From principles to practices: Open Science at Europe’s universities: 2020-2021 EUA Open Science Survey results

“KEY RESULTS: • Open Science principles: over half (59%) of the surveyed institutions rated Open Science’s strategic importance as very high or high. Open Access to research publications was considered to be highly important for 90% of institutions, but only 60% considered its implementation level to be high. However, the gap between importance and implementation is much wider in data-related areas (RDM, FAIR and data sharing): high importance at between 55-70% of the institutions surveyed, with high levels of implementation at 15-25%. • Open Science policies: 54% of institutions have an Open Science policy and 37% are developing one. Only 9% of surveyed institutions lack an Open Science policy or are not planning to draft one. • Monitoring Open Access to research publications: 80% of institutions monitored the number of publications in their repository and 70% monitored articles published by their researchers in Open Access journals. In addition, almost 60% reported monitoring the cost of publications by their researchers in Open Access journals. • Infrastructure for Open Access to research publications: 90% of the institutions surveyed have their own repository, participate in a shared repository or both. For journal hosting or publishing platforms this figure reaches 66%, and levels out at 57% for monograph hosting/publishing. In addition, 66% of those surveyed reported that their institution has participated in or supported non-commercial Open Access publishing. Data-related skills: over 50% of the surveyed institutions reported that research data skills were only partially available. Moreover, all of the institutions that indicated the absence or partial availability of data skills, considered that more of these skills are needed at institutional level. • Emerging areas of Open Science: Approximately 50% of the respondents know of citizen science and open education activities at their institutions. • Open Science in academic assessment: In 34% of institutions, none of the Open Science elements examined by the survey were included in academic assessments. Amongst the institutions that included Open Science activities in their academic assessments, 77% took into consideration article deposition in a repository. …”

OA.Works receives $1.9 million to bolster OA policies

“We’re thrilled to announce that OA Works (formerly Open Access Button) has received a grant of $1.9M USD over the next three years from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The investment expands OA.Work’s efforts to streamline self-archiving through ShareYourPaper, and forges a new partnership with the foundation to develop tools that help put OA policies into practice. We’re building three new open-source services for the foundation and other institutions, including:

OAreport: to discover, analyze, and unlock papers covered by OA policies.
ShareYourPaper for Funders: to bring drag-and-drop self-archiving to funders and their grantees.
OAsupport: to provide a help desk that serves authors making their work open access….”

Preprints 101 for authors

“Preprints enable researchers to rapidly share their work publicly before the formal peer review process. In this webinar you will learn more about preprints and their benefits for the research community from ASAPbio; will hear an author’s perspective on posting preprints from Sumeet Pal Singh, a group leader at IRIBHM, ULB; and will find out how to incorporate preprints in your literature search routine by using the preprint discovery tools developed by Europe PMC.”

Wiley supplies full-text open access articles to Publications Router – Research

“Wiley has become the latest publisher to distribute open access full-text articles to UK institutional repositories via Jisc’s Publications Router, making institutions’ research outputs more visible.

Publications Router is an alerting service that automatically sends research articles to institutions’ systems such as their repositories or CRISs.

Wiley, one of the world’s largest publishers of scholarly journals, now actively deposits open access content from both their hybrid and wholly open access titles across a range of disciplines from science and medicine to arts and humanities, law, business, social sciences and many others.

The arrangement with Wiley and Publications Router builds upon the read and publish agreement for UK institutions agreed via Jisc Collections, as a result of which most UK-authored articles published with Wiley are made open access….”

Wiley supplies full-text open access articles to Publications Router – Research

“Wiley has become the latest publisher to distribute open access full-text articles to UK institutional repositories via Jisc’s Publications Router, making institutions’ research outputs more visible.

Publications Router is an alerting service that automatically sends research articles to institutions’ systems such as their repositories or CRISs.

Wiley, one of the world’s largest publishers of scholarly journals, now actively deposits open access content from both their hybrid and wholly open access titles across a range of disciplines from science and medicine to arts and humanities, law, business, social sciences and many others.

The arrangement with Wiley and Publications Router builds upon the read and publish agreement for UK institutions agreed via Jisc Collections, as a result of which most UK-authored articles published with Wiley are made open access….”

My Research Institute (and Scholarly Orphans project)

“The Scholarly Orphans project explores an institution driven approach to discover, capture, and archive scholarly artifacts that researchers deposit in productivity web portals as a means to collaborate and communicate with their peers. The project is funded by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and is a collaboration between the Prototyping Team of the Los Alamos National Laboratory and the Web Science and Digital Library Research Group at Old Dominion University.

myresearch.institute and scholarlyorphans.org are components in a limited-term experiment conducted as part of the Scholarly Orphans project. The experiment is set up as an automated pipeline that is coordinated by an institutional orchestrator process, as depicted below. It was started on August 1 2018 and will be terminated on March 31 2020.

The modules in the pipeline are as follows:

 

Discovery of new artifacts deposited by a researcher in a portal is achieved by a Tracker that recurrently polls the portal’s API using the identity of the researcher in each portal as an access key. If a new artifact is discovered, its URI is passed on to the capture process.
Capturing an artifact is achieved by using web archiving techniques that pay special attention to generating representative high fidelity captures. A major project finding in this realm is the use of Traces that abstractly describe how a web crawler should capture a certain class of web resources. A Trace is recorded by a curator through interaction with a web resource that is an instance of that class. The result of capturing a new artifact is a WARC file in an institutional archive. The file encompasses all web resources that are an essential part of the artifact, according to the curator who recorded the Trace that was used to guide the capture process.
Archiving is achieved by ingesting WARC files from various institutions into a cross-institutional web archive that supports the Memento “Time Travel for the Web” protocol. As such, the Mementos in this web archive integrate seamlessly with those in other web archives….”

 

Data deposition required for all C19 Rapid Review publishers – OASPA

“The C19 Rapid Review Initiative – a large-scale collaboration of organisations across the scholarly publishing industry – has agreed to mandate data deposition across the original group of journals that set up the collaboration (eLife, F1000 Research, Hindawi, PeerJ, PLOS, Royal Society, FAIRsharing, Outbreak Science Rapid PREreview, GigaScience, Life Science Alliance, Ubiquity Press, UCL, MIT Press, Cambridge University Press, BMC, RoRi and AfricArXiv). New members aim to align in due course. 

The Initiative, which grew from a need to improve efficiency of peer review and publishing of crucial COVID-19 research, began in April 2020 and now involves over 20 publishers, industry experts, and scholarly communication organizations, supporting over 1,800 rapid reviewers across relevant fields. …”

Full article: An Institutional Repository Publishing Model for Imperial College London Grey Literature

Abstract:  In 2019 we became increasingly aware of authors at Imperial College London choosing to publish grey literature through local website PDF or full text hosting. Recognising the need to improve the institutional open access repository as a venue of choice to publish or co-publish grey literature, we developed a publishing model of identifiers (DOIs and ORCIDs) and metrics (indexing, citations and Altmetric coverage). Some of the incentives already existed in the repository but had not previously been explicitly communicated as benefits; whilst others required technical infrastructure development and scholarly communications education for authors. As of September 2020, a 206% increase in deposit of one type of grey literature has been observed on the previous full year, including Imperial’s influential COVID-19 reports.

 

The ‘Impact Opportunity’ for Academic Libraries through Grey Literature

Abstract:  This paper proposes a new role for academic libraries as part of a wider ‘research practice’ activity for research institutions, incorporating support, training and expertise in relation to scholarly communication and research impact. The role libraries hold within research institutions is changing as the world shifts towards a digital and increasingly open future. This requires a rethink of the types of services and skill sets that are appropriate for an academic library to encompass. The increased focus of institutions and funders on the societal impact of research offers an opportunity for academic libraries to further integrate their work into the open research agenda. Libraries can draw on what is now over a decade of experience introducing open access, institutional repositories and research data management service to their academic communities to inform the development of impact services.

An immediate service that libraries can offer is assisting with the identification of, and sometimes deposit into the institutional repository of, works that are sitting outside the peer reviewed literature – grey literature. This material needs to be collected for the purposes of demonstrating outcomes and pathways to impact. This paper describes the need to consider item classifications within digital repositories. If this new service is considered an option into the future, libraries themselves and potentially research offices will need to look not just at workflows but also item classifications within systems to ensure they encompass this broader collection of works.

 

Tailoring Transformative Agreements to Support Open Access through Automatic Deposit – YouTube

“In this presentation, Ellen Finnie, Open Access Publisher Agreements Manager at the California Digital Library (CDL), explores opportunities and strategies for tailoring transformative agreements to support open access through automatic deposit, drawing on her extensive experience not only at the CDL but also in her former role as the Head of Scholarly Communications and Collections Strategy at MIT Libraries.

This presentation was delivered as part of a Coalition of Open Access Policy Institutions (COAPI) community call. More information about COAPI is available at: https://sparcopen.org/coapi/ …”

Repository Quick Submit and CV Scraping – Charleston Hub

“A significant challenge in administering an institutional open-access repository is acquiring local scholarly content to distribute and build the repository.  Complicated licensing and author re-use rights can sometimes be viewed as a barrier by authors who are looking to deposit their work.  Paired with the challenges of communicating the benefits of repository deposit and the rights afforded by institutional open-access policies, limited resources, or lack of administrative support, repository managers often struggle to build a broader culture around deposits outside of open-access advocates.  A proactive, mediated, and collaborative publication review program can mitigate or solve some of these issues.  By reviewing an author’s publication list or CV with an eye towards repository deposit, repository managers and scholarly communication librarians can demystify the process and educate depositors on licensing and open-access policies.  Here, we outline such an effort at Harvard University. …”

Repository Quick Submit and CV Scraping – Charleston Hub

“A significant challenge in administering an institutional open-access repository is acquiring local scholarly content to distribute and build the repository.  Complicated licensing and author re-use rights can sometimes be viewed as a barrier by authors who are looking to deposit their work.  Paired with the challenges of communicating the benefits of repository deposit and the rights afforded by institutional open-access policies, limited resources, or lack of administrative support, repository managers often struggle to build a broader culture around deposits outside of open-access advocates.  A proactive, mediated, and collaborative publication review program can mitigate or solve some of these issues.  By reviewing an author’s publication list or CV with an eye towards repository deposit, repository managers and scholarly communication librarians can demystify the process and educate depositors on licensing and open-access policies.  Here, we outline such an effort at Harvard University. …”

Submissions and Downloads of Preprints in the First Year of medRxiv | Medical Journals and Publishing | JAMA | JAMA Network

“Preprint servers offer a means to disseminate research reports before they undergo peer review and are relatively new to clinical research.1-4 medRxiv is an independent, not-for-profit preprint server for clinical and health science researchers that was introduced in June 2019.4 A central question was whether there would be adoption of a new approach to dissemination of pre–peer-review science. Now, a year after its establishment, we report medRxiv’s submissions, posts, and downloads.”

Guest Post – Assessing User Perceptions of an Open Access Subvention Fund – The Scholarly Kitchen

“After eight years of funding open access (OA) articles, University Libraries at Virginia Tech has a wealth of quantitative data on article processing charges (APC). However, we lacked qualitative information on authors’ perceptions about funding OA articles, how this funding supports research in specific disciplines, and how authors view OA publishing in general. Since the fund’s inception, the Library’s expenditures on APCs has increased over 500%, prompting us to ask authors about their perceptions of the Open Access Subvention Fund (OASF) as we consider its future development and sustainability….

In fall 2019 we conducted a survey of all the VT authors and co-authors who had requested APC support between August 2012 and October 2019….

As context for understanding respondents’ views on the OASF, we wanted to learn about their views on the value of OA publishing more generally. Overall the attitudes were positive (perhaps not surprising given that those receiving the survey were seeking funding to publish OA) but the nuances are useful to understand.

 

56% of respondents felt that OA publishing should be a positive factor in promotion and tenure (P&T) considerations. But, 58% said it had not been discussed by any P&T committee they served on.
63% of the respondents received no special recognition from their departments for publishing an OA article.
Only 20% of authors reported that they deposited their articles in VTechWorks (our institutional repository). This indicates they may not be aware of the added exposure that the repository could provide for their work. Or, they may believe that by publishing the work OA, there is no need to provide a duplicate a copy in VTechWorks. (Note: OASF-supported articles are deposited in VTechWorks by Scholarly Communication Department staff if the authors do not deposit them.)
Authors are spreading the word about the OASF to their colleagues. While the Library uses a number of communication channels to advertise the fund, word of mouth seems to be very  effective. Nearly 80% indicated that they passed on information they got from a Library session, and 49% of respondents said they learned about the fund from a colleague.
Authors report encouraging others to publish in OA journals, including colleagues at VT (37%) and other universities (20%), graduate students (34%), and occasionally undergraduate students (8%)….”