important first step in understanding the barriers for social workers in accessing research to inform practice. Recommendations for increasing access to research include publishing in open access journals and utilizing full text repositories.


Author(s):  
Kelly Ayanna Peters Barros Duarte ◽  
Rosângela Schwarz Rodrigues

A repercussão das Tecnologias de Informação e Comunicação (TICs) viabiliza mudanças nos periódicos digitais. O Movimento de Acesso Aberto promove a socialização do conhecimento científico ao permitir o acesso irrestrito aos conteúdos disponíveis em formato on-line. Uma avaliação dos periódicos surge da necessidade de se refletir a qualidade da informação registrada. Este artigo analisa os periódicos científicos de acesso aberto na área do Direito, classificados nos estratos A2, B1, B2 e B3 pelo Qualis/CAPES (Ano-Base 2007) quanto ao atendimento aos padrões da normalização. O método caracteriza-se pela pesquisa exploratória, descritiva, documental e por análise quanti-qualitativa. Dos sessenta e três periódicos identificados nos estratos mencionados, onze são em acesso aberto. Foi elaborada uma Lista de Verificação para Periódicos em Acesso Aberto com base na literatura e identificou-se que apenas os indicadores título e subtítulo do periódico, ferramenta de busca, instituição, título e subtítulo do artigo e autores apresentaram cem por cento de atendimento aos critérios. Conclui que a ausência de padrões, normas e critérios em publicações periódicas de acesso aberto interferem na disseminação da produção científica, e afetam diretamente na recuperação da informação. Abstract The impact of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) enables periodic changes in fingerprints. The Movement for Free Access to Information (ALi) promotes the socialization of knowledge to allow unrestricted access to content available in online format. A periodic assessment arises from the need to reflect the quality of information recorded. This article discusses the open-access journals in the fi eld of law falling within strata A2, B1, B2 and B3 for Qualis/CAPES (Base Year 2007) with regard to meeting the standards of normalization. The method is characterized by exploratory, descriptive, document and quantitative and qualitative analysis. Of the sixty-three journals identified in the strata mentioned, eleven are freely available. It was drawn up a checklist for Open Access Journals based on the literature and identified himself only as indicators title and subtitle of the journal, search engine, institution, title and subtitle of the article and authors presented one hundred percent of meeting the criteria Checklist. Concludes that the absence of standards, guidelines and criteria in open access journals negative interference in the dissemination of scientific production, which directly affects the 


Mousaion ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 83-100
Author(s):  
Solomon Bopape

The study of law focuses, among other aspects, on important issues relating to equality, fairness and justice in as far as free access to information and knowledgeis concerned. The launching of the Open Access to Law Movement in 1992, the promulgation of the Durham Statement on Open Access to Legal Scholarshipin 2009, and the formation of national and regional Legal Information Institutes (LIIs) should serve as an indication of how well the legal world is committed to freely publishing and distributing legal information and knowledge through the Internet to legal practitioners, legal scholars and the public at large aroundthe world. In order to establish the amount of legal scholarly content which is accessible through open access publishing innovations and initiatives, this studyanalysed the contents of websites for selected open access resources on the Internet internationally and in South Africa. The results of the study showed that there has been a steady developing trend towards the adoption of open access for legal scholarly literature internationally, while in South Africa legal scholarly literature is under the control of commercial publishers. This should be an issue for the legal scholarship which, among its focus, is to impart knowledge about the right of access to information and knowledge.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Гульдар Фанисовна Ибрагимова ◽  
Ольга Алексеевна Ковалевич ◽  
Раиса Николаевна Афонина ◽  
Елена Алексеевна Лесных ◽  
Яна Игоревна Ряполова ◽  
...  

Conference paper Covered by Leading Indexing DatabasesOpen European Academy of Public Sciences aims to have all of its journals covered by the Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) and Scopus and Web of Science indexing systems. Several journals have already been covered by SCIE for several years and have received official Impact Factors. Some life sciencerelated journals are also covered by PubMed/MEDLINE and archived through PubMed Central (PMC). All of our journals are archived with the Spanish and Germany National Library.All Content is Open Access and Free for Readers Journals published by Open European Academy of Public Sciences are fully open access: research articles, reviews or any other content on this platform is available to everyone free of charge. To be able to provide open access journals, we finance publication through article processing charges (APC); these are usually covered by the authors’ institutes or research funding bodies. We offer access to science and the latest research to readers for free. All of our content is published in open access and distributed under a Creative Commons License, which means published articles can be freely shared and the content reused, upon proper attribution.Open European Academy of Public Sciences Publication Ethics StatementOpen European Academy of Public Sciences is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Open European Academy of Public Sciences takes the responsibility to enforce a rigorous peerreview together with strict ethical policies and standards to ensure to add high quality scientific works to the field of scholarly publication. Unfortunately, cases of plagiarism, data falsification, inappropriate authorship credit, and the like, do arise. Open European Academy of Public Sciences takes such publishing ethics issues very seriously and our editors are trained to proceed in such cases with a zero tolerance policy. To verify the originality of content submitted to our journals, we use iThenticate to check submissions against previous publications.Mission and ValuesAs a pioneer of academic open access publishing, we serve the scientific community since 2009. Our aim is to foster scientific exchange in all forms, across all disciplines. In addition to being at the root of Open European Academy of Public Sciences and a key theme in our journals, we support sustainability by ensuring the longterm preservation of published papers, and the future of science through partnerships, sponsorships and awards.


2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Elke Maurer ◽  
Nike Walter ◽  
Tina Histing ◽  
Lydia Anastasopoulou ◽  
Thaqif El Khassawna ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Along with emerging open access journals (OAJ) predatory journals increasingly appear. As they harm accurate and good scientific research, we aimed to examine the awareness of predatory journals and open access publishing among orthopaedic and trauma surgeons. Methods In an online survey between August and December 2019 the knowledge on predatory journals and OAJ was tested with a hyperlink made available to the participants via the German Society for Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery (DGOU) email distributor. Results Three hundred fifty orthopaedic and trauma surgeons participated, of which 291 complete responses (231 males (79.4%), 54 females (18.6%) and 5 N/A (2.0%)) were obtained. 39.9% were aware of predatory journals. However, 21.0% knew about the “Directory of Open Access Journals” (DOAJ) as a register for non-predatory open access journals. The level of profession (e.g. clinic director, consultant) (p = 0.018) influenced the awareness of predatory journals. Interestingly, participants aware of predatory journals had more often been listed as corresponding authors (p < 0.001) and were well published as first or last author (p < 0.001). Awareness of OAJ was masked when journal selection options did not to provide any information on the editorial board, the peer review process or the publication costs. Conclusion The impending hazard of predatory journals is unknown to many orthopaedic and trauma surgeons. Early stage clinical researchers must be trained to differentiate between predatory and scientifically accurate journals.


BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. e047107
Author(s):  
Mallory K. Ellingson ◽  
Xiaoting Shi ◽  
Joshua J. Skydel ◽  
Kate Nyhan ◽  
Richard Lehman ◽  
...  

ObjectiveTo estimate the financial costs paid by individual medical researchers from meeting the article processing charges (APCs) levied by open access journals in 2019.DesignCross-sectional analysis.Data sourcesScopus was used to generate two random samples of researchers, the first with a senior author article indexed in the ‘Medicine’ subject area (general researchers) and the second with an article published in the ten highest-impact factor general clinical medicine journals (high-impact researchers) in 2019. For each researcher, Scopus was used to identify all first and senior author original research or review articles published in 2019. Data were obtained from Scopus, institutional profiles, Journal Citation Reports, publisher databases, the Directory of Open Access Journals, and individual journal websites.Main outcome measuresMedian APCs paid by general and high-impact researchers for all first and senior author research and review articles published in 2019.ResultsThere were 241 general and 246 high-impact researchers identified as eligible for our study. In 2019, the general and high-impact researchers published a total of 914 (median 2, IQR 1–5) and 1471 (4, 2–8) first or senior author research or review articles, respectively. 42% (384/914) of the articles from the general researchers and 29% (428/1471) of the articles from the high-impact medical researchers were published in fully open access journals. The median total APCs paid by general researchers in 2019 was US$191 (US$0–US$2500) and the median total paid by high-impact researchers was US$2900 (US$0–US$5465); the maximum paid by a single researcher in total APCs was US$30115 and US$34676, respectively.ConclusionsMedical researchers in 2019 were found to have paid between US$0 and US$34676 in total APCs. As journals with APCs become more common, it is important to continue to evaluate the potential cost to researchers, especially on individuals who may not have the funding or institutional resources to cover these costs.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document