Abstract: In developing countries like India, taxpayers’ money is utilized for research and development. The researchers conduct their research using public money and publish their research papers in commercial journals. Firstly, the researcher uses Government funds for research. Secondly, government funds are also spent on subscribing to high-cost journals. Also, many Indian academic institutions can not subscribe to reputed commercial journals due to a lack of funds. In other words, research output generated using public money is not accessible to all. OA journals can solve this problem smoothly. In this study, researchers analyze the trends in Open Access publications and Closed access publications by India’s top research institutes, IITs. Researchers found that IIT Hyderabad (26%) published the highest number of open-access publications. Old established IITs’ open-access publication figures are lower than newly set-up IITs. However, there is an increase in Open Access publications by IITs over the last decade.
“As a leader in academic publishing, what most excites you right now?
I do think that making virtually all aspects of science open – its outcomes (i.e., articles and books), its data, its code, its techniques, etc. – has huge potential to improve trust in science and to accelerate its impact. Targeting this at finding solutions to UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) has to be the most important and exciting opportunity we all face. This will require imagination and an ability to better combine people and technology than ever before….
What do you anticipate the major challenges will be for Springer Nature, and indeed the publishing industry, over the next five years?
I think the greatest challenge is for us to find a way to make the transition to Open Science, including open access (OA), sustainable and equitable for all. Beyond this core challenge, we need to make sure that the determined and adaptable criminals and state actors that want to use our networks, our products, and our content to make illicit gains or gain access to the personal and institutional data of our customers are not able to succeed. These damage our customers and our reputations, and we must work together to prevent this.
What does open access / public access mean for your business?
We strongly believe in the benefits to the whole research process of immediate OA to the article version of record (VoR) which means Gold OA. Other forms, such as Public Access (PA), offer benefits mainly outside of the research system, but so far we haven’t found a way of making them financially sustainable. Of course, OA is a precursor to Open Science, which I think is the greatest prize, but OA by itself still enables many benefits such as getting more research out to more researchers faster, into the hands of policy makers and businesses, and the wider public….”
Abstract: By analyzing 25,671 journals largely absent from common journal counts, as well as Web of Science and Scopus, this study demonstrates that scholarly communication is more of a global endeavor than is commonly credited. These journals, employing the open-source publishing platform Open Journal Systems (OJS), have published 5.8 million items; they are in 136 countries, with 79.9% in the Global South and 84.2% following the OA diamond model (charging neither reader nor author). A substantial proportion of journals operate in more than one language (48.3%), with research published in 60 languages (led by English, Indonesian, Spanish, and Portuguese). The journals are distributed across the social sciences (45.9%), STEM (40.3%), and the humanities (13.8%). For all their geographic, linguistic, and disciplinary diversity, 1.2% are indexed in the Web of Science and 5.7% in Scopus. On the other hand, 1.0% are found in Cabell’s Predatory Reports, and 1.4% show up in Beall’s (2021) questionable list. This paper seeks to both contribute to and historically situate the expanded scale and diversity of scholarly publishing in the hope that this recognition may assist humankind in taking full advantage of what is increasingly a global research enterprise.
“Peer Review is an experiment in scholarly publishing currently in Beta. It is a platform that enables crowdsourced peer review and public dissemination of scientific and academic papers. For now, the platform can only handle pre-prints. It is and will remain open source and diamond open access. It is currently being maintained by a single developer as a side project.
Peer Review uses a reputation system to ensure that review and refereeing is done by qualified peers. Reputation is primarily gained from publishing, but can also be gained from giving constructive reviews. Review is separated into pre-publish “review” and post-publish “refereeing”. Review is entirely focused on giving authors constructive, supportive feedback. Refereeing is intended to help maintain the integrity of the overall literature by identifying spam, malpractice, and misinformation. To learn more, please read how it works.”
“We invited a number of (lead) editors to tell us about their journals and the reasons why they chose to work with Openjournals.nl. Sible Andringa, editor-in-chief of the Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics, kicks off. He feels that the journal has become more attractive to authors since switching to Openjournals and he explains why his editors quit working with a traditional publisher.
Sible Andringa: ‘The journal Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics (DuJAL) has been around for a long time. It started as the Journal of Applied Linguistics in Articles. The first volume was published in-house in 1976. From the beginning, the journal was published by the Dutch Association of Applied Linguistics Anéla (see www.anela.nl). In 2012, it was decided to change its name. The journal was renamed Dutch Journal of Applied Linguistics and it has since been published by John Benjamins. In January 2021, the journal moved to Openjournals….
With Openjournals, you can choose to offer all that together: pre- and post-prints are not necessary, and all data and instruments can be co-published. The ideal model, if you ask me. We can now also think about all kinds of new forms of publishing, such as publishing conference posters and the like. Those conversations we can now have, because we know it is possible and allowed by the publisher. We find that we have become more attractive to authors now that we are open access and publish on an ongoing basis. There are not huge numbers of submissions right away, but a steady stream of good quality.”
“Open science is in the interest of all professionals working in epilepsy care and patients. At the same time, we do have some challenges with open science within our field. For example, it clashes with patient-related data that cannot be shared due to privacy laws, and sometimes also with the interests of entrepreneurs who supply institutions with equipment/software.
We chose openjournals.nl because it offers full professional support in making both new issues and the Epilepsie archive open access. We are proud that, as the Nederlandse Liga tegen Epilepsie, we are now using the most widely used open source publishing platform for scientific journals.”
Abstract: We present the Webis-STEREO-21 dataset, a massive collection of Scientific Text Reuse in Open-access publications. It contains 91 million cases of reused text passages found in 4.2 million unique open-access publications. Cases range from overlap of as few as eight words to near-duplicate publications and include a variety of reuse types, ranging from boilerplate text to verbatim copying to quotations and paraphrases. Featuring a high coverage of scientific disciplines and varieties of reuse, as well as comprehensive metadata to contextualize each case, our dataset addresses the most salient shortcomings of previous ones on scientific writing. The Webis-STEREO-21 does not indicate if a reuse case is legitimate or not, as its focus is on the general study of text reuse in science, which is legitimate in the vast majority of cases. It allows for tackling a wide range of research questions from different scientific backgrounds, facilitating both qualitative and quantitative analysis of the phenomenon as well as a first-time grounding on the base rate of text reuse in scientific publications.
“As a committee, we have discussed various business models for open access, from transformative agreements like the one between Elsevier and the University of California system to the Subscribe to Open model now being implemented at Berghahn and Annual Reviews. We have begun to consider a more federated approach to AnthroSource that would bring together AAA content from multiple sources, inspired by the work of the Next Generation Library Publishing project. Over the past decade, different iterations of the PFC have also thought about the possibility of creating a larger mega-journal composed of Sections corresponding to some of the subfields represented in our current portfolio….
The second step of the process will be to engage a third-party scholarly communication consultant to assist in plotting out scenarios for a sustainable future for the AAA publishing program. Experience with a range of open access models and a demonstrated understanding of the challenges facing social science society publishers will be our primary considerations in selecting a consultant. A consultant who sees the advantages of partnering with different types of publishers will be given the highest consideration. The committee regards the results of the self-study as critical to the consultant’s work, and we will request that prospective consultants outline a process for reaching out to and collaborating with the Sections. It is the PFC’s hope that the consultant will be able to provide each publishing section with a clearer understanding of not only a future for their journal but also of the portfolio as it moves toward a more open future.”
Core is proud to announce that Library Resources & Technical Services (LRTS), ALA’s premier journal dedicated exclusively to all aspects of collections, is now completely open access.
Transformative arrangements – including Transformative Agreements and Transformative Journals – were developed to encourage subscription journals to transition to full and immediate open access within a defined timeframe (31st December 2024, as specified in the Plan S Implementation Guidance). After careful consideration of the outcomes of transformative arrangements, the leadership of cOAlition S reaffirms that, as a principle, its members will no longer financially support these arrangements after 2024.
Exceptionally, individual cOAlition S funders may still choose to financially participate in Transformative Agreements beyond 2024 as part of their respective national strategies. Such exceptions will be communicated on the cOAlition S website.
Support for Transformative Journals will also cease at the end of 2024. In anticipation of this, no new applications to this programme will be considered after the 30th of June 2023.
Abstract: Overlay journals, a potentially overlooked model of scholarly communication, have seen a resurgence due to the increasing number of preprint repositories and preprints on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) related topics. Overlay journals at various stages of maturity were examined for unique characteristics, including whether the authors submitted their article to the journal, whether the peer reviews of the article were published by the overlay journal, and whether the overlay journals took advantage of opportunities for increased discovery. As librarians and researchers seek new, futuristic models for publishing, overlay journals are emerging as an important contribution to scholarly communication.
CRKN has signed a two-year, read-and-publish transformative agreement with Wiley. This cost-neutral agreement removes article processing charges (APCs) for authors publishing in Wiley hybrid journals at participating CRKN institutions, and is expected to result in the publication of over 4,000 articles as open access over the period of the agreement. Any corresponding authors affiliated with participating CRKN institutions, with articles accepted for publication in Wiley journals during the term of the agreement, will have their APC waived.
“PKP released development updates in December. In advance of releasing the Open Journal Systems (OJS), Open Monograph Press (OMP), and Open Preprint Systems (OPS) software in version 3.4 this year, the PKP team offers a sneak-peek of what to expect, why they are most excited for the community, and some personal insights from their own work on the Project….”
“Some publishers have been quoted as saying it is too soon to tell if this mandate will impact their journals. My colleagues and I at the ANS have known for some time that our journals would be impacted by the wider movement toward open research publishing. In many ways, the OSTP’s latest public access guidance is a big win for federally funded researchers and the entire nuclear community. ANS has recently published numerous OA supplements alongside some national US labs and the benefit to authors and researchers is far-reaching. The Nelson Memo only reaffirms that we as publishers must continue to be proactive in finding sustainable solutions that work for authors, the publishers of those journals and for society. We are ready to move forward.
But it is not an all-or-nothing approach. The ANS has long taken a progressive stance to ensure that we stay at the fore of the evolution of scholarly publishing, whilst ensuring that we continue to meet the needs of our members and our wider research community….”
“I joined OASPA in the summer of 2022. Considering the point of representation, and the need to reflect a greater diversity of viewpoints, particularly from those outside of Europe, I’ve been gathering non-European perspectives on the ‘OA market’ work done so far.
I had email conversations and in-person conversations via Zoom with 15 individuals. All participants were asked to review the work completed by OASPA in 2021 (as documented in the issue brief and reflections). Feedback was specifically sought about the ‘OA market’ and the three areas of focus outlined above….
1. Publishing can be a cost rather than a revenue/profit source…
2. Wide access is being achieved in ways that are not always recognized…
3. APCs and OA are (not?) the same…
4. How can libraries focus on content acquisition and (OA) publishing?…
5. Pricing is a huge problem…
6. “Brain drain” and (Western) market gain…
7. Equity first for better health and diversity…”