Downloaded 13 times
Open Access 101
This document provides a summary of recent developments in open access publishing. It discusses motivations for open access like increasing access and promoting reproducible research. It outlines key aspects of open access like different models of open access publishing and who pays publication fees. It also summarizes milestones in open access like the development of open access policies and funds. Recent initiatives discussed include petitions to support open access and new models of peer review and publishing.
Open Access 101
- 1. Open Access 101 Anoversimplified, aggressively abbreviated overview and summary of recent developments Claire Stewart Josh Honn John Blosser Open Access Week 2012 October 25, 2012 Center for Scholarly Communication & Digital Curation Northwestern University
- 2. A Realistic Goal? In 10 years, a scientist will be able to incorporate 30% more papers into their thinking than they can today in the same amount of time Neil M. Thakur, Special Assistant to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Deputy Director for Extramural Research, Berlin 9 presentation
- 3. From Neil M.Thakur's Berlin 9 presentation
- 4.
- 5. Why Open Access? • Pricing • Democratizing access • Promoting reproducible and efficient research • Computing across the literature to yield new insights, promote discovery, collaboration
- 6. Serials pricing "The Resourcesand Technical Services Division of the American Library Association has created the Subcommittee on Serials Pricing Issues to gather and disseminate statistics and other data on the rising costs of journals to libraries, perhaps the greatest concern among academic libraries today." Issue 1, ALA/RTSD Newsletter on Serials Pricing Issues, 1989 (emphasis added)
- 7.
- 8. Democratizing access "In today’s information age, where essentially anything said by anyone can be made accessible within a matter of moments, it is unfortunate that families have easy access to all BUT the most scientifically valid information, that which can be found in scientifically reviewed research literature." Sophia Colamarino, Vice President for Research, Autism Speaks Testimony, House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Hearing on Public Access to Federally Funded Research, July 29, 2010
- 9. Reproducible and efficientresearch Reproducibility initiative https://www.scienceexchange.com/reproducibility
- 10. Computing the literature Action Science Explorer, http://www.cs.umd.edu/hcil/ase/
- 11.
- 12. Brief (and oversimplified) digression:how scholarly journal publishing works 1. Authors write articles for free 2. Other qualified researchers review them for free 3. Publishers publish them a. Traditional publishers charge a fee to read b. Open Access publishers don't, but might charge a fee to authors
- 13. Key players inthe ecosystem Authors and researchers Editorial boards Scholarly societies Universities Publishers Libraries Repositories Funders Policy makers Readers and the general public!
- 14. What is OpenAccess? Open-access (OA) literature is digital, online, free of charge, and free of most copyright and licensing restrictions. A very brief introduction to Open Access Peter Suber
- 15. What is 'Real'open access? Green versus gold Self-archived or immediate OA from publisher (when and what) Gratis versus libre Free to read or free to reuse (what rights)
- 16. Who pays for(Gold) OA? Free is free: some (many) are free to authors and to readers For those that are NOT free to authors: submission charges, article processing charges (APC), page charges o NIH, NSF, HHMI, others will allow publishing costs to be charged to grants o OA funds. We don't have one at NU (should we?), some universities do. o Author personal funds
- 17. Hybrid Open Access Author pays APC to make single article available: immediate OA Subscription required to access entire issue/run; rights to reuse vary -- see A crowdsourced survey of 'open access' publishers, publications, licenses and fe and SHERPA/RoMEO's paid option list
- 18. Repositories https://scholarsphere.psu.edu | http://arxiv.org
- 19. Publisher policies http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo
- 20. Creative Commons http://creativecommons.org
- 21. ... and otherissues http://www.doaj.org | http://www.plos.org/about/open-access/howopenisit | http://scholarlyoa.com
- 22. Scholarly Communication LibGuide http://libguides.northwestern.edu/scholcomm
- 23.
- 24. Open Access milestones 1966:ERIC and MEDLINE, seeds of open access. early 1970's: Agricola, Project Gutenberg. arXiv 1991, SSRN 1994.
- 25. e-biomed and PubMedCentral: Harold Varmus and the NIH role
- 26. NIH public accesspolicy PubMed Central; full policy @ http://publicaccess.nih.gov
- 27. Scholarly Publishing andAcademic Resources Coalition (SPARC) 1998 http://www.arl.org/sparc
- 28. August 2006, editorialboard of the mathematics journal Topology resign en masse, citing concerns about Elsevier's pricing policies.
- 29. Editorial board resignationsand alt journals Not always a transition to Open Access! many moved from big commercials to University Presses (Portal: Muse/JHU; Journal of Topology: LMS/Oxford, etc.) 1989 - present, spike around 2003 Source: Journal declarations of independence (OAD)
- 30. Journals that convertedfrom Toll Access to Open Access from the Open Access Directory (OAD)
- 31. Declarations and principles • Budapest: February 2002, reaffirmed and expanded September 2012 • Bethesda: April 2003. Definitions and statements of principle • Berlin: October 2003 • Open Access Scholarly Publishers Association (OASPA): 2008, Code of Conduct
- 32. (Attempted) legislation http://www.taxpayeraccess.org/issues/frpaa | http://thecostofknowledge.com
- 33. Institutional mandates http://roarmap.eprints.org/
- 34. Open Access funds http://www.arl.org/sparc/openaccess/funds/ | http://www.library.cornell.edu/compact
- 35. Interesting models andNU support 1999 - SPARC 2003 - BioMed Central 2004 - PLoS 2005 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy 2008 / 2011 - New Journal of Physics 2008 - SCOAP3 2010 - arXiv
- 36. What about impactand uptake?
- 37. Bibliography of studieson OA impact advantage
- 38. from Laakso, M.,& Björk, B.-C. (2012). Anatomy of open access publishing: a study of longitudinal development and internal structure. BMC Medicine, 10(1), 124. doi:10.1186/1741-7015-10-124
- 39.
- 40. Petition to theWhite House https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/require-free-access-over-internet-scientific-journal-articles-arising-taxpayer-funded-research/wDX82FLQ
- 41. EU & UKrecent developments • PEER report June 2012: no evidence that self-archiving harms publishing • EU signals intention to support full OA in Horizon 2020 research programme • Finch report, commissioned by UK science minister David Willetts July 2012, strong support for Gold, and diversion of public funds to support it. (lots of criticism that Finch got some basic stuff wrong) • Research Councils UK mandate based on Finch recommendations: o favors Green, embargo of no more than 6 months for science, 12months for other, CC-BY-NC or better o if Gold (even hybrid) is available instead, must choose it. Govt will pay via block grants to unis, but no embargo and CC-BY required
- 42. MLA and AHA June2012: • Concedes that there are significant problems with the "The revised agreements leave current ecosystem, growing copyright with the authors and problems of inequitable access explicitly permit authors to deposit and rising cost in open-access repositories and post on personal or departmental • Voices concern about the Web sites the versions of their emergence of APC model and manuscripts accepted for recommendations of the Finch publication." report • Sciences v humanities/SS • Exchanging one set of cost Text of the MLA statement inequalities for another? Text of the AHA statement
- 43.
- 44. On sharing data:"Open your minds and share your results" by Geoffrey Boulton, emeritus professor of Geology of the University of Edinburgh and chair of a Royal Society committee that authored the June 2012 report "Science as an open enterprise"
- 45. Peer review+OA experimentscontinue: F1000 Research open access and post-publication peer review, Modern Language Association's MLA Commons for pre-publication peer review and publishing platform for scholarship in new formats
- 46.
- 47. Thank you! Time fordiscussion
- 48. Image credits, additionalcitations Unless otherwise indicated, quotes, screenshots, images and other materials are the intellectual property of the referenced persons or organizations, and are reproduced here according to section 107 fair use principles of the United States Copyright Law, title 17 U.S. Code. This presentation is intended for educational and research use only; any additional use of these materials may be subject to additional restrictions and/or require the permission of the copyright holder. • 'A realistic goal?' and 'A new role for scientific publishing' Thakur, N. M. (2011, November 8). Open access as a path to increased scientific productivity. Presented at the Berlin 9 conference, Bethesda MD. Retrieved from http://www.berlin9.org/bm~doc/berlin9-thakur.pdf • 'Democratizing access' photograph from Berlin 9 speaker page and Autism Speaks logo from Autism Speaks web page • 'What is Open Access?' Thorpe, Lilian. Photo of Peter Suber by Lilian Thorpe. Taken in Brooksville, Maine, November 25, 2009. Work found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Peter- Suber8.jpg / http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ • 'e-biomed and PubMed Central' photo of Harold Varmus from Columbia University news
- 49. All original materialin this presentation is (c) 2012 by John Blosser, Josh Honn and Claire Stewart this work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License (CC BY 3.0)
Editor's Notes
- #12 Intentionally blank