scholarly journals Mapping the OA Diamond landscape worldwide. What do we know so far?

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vanessa Proudman

The open access publishing offering has grown significantly over the last two decades with DOAJ alone currently indexing over 15,000 open access journals. Apart from APC-based OA, a fertile and diverse landscape of open access journals and platforms exists in the form of Diamond OA. Diamond OA is the publishing model where research is both free for authors to publish and free for readers to access. This presentation will describe the results of an ongoing research study: The Diamond Open Access Study commissioned by cOAlition S. This research study aims to acquire a deeper understanding of the landscape of OA Diamond journals and platforms. Its goal is also to gain insights that will help cOAlition S and other stakeholders develop effective policies and funding mechanisms that more strategically support Diamond Open Access. For the Munin Conference, we aim to present the preliminary results of the survey part of the study. As at end August, more than 1,700 Diamond OA journals have responded to the survey which was launched in early July 2020. The survey focuses on journals in DOAJ and on those not yet included. The session will address the following: What are the motivations for OA Diamond? How mature are OA Diamond journals, where are they based, what languages and what disciplines do they serve? What journal services are provided? How do journals manage copyright and licensing? What editorial quality assurance practices exist? And how do these characteristics differ between journals from different regions, languages and disciplines?Who owns them? How are they funded by whom and using which type of mechanism? What revenue streams exist? How might funders support the financial sustainability of the journal or platform?

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noella Edelmann ◽  
Judith Schoßböck

Watch the VIDEO of the presentation.JeDEM, the Journal of E-democracy and Open Government (jedem.org), was first published in 2009 as an initiative of the Centre for E-Governance. It is an open access e-journal (that follows the green open access road) with a focus on topics such as e-democracy, e-participation, open government and open access. The journal follows the green open access road, and it is indexed with EBSCO[1], DOAJ[2], Google Scholar and the Public Knowledge Project metadata harvester[3]. With a wide range of subjects and research fields, articles cover diverse topics so publishing in JeDEM attracts a wide range of authors and readers from different disciplines.While the effects and impact of open access publishing have been studied, there is less research on the motivational factors of publishing in open access e-journals (such as JeDEM) that focus on a user perspective (see e.g. Nicholas et al 2015; Jamali, Nicholas, and Herman 2016). A review of JeDEM by Quality Open Access Market (QOAM)[4] in 2016 provides an external evaluation of JeDEM, but in this contribution, we wish to present and to discuss a research design to assess the users’ perspectives and motivational factors for publishing open access whilst also considering different user types and disciplines. A workshop held at CEDEM16 (Conference for E-Democracy and Open Government 2016[5], see Lampoltshammer, Edelmann, und Schossboeck, 2016)), shed some light on the most important topics for researchers in open access publishing. The results of this workshop revealed some motivations for publishing open access. Another workshop will be held at CeDEM Asia 2016 (Conference for E-Democracy and Open Government Asia 2016)[6], with the aim of uncovering further motivational factors and understanding them from a comparative perspective. Comparing the results of both workshops and a literature review regarding motivational factors for open access publishing will form the basis for developing and choosing the questions for a quantitative study (online survey) to be sent out to all users of JeDEM by summer 2017. Conferences in the area of open access will be used to discuss the methodology and set-up of this questionnaire. Registered and potential users will be encouraged to answer the survey, also to find out about their use of the features of the journal (e.g. commenting articles) and how such features contribute to the concept of open science and scholarly communication.By assessing the user perspective of our open access journal, we seek to answer questions such as:Can we distinguish differences in motivation for publishing in open access across user types and disciplines? What differences can be determined?How can users be classified according to their motivations and does it make sense to consider user types and motivations for management activities of an open access journal? What type of users are JeDEM users?What are users’ opinion on different aspects of open access publishing and its further development, e.g. open peer review etc. and how do user opinions differ across the disciplines or countries?How can results help other e-publishers or editors in the area of open access and contribute to the field of scholarly communication?As an ongoing research project, we will be looking forward for feedback and recommendations about how to develop the user survey and our activities for the journal.[1] EBSCO Information Services www.ebsco.com[2] DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals https://doaj.org/[3] https://pkp.sfu.ca/ojs/[4] https://www.qoam.eu/[5] www.donau-uni.ac.at/cedem16[6] www.donau-uni.ac.at/cedemasia2016


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Henrik Karlstrøm ◽  
Per Pippin Aspaas

More than 70 fully open-access, peer-reviewed journals are currently being published by government-funded service providers at eight Norwegian institutions. The service-providing staff is typically working within a research library, with the editor-in-chief affiliated to the same institution. In autumn 2020, Universities Norway (a cooperative body for accredited universities and university colleges in Norway), commissioned a report on this part of the national publishing landscape. The report was published in June 2021. As representatives of the committee writing the report, we present an overview of the Diamond Open Access publishing landscape in Norway and discuss our recommendations for strengthening the quality and robustness of the institutional service providers (ISPs). In brief, we suggest that the various ISPs merge and establish a board with an executive officer responsible for prioritizing technical upgrades and for establishing common standards and systems of quality assurance. Library staff at the various institutions should however still function as primary contacts for the editors and owners of the various journals, but operate according to clear guidelines and within a multi-institutional collegium.


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.


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.


Publications ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bo-Christer Björk ◽  
Sari Kanto-Karvonen ◽  
J. Tuomas Harviainen

Predatory journals are Open Access journals of highly questionable scientific quality. Such journals pretend to use peer review for quality assurance, and spam academics with requests for submissions, in order to collect author payments. In recent years predatory journals have received a lot of negative media. While much has been said about the harm that such journals cause to academic publishing in general, an overlooked aspect is how much articles in such journals are actually read and in particular cited, that is if they have any significant impact on the research in their fields. Other studies have already demonstrated that only some of the articles in predatory journals contain faulty and directly harmful results, while a lot of the articles present mediocre and poorly reported studies. We studied citation statistics over a five-year period in Google Scholar for 250 random articles published in such journals in 2014 and found an average of 2.6 citations per article, and that 56% of the articles had no citations at all. For comparison, a random sample of articles published in the approximately 25,000 peer reviewed journals included in the Scopus index had an average of 18, 1 citations in the same period with only 9% receiving no citations. We conclude that articles published in predatory journals have little scientific impact.


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.


2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Arindam Basu

Open access publications are those where following the publication itself, the publishers allow anyone to access the article or publication to read, or download without any restriction. It is believed that publishing in open access journals can increase the visibility of the publication, although uncertainties prevail. In a bid to improve the PBRF ratings, the College research committee in its monthly meeting agreed to organise an Open Access Seminar in the college. The seminar was organised on 4th of June, 2015, Thursday. Four speakers were identified. They were: Peter Lund and Anton Angelo from the University of Canterbury Central Library and Researcn Unit, Peter Binfield from PeerJ, and Viriginia Barbour from Australian Open Access Support Group. The topics of the seminar included a brief introduction to open access publishing and the state of the scenario in NZ and Australia and exploration of the issues around green and gold open access, and future directions as to what can be done to increase participation in open access. The seminar was also designed to be an open to all, and free flowing discussion. This seminar followed a format of webinar and on the spot presentations, questions and answers. A web based page was set up using the openly accessible Adobe Connect "room" where participants could connect even if they were not able to attend in person. Dr Binfield and Barbour were overseas speakers and they connected using the webinar (Adobe Connect). Mr Lund and Angelo were local speakers and they came to the meeting hall directly and spoke. A resource website was set up and the event was recorded for later viewing. The event was publicised across the university and through online channels. About 30 individuals attended the meeting in person, and ten participants joined online. Mr Lund introduced the concept of open access at the University of Canterbury, and introduced the concepts of gold and green open access; Mr Angelo introduced the concepts of creative commons, and Drs Binfield and Barbour discussed models of open access and the situation in Australia. The floor was open for questions, and clarifications and discussions from the audience participation. Key takeaway lessons from the seminar included: at the University of Canterbury, scholars are active in publishing in Open Access channels; green open access is popular in Australia and in New Zealand; newer channels and novel publishing models uitlising the Open Access formats are emerging and becoming popular; while some reservations about quality in open access exist, quality of peer review in OA journals were at par.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
OEAPS

Conference paper Covered by Leading Indexing Databases Open 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 science related 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.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document