“Humanities book authors value the benefits that publishing open access can bring. Open access books are easy to find and share, allowing for authors to increase the real-world impact of their work.
Open access can support authors’ desires to increase interdisciplinary discussion and use of their work, and to reach a larger and broader audience outside of their normal networks to students, policymakers and the general public. Publishing an open access academic book can also help with career advancement.
On this page you can find interviews with some of our featured book authors talking about their experiences of publishing open access, as well as open access book highlights from our Humanities list (History, Literature, Culture and Media Studies, Religion and Philosophy). Open access funding can sometimes be challenging to find, so you can also find a list of some of the funders who have supported our featured books, and information on our free Funding Support Service….”
“If you want to publish your scholarly book open access, watch this video to find out how it works at Springer Nature. Learn about the 6 steps to getting more impact for your research including peer review, copyright and licencing, and dissemination. German and English subtitles are available. Want to learn more about the benefits of publishing an OA book? Watch our first video ‘Why publish an open access book?’ then head over to our website: www.springernature.com/oabooks. ”
“Since 2014, when Springer Nature pioneered its first transformative agreement (TA), the publisher has been leading the way enabling country level flips to open access (OA). Its latest national TA with Spain takes Springer Nature’s number of national TA’s to 14, 13 of which are in Europe. Through its TAs Springer Nature supports researchers from over 2,100 institutions, double that of any other publisher, in publishing OA.
This latest TA for Springer Nature, agreed with the Conference of Rectors of Spanish Universities (Crue Universidades Españolas) and the Spanish National Research Council (CSIC), is a clear example of the publisher’s continued commitment to driving OA and enabling sustainable open science practices globally.
The agreement will enable the 58 affiliated Universities of Crue & CSIC, responsible for over 90% of scientific research production in Spain, to publish OA in Springer Nature’s portfolio of over 2,300 titles including the Adis titles. With their work freely and universally available from the point of publication, this agreement will further enable the world’s students, scholars and scientists to read, share, use and reuse Spanish-funded research on a global scale. Affiliated researchers from Crue & CSIC institutions will also have full access to all Springer and Adis subscription journal content. The agreement is expected to see over 2200 articles a year from researchers in Spain published OA, and will run for four years up to 31 December 2024….”
Abstract: The German DEAL agreements between German universities and research institutions on the one side and Springer Nature and Wiley on the other side facilitate easy open access publishing for researchers located in Germany. We use a dataset of all publications in chemistry from 2016 to 2020 and apply a difference-in-differences approach to estimate the impact on eligible scientists’ choice of publication outlet. We find that even in the short period following the conclusion of these DEAL agreements, publication patterns in the field of chemistry have changed, as eligible researchers have increased their publications in Wiley and Springer Nature journals at the cost of other journals. From that two related competition concerns emerge: First, academic libraries may be, at least in the long run, left with fewer funds and incentives to subscribe to non-DEAL journals published by smaller publishers or to fund open access publications in these journals. Secondly, eligible authors may prefer to publish in journals included in the DEAL agreements, thereby giving DEAL journals a competitive advantage over non-DEAL journals in attracting good papers. Given the two-sided market nature of the academic journal market, these effects may both further spur the concentration process in this market.
“Springer Nature and the University of California (UC) today launched a new initiative to gain greater understanding of researcher attitudes to and motivations towards open research practices (including open access articles, data, and code; transparent peer review; and preprints). As part of the partnership, participating UC authors will also have the option to trial Guided Open Access (GOA) for some flagship Nature titles….”
“Guided Open Access is a new publishing option offered at Nature Genetics. Authors can submit once and be simultaneously considered by three journals. Editorial collaboration and a single submission system combine to make the publication process easier and faster.
Nature Genetics now offers three publishing options for new manuscripts submitted in 2021: the traditional (subscription) model, Open Access and Guided Open Access. Whereas the first two options are well-known parts of the publishing landscape, the Guided Open Access option is different….
The cost for Guided Open Access is split into two payments: an Editorial Assessment Charge (€2,190), which is payable after the Guided Open Access suitability check is passed and also covers the Editor Assessment Report, and the remainder of the APC, which is payable after acceptance in one of the three journals (a top-up fee of €2,600 for Nature Genetics or Nature Communications or €800 for Communications Biology). The total fee for Guided Open Access publication in Nature Genetics is €4,790, approximately half the regular Open Access APC….
Why might Guided Open Access be of interest as a publication option for some Nature Genetics authors? First, authors can be simultaneously considered at Nature Genetics, Nature Communications and Communications Biology, without a need for resubmission or transfers. Second, editors work collaboratively to guide authors throughout the process to help manuscripts find their best home, giving detailed evaluation and recommendation in the Editor Assessment Report. Finally, Guided Open Access allows for Open Access publication in Nature Genetics at a lower APC. We note that we follow the same editorial standards for all submissions regardless of which option is chosen….”
“However, for those of us committed to accelerating the transition to immediate gold OA, 2021 has come with a new challenge – the introduction by cOAlition S of its Rights Retention Strategy (RRS) and its determination that zero-embargo green OA be used as an alternative to gold OA. As we have made clear from the outset in our Plan S submission and contributions to blogs and letters, seeking to assert a prior CC BY licence on the accepted manuscript (AM) version of an article risks undermining the transition to immediate open access to the version of record, a goal we had thought cOAlition S shared with us. This RRS/zero-embargo green OA approach forces publishers into defending subscription income since this is the only income available to pay for their per article costs. Further, this RRS/zero-embargo green OA approach has introduced significant confusion for authors with the priority it gives zero embargo green OA even if a journal provides a compliant immediate OA option for the version of record….”
“It was against this backdrop that I read Exploring Researcher Preference for the Version of Record, which reported on research Springer Nature conducted in collaboration with ResearchGate. It is perhaps obvious to caveat that it is in Springer Nature’s interests to use this study to reinforce the value of the VOR, a central position of a recent keynote by CEO Frank Vrancken Peeters at the APE 2021 conference.
The study was conducted “in situ” and leveraged the Springer Nature syndication pilot project that posted VOR articles for access on the ResearchGate platform. As Mithu Lucraft, Director for Content Marketing Strategy, of the Springer Nature Group and one of the study’s co-authors explained to me, the survey was presented to ResearchGate users that were logged in and who had interacted with at least one Springer Nature publication in the 60 days prior to the survey being live in October 2020.
Importantly, survey participants were not only asked to choose which version of an article they prefer but also which versions they would feel comfortable using for different purposes. In many cases, participants indicated that multiple different versions would be acceptable for a given use, which indicates that a preprint or accepted manuscript can substitute for the VOR in some use cases but perhaps not all. …”
“This virtual event will give an introduction to open access (OA) books before our guest speaker, Prof. Fernando M. Reimers, will share his experiences of publishing several OA books. Afterwards, we will open up participation for an audience Q&A session where you can ask Prof. Reimers and OA expert Peter Suber all about OA books. …”
“A recent survey by academic publisher Springer Nature suggests academics strongly prefer to read and cite final versions of journal articles over earlier drafts….
Nearly 1,400 ResearchGate users responded to the survey in early 2020. A majority of survey respondents said when given the choice between an earlier version of a journal article and the final published version of record, they would choose the final version, viewing it as the most credible and authoritative source. When citing an article in their own work, 83 percent of respondents said they preferred to use the version of record over earlier versions….
It is not particularly surprising that academics say they would choose version-of-record articles over preprint versions of the same article, said Jessica Polka, executive director of ASAPbio, a group that advocates for the open publication of STEM research.
In a recent analysis of articles published on preprint servers bioRxiv and medRxiv, Polka and her colleagues found relatively few differences between preprint articles and their final published counterparts….
While staff at Springer Nature have worked over the past two years to increase their collaboration with ResearchGate, staff at several other major academic publishers have actively tried to distance their companies from the site and diminish its role in the research information landscape — an interesting division in approach.
In 2018, publishers including Elsevier and the American Chemical Society formed a group called the Coalition for Responsible Sharing. This group sent thousands of take-down notices to ResearchGate demanding the site remove unauthorized copies of journal articles. Elsevier and ACS have also filed copyright infringement lawsuits against ResearchGate, legal battles that are still working their way through American and German courts….”