Injecting Creative Commons Licensing into university policy and publishing

Australian universities are publishing previously unpublished works such as theses in institutional repositories or by publishing scholarly journals on their own presses. This re-invented role of publisher is due in part, to the availability of digital age technologies which scaffold the publishing process and facilitate inexpensive production of digital-only journals. The global push for Open Access to the outputs of publicly-funded research has also been a major driver. Research funder mandates and institutional Open Access policies apply only to publications for which the authors have no expectation of commercial gain. In all cases the primary motivation is to disseminate widely for maximum uptake with attribution to the author thereby increasing impact. This makes works published in institutional repositories and on university presses ideal candidates for Creative Commons licences.

Two Scenarios for How Scholarly Publishers Could Change Their Business Model to Open Access

The Internet has made possible the cost-effective dissemination of scientific journals in the form of electronic versions, usually in parallel with the printed versions. At the same time the electronic medium also makes possible totally new open access (OA) distribution models, funded by author charges, sponsorship, advertising, voluntary work, etc., where the end product is free in full text to the readers. Although more than 2,000 new OA journals have been founded in the last 15 years, the uptake of open access has been rather slow, with currently around 5% of all peer-reviewed articles published in OA journals. The slow growth can to a large extent be explained by the fact that open access has predominantly emerged via newly founded journals and startup publishers. Established journals and publishers have not had strong enough incentives to change their business models, and the commercial risks in doing so have been high. In this paper we outline and discuss two different scenarios for how scholarly publishers could change their operating model to open access. The first is based on an instantaneous change and the second on a gradual change. We propose a way to manage the gradual change by bundling traditional “big deal” licenses and author charges for opening access to individual articles.

A Method for Comparing Scholarly Journals as Service Providers to Authors

When authors of scholarly articles decide where to submit their manuscripts for peer review and eventual publication, they often base their choice of journals on very incomplete information abouthow well the journals serve the authors’ purposes of informing about their research and advancing their academic careers. The purpose of this study was to develop and test a new method for benchmarking scientific journals, providing more information to prospective authors. The method estimates a number of journal parameters, including readership, scientific prestige, time from submission to publication, acceptance rate and service provided by the journal during the review and publication process. Data directly obtainable from the web, data that can be calculated from such data, data obtained from publishers and editors, and data obtained using surveys with authors are used in the method, which has been tested on three different sets of journals, each from a different discipline. We found a number of problems with the different data acquisition methods, which limit the extent to which the method can be used. Publishers and editors are reluctant to disclose important information they have at hand (i.e. journal circulation, web downloads, acceptance rate). The calculation of some important parameters (for instance average time from submission to publication, regional spread of authorship) can be done but requires quite a lot of work. It can be difficult to get reasonable response rates to surveys with authors. All in all we believe that the method we propose, taking a “service to authors” perspective as a basis for benchmarking scientific journals, is useful and can provide information that is valuable to prospective authors in selected scientific disciplines.

Barriers to and facilitators of interventions to counter publication bias: thematic analysis of scholarly articles and stakeholder interviews.

BACKGROUND: When the nature and direction of research results affect their chances of publication, a distortion of the evidence base - termed publication bias - results. Despite considerable recent efforts to implement measures to reduce the non-publication of trials, publication bias is still a major problem in medical research. The objective of our study was to identify barriers to and facilitators of interventions to prevent or reduce publication bias. METHODS: We systematically reviewed the scholarly literature and extracted data from articles. Further, we performed semi-structured interviews with stakeholders. We performed an inductive thematic analysis to identify barriers to and facilitators of interventions to counter publication bias. RESULTS: The systematic review identified 39 articles. Thirty-four of 89 invited interview partners agreed to be interviewed. We clustered interventions into four categories: prospective trial registration, incentives for reporting in peer-reviewed journals or research reports, public availability of individual patient-level data, and peer-review/editorial processes. Barriers we identified included economic and personal interests, lack of financial resources for a global comprehensive trial registry, and different legal systems. Facilitators identified included: raising awareness of the effects of publication bias, providing incentives to make data publically available, and implementing laws to enforce prospective registration and reporting of clinical trial results. CONCLUSIONS: Publication bias is a complex problem that reflects the complex system in which it occurs. The cooperation amongst stakeholders to increase public awareness of the problem, better tailoring of incentives to publish, and ultimately legislative regulations have the greatest potential for reducing publication bias.

Where did all these books come from? The Publishing Industry and American Intellectual Life

The American book publishing industry shapes the character of American intellectual life. While the newspaper and television industries have been accused of and investigated for bias and lowering America’s intellectual standards, book publishing has gone largely unexamined by scholars. The existing studies of the publishing industry have focused on finance, procedure and history. “There are few ‘theories’ of publishing – efforts to understand the ‘whys’ as well as the ‘hows.’ Few scholarly scientists have devoted significant scholarly attention to publishing” (Altbach and Hoshino, xiii). There are many possible reasons for this lacuna. First, there is a perception that books have always been around, that they are an “old” technology and therefore they don’t appear to have had as much of an impact on our society as television and other media (which were developed quickly and suddenly) seem to have had (Altbach and Hoshino, xiv). Also, despite books’ present and past popularity, television, radio, and now the internet reach more people more easily, and are therefore more topical points of study and observation. In studying the effects of mass media on everyday American life, television and the internet may be the most logical points of study. Regarding public intellectual life however, books play a much more important role. Public intellectual life has always been associated with independent thinkers publishing their work for the masses. For this reason, this I focus on trade publishing. Trade publishing produces fiction and non-fiction works for the general reading public, as opposed to technical manuals, textbooks, and other fiction and nonfiction books targeted to small and specific audiences. Although, quantitatively speaking, “the largest part of book publishing business is embodied in that great complex of companies and activities producing educational, business, scientific, technical, and reference books and materials,” (Tebbel 1987, 439) the trade industry publishes most of the books that most people read. It is the most public segment of the industry, and the most likely place to find public intellectualism. Trade publishing is not only the most public segment of the industry, but it is also the most susceptible to corruption and lowered intellectual standards. Unlike specialty publishing, which caters to a specific, known segment of society, trade publishers must compete with countless other publications, as well as with other forms of media, for the patronage of the general public. As John Tebbel (author of a widely referenced history of the publishing industry) puts it, “The textbook, scientific, or technical book is subjected to much more rigorous scrutiny by buyers and users, and in an intensively competitive market inferior products are quickly lost" (Tebbel 1987, xiv). Since the standards for trade publishing are not nearly as specific – trade books simply need to catch the attention of a significant number of readers, they don’t have to measure up to a given level of quality – the quality of trade books is much more variable. And yet, a successful trade publication can have a much greater impact on society than the most rigorously researched and edited textbook or scholarly study.

Open Access Influence on Argentinean Scientific Community's Publishing Patterns

Este estudio tiene como objetivo estimar la influencia del acceso abierto en los patrones de publicación de la comunidad científica argentina en diferentes campos temáticos (Medicina; Física y Astronomía; Agricultura y Ciencias biológicas y Ciencias sociales y Humanidades), a partir del análisis del modelo de acceso de las revistas elegidas para comunicar los resultados de investigación en el período 2008-2010. La producción fue recogida de la base de datos SCOPUS y los modelos de acceso de las revistas determinados a partir de la consulta a las fuentes DOAJ, e-revist@s, SCielo, Redalyc, PubMed, Romeo-Sherpa y Dulcinea. Se analizó la accesibilidad real y potencial de la producción científica nacional por las vías dorada y verde, respectivamente, así como también por suscripción a través de la Biblioteca Electrónica de Ciencia y Tecnología del Ministerio de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación Productiva de la Nación Argentina. Los resultados muestran que en promedio, y para el conjunto de las temáticas estudiadas, el 70 de la producción científica argentina visible en SCOPUS se publica en revistas que adhieren de una u otra forma al movimiento de acceso abierto, en una relación del 27 para la vía dorada y del 43 para las que permiten el autoarchivo por la vía verde. Entre el 16 y el 30 (según las áreas temáticas) de los artículos publicados en revistas que permiten el autoarchivo se accede vía suscripción. El porcentaje de revistas sin acceso es del orden del 30 en Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades, y alcanza cerca del 45 en el resto de las áreas. Se concluye que Argentina presenta condiciones muy favorables para liberar un alto porcentaje de la literatura científica generada en el país bajo la modalidad del acceso abierto a través de repositorios institucionales y de mandatos para el auto-archivo, contribuyendo además a incrementar la accesibilidad y la preservación a largo plazo de la producción científica y tecnológica nacional

Open Access Influence on Argentinean Scientific Community's Publishing Patterns

Este estudio tiene como objetivo estimar la influencia del acceso abierto en los patrones de publicación de la comunidad científica argentina en diferentes campos temáticos (Medicina; Física y Astronomía; Agricultura y Ciencias biológicas y Ciencias sociales y Humanidades), a partir del análisis del modelo de acceso de las revistas elegidas para comunicar los resultados de investigación en el período 2008-2010. La producción fue recogida de la base de datos SCOPUS y los modelos de acceso de las revistas determinados a partir de la consulta a las fuentes DOAJ, e-revist@s, SCielo, Redalyc, PubMed, Romeo-Sherpa y Dulcinea. Se analizó la accesibilidad real y potencial de la producción científica nacional por las vías dorada y verde, respectivamente, así como también por suscripción a través de la Biblioteca Electrónica de Ciencia y Tecnología del Ministerio de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación Productiva de la Nación Argentina. Los resultados muestran que en promedio, y para el conjunto de las temáticas estudiadas, el 70 de la producción científica argentina visible en SCOPUS se publica en revistas que adhieren de una u otra forma al movimiento de acceso abierto, en una relación del 27 para la vía dorada y del 43 para las que permiten el autoarchivo por la vía verde. Entre el 16 y el 30 (según las áreas temáticas) de los artículos publicados en revistas que permiten el autoarchivo se accede vía suscripción. El porcentaje de revistas sin acceso es del orden del 30 en Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades, y alcanza cerca del 45 en el resto de las áreas. Se concluye que Argentina presenta condiciones muy favorables para liberar un alto porcentaje de la literatura científica generada en el país bajo la modalidad del acceso abierto a través de repositorios institucionales y de mandatos para el auto-archivo, contribuyendo además a incrementar la accesibilidad y la preservación a largo plazo de la producción científica y tecnológica nacional

Workflow-centric research objects: First class citizens in scholarly discourse.

A workflow-centric research object bundles a workflow, the provenance of the results obtained by its enactment, other digital objects that are relevant for the experiment (papers, datasets, etc.), and annotations that semantically describe all these objects. In this paper, we propose a model to specify workflow-centric research objects, and show how the model can be grounded using semantic technologies and existing vocabularies, in particular the Object Reuse and Exchange (ORE) model and the Annotation Ontology (AO).We describe the life-cycle of a research object, which resembles the life-cycle of a scienti?c experiment.

Open Access Influence on Argentinean Scientific Community's Publishing Patterns

Este estudio tiene como objetivo estimar la influencia del acceso abierto en los patrones de publicación de la comunidad científica argentina en diferentes campos temáticos (Medicina; Física y Astronomía; Agricultura y Ciencias biológicas y Ciencias sociales y Humanidades), a partir del análisis del modelo de acceso de las revistas elegidas para comunicar los resultados de investigación en el período 2008-2010. La producción fue recogida de la base de datos SCOPUS y los modelos de acceso de las revistas determinados a partir de la consulta a las fuentes DOAJ, e-revist@s, SCielo, Redalyc, PubMed, Romeo-Sherpa y Dulcinea. Se analizó la accesibilidad real y potencial de la producción científica nacional por las vías dorada y verde, respectivamente, así como también por suscripción a través de la Biblioteca Electrónica de Ciencia y Tecnología del Ministerio de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación Productiva de la Nación Argentina. Los resultados muestran que en promedio, y para el conjunto de las temáticas estudiadas, el 70 de la producción científica argentina visible en SCOPUS se publica en revistas que adhieren de una u otra forma al movimiento de acceso abierto, en una relación del 27 para la vía dorada y del 43 para las que permiten el autoarchivo por la vía verde. Entre el 16 y el 30 (según las áreas temáticas) de los artículos publicados en revistas que permiten el autoarchivo se accede vía suscripción. El porcentaje de revistas sin acceso es del orden del 30 en Ciencias Sociales y Humanidades, y alcanza cerca del 45 en el resto de las áreas. Se concluye que Argentina presenta condiciones muy favorables para liberar un alto porcentaje de la literatura científica generada en el país bajo la modalidad del acceso abierto a través de repositorios institucionales y de mandatos para el auto-archivo, contribuyendo además a incrementar la accesibilidad y la preservación a largo plazo de la producción científica y tecnológica nacional

The Cuala Press: Women, publishing, and the conflicted genealogies of 'feminist publishing'

The Cuala Press, a fine art press run by Elizabeth Yeats around Dublin during the first half of the twentieth century, has long been recognised amongst scholars of Irish literature and history. But the press has been analysed almost exclusively through the interpretative lenses of poet W.B. Yeats, the Yeats family, and the Irish Renaissance. The article challenges such received understandings of Cuala by considering the press as a gendered publishing enterprise: one run by a woman, employing only women, and designed to create work and economic independence for Irish working girls. Through examining the origins of Cuala, the locus of editorial power within the press, and Cuala's complexly ambivalent relationship with modernist Irish suffrage and nationalist women's networks, the article situates the post-1970 feminist publishing boom within a historical trajectory. It suggests that scholarly knowledge of women's publishing history may be crucially dependent upon the health of contemporary feminist presses. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.