Euporia: a Portal and a Community under Construction. For the Philosophy, in Open Access | Euporia

“We are happy to introduce Euporia, the portal for Open Access philosophy and philosophy of Open science. The Euporia portal is still under construction but is you visit euporia.org can you can already get an idea of what this portal intends to be: a platform aggregating digital resources in philosophy for increasing their discoverability and fostering the dissemination in Open Access of new philosophical publications, as well as a place for discussing new developments concerning both traditional philosophical questions and, more specifically,  the impact of open science and digitization on academic work and human culture….”

Editorial: Open Science and Ethics | SpringerLink

“At first sight it seems to be self-evident that the ethics-community should embrace those open science principles unconditionally. Transparency, accessibility, and solving societal challenges are laudable goals. Understanding and solving societal challenges seems to be the core business of ethics: the theoretical branches of ethics aim for a better understanding of the practical and moral dimension of human life in general and applied ethics engages with possible solutions of urgent societal challenges. Thus, ‘open science’ seems to be the ideal context for ethical research to flourish. But as philosophers we should be a bit more reflective than just preaching the gospel of open science without critical remarks. In the following I want to highlight five possible pitfalls and problems around open science. The aim is not to frustrate the entire enterprise but to contribute to a responsible way of introducing the open science principles….

I think the opposition between academic freedom and open science is a misconception. Academic freedom is a necessary requirement for any research….”

PEERS

From Google’s English: 

“PEERS is a non-profit scientific publishing platform built from the joint initiative of researchers in epistemology, metacognition and critical theory…

  • Posting and reading on PEERS is and will always be free.
  • All publications are available free of charge in .epub and .pdf versions
  • PEERS is a non-profit organization working to protect research and its accessibility
  • By publishing on PEERS, you make your data accessible to readers.
  • The project pages allow you to share data while your search is progressing.
  • All data sharing tools are automatically integrated into your documents
  • PEERS contains an evaluation mode for each reader. The reader can, anonymous or not, point out errors or raise questionable points. Authors can correct mistakes by reviewing their work in a dedicated thread 
  • For quantitative research, PEERS contains the tools to re-analyze the data contained in the product work….

We need open access. The most important research is becoming less and less acceptable for academics. Most of us would like to become more accessible. We want our students to-have access to all of the available literature, and we do not want public money to be spent just to make the research we-have written available.

We need open data. Back in the “paper era”, was not shared, but it was almost impossible to share. But now, there is no excuse for prohibiting the reader of an authoritative work to a workable data set. The practice of open data is slowly spreading through some academic disciplines, while others ignore it completely. Sharing open data lacks unity in formatting and in practices. Ideally, researchers would share their data as soon as the research starts, so be sure to follow the highest standards of transparency.

Sharing your data is scary, so this move must be valued by our community. Everybody makes mistakes. The faster we know it, the better is it. The generalization of open data, but it will also allow for a deep collective effort that can produce wonders.

We need open review . Reviews are essential for every actor of the research process. But we want them to be done openly, in front of everyone else….”

PEERS

From Google’s English: 

“PEERS is a non-profit scientific publishing platform built from the joint initiative of researchers in epistemology, metacognition and critical theory…

  • Posting and reading on PEERS is and will always be free.
  • All publications are available free of charge in .epub and .pdf versions
  • PEERS is a non-profit organization working to protect research and its accessibility
  • By publishing on PEERS, you make your data accessible to readers.
  • The project pages allow you to share data while your search is progressing.
  • All data sharing tools are automatically integrated into your documents
  • PEERS contains an evaluation mode for each reader. The reader can, anonymous or not, point out errors or raise questionable points. Authors can correct mistakes by reviewing their work in a dedicated thread 
  • For quantitative research, PEERS contains the tools to re-analyze the data contained in the product work….

We need open access. The most important research is becoming less and less acceptable for academics. Most of us would like to become more accessible. We want our students to-have access to all of the available literature, and we do not want public money to be spent just to make the research we-have written available.

We need open data. Back in the “paper era”, was not shared, but it was almost impossible to share. But now, there is no excuse for prohibiting the reader of an authoritative work to a workable data set. The practice of open data is slowly spreading through some academic disciplines, while others ignore it completely. Sharing open data lacks unity in formatting and in practices. Ideally, researchers would share their data as soon as the research starts, so be sure to follow the highest standards of transparency.

Sharing your data is scary, so this move must be valued by our community. Everybody makes mistakes. The faster we know it, the better is it. The generalization of open data, but it will also allow for a deep collective effort that can produce wonders.

We need open review . Reviews are essential for every actor of the research process. But we want them to be done openly, in front of everyone else….”

Publishing Your Philosophy Book with Open Access – Daily Nous

“I recently published an open access book with OUP, using grant money to pay for the substantial open access fee. This isn’t something OUP has done much in philosophy, and it’s certainly an experiment for me, so I want to make up my mind about whether it’s a good use of funds….”

Publishing Your Philosophy Book with Open Access – Daily Nous

“I recently published an open access book with OUP, using grant money to pay for the substantial open access fee. This isn’t something OUP has done much in philosophy, and it’s certainly an experiment for me, so I want to make up my mind about whether it’s a good use of funds….”

Open access monograph business models

Abstract:  In recent years, a number of business models have been developed for open access (OA) monographs in the humanities and social sciences (HSS). While each model has been created in response to specific circumstances and needs, some commonalities can be observed. This article outlines some of the main types of model to support the costs of publishing OA books and provides examples of these models across the world.

It is followed by three short sketches providing more depth on: firstly, a traditional publisher’s OA monograph offer; secondly, a licensing-based model which draws from existing library budgets; and finally, an experiment with delayed open access for books in philosophy: http://dx.doi.org/10.1629/2048-7754.118

Is Open Science a Tautology? | HIIG Blog

In our blog series on metaphors of the digital society, we uncover the vocabularies that are thrown around almost haphazardly these days. These terms are often deployed in the scholarly and societal discourse without much thought about their meaning and use. Here, Benedikt Fecher and Tony Ross-Hellauer dismantle one of these metaphors of the digital society: open science. We believe that, depending on how you look at it, open science can be understood as both a tautology and an antithesis.

Welcome to Cogprints – Cogprints

“Welcome to CogPrints, an electronic archive for self-archive papers in any area of Psychology, Neuroscience, and Linguistics, and many areas of Computer Science (e.g., artificial intelligence, robotics, vison, learning, speech, neural networks), Philosophy (e.g., mind, language, knowledge, science, logic), Biology (e.g., ethology, behavioral ecology, sociobiology, behaviour genetics, evolutionary theory), Medicine (e.g., Psychiatry, Neurology, human genetics, Imaging), Anthropology (e.g., primatology, cognitive ethnology, archeology, paleontology), as well as any other portions of the physical, social and mathematical sciences that are pertinent to the study of cognition….”

Balancing ideology and feasibility: a case study on adopting and evaluating open access publishing models for a society journal within philosophy

“Open access, the notion that research output, such as journal articles, should be freely accessible to readers on the Web, is arguably in the best interest of science. In this article, we (1) describe in-depth how a society-owned philosophy journal, Nordic Wittgenstein Review, evaluated various publishing models and made an informed decision on how best to adopt open access publishing for the journal, and (2) develop and implement measures to evaluate the chosen model.”

Sophia Project – Online resources in philosophy and ethics

“Founded in 1999 by college educators, the Sophia Project is an online collection of original articles, primary source texts, and commentaries in the fields of philosophy and ethics designed to provide the newcomer to the discipline of philosophy with the resources necessary to read great philosophical works.  We believe that with the proper guidance almost any intelligent person can begin a life-long reading program in philosophy…and perhaps even become a bit wiser in the process….”

The Open Commons of Phenomenology

“We are a non-profit, international scholarly association whose mission is to provide free access to the full corpus of phenomenology as well as to develop and maintain the digital infrastructure required for its curation, study and dissemination….A digital platform will host all texts, documents and images in open access, feature interactive contents and offer an extensive set of digital tools such as multi-text search, data visualisations, citation index, bibliometric statistics, annotations and social sharing….”

Promoting open access in the humanities

The blog of the +American Philosophical Association is reprinting my 2004 article, “Promoting open access in the humanities,” in three new blog posts.

The first of three APA posts appeared today.
http://blog.apaonline.org/2017/06/01/open-access-in-the-humanities/

Here’s the full article.
https://dash.harvard.edu/handle/1/4729720

I’ve slightly revised the APA version to word things the way I’d word them today. But unfortunately I didn’t have time to update the substance. The examples and evidence are limited to what I knew in early 2004, which is close to ancient history in internet time.

For more recent examples and evidence, see the updates and supplements to my 2012 book (Open Access, MIT Press).
http://bit.ly/oa-book

Also see the items tagged with “oa.humanities” and “oa.philosophy” at the Open Access Tracking Project.
http://tagteam.harvard.edu/hubs/oatp/tag/oa.humanities
http://tagteam.harvard.edu/hubs/oatp/tag/oa.philosophy

These tag libraries are crowd-sourced, and you can make them more complete by taking part in the OATP. See the OATP home page for more detail.
http://bit.ly/o-a-t-p

Towards a philosophy of academic publishing

“Increasingly, scholars embrace a theory of technological disruption to indicate fundamental changes in the system of the digital text with the rise of open access. This theory needs closer scrutiny for its technological determinism….However one views it, the rise of open access (OA) has created a host of opportunities to challenge traditional publishing models….The open access movement aims to recover control—to assert our rights and ownership as cre- ators—over the material products of our academic labour, and in that sense is politically radical….Open access (OA), as noted earlier, has caused ripples through the publishing system, affecting the distribution of academic knowledge. The OA movement has widened the gap, in some sense, increasing visibility for some scholarship while creating difficulties in covering the costs of disseminating other scholarship. The geographical distribution of journal knowledge has become directly linked to a privileged world and sidelined those who struggle….OA raises issues around scholarly effort, academic quality and who profits by academic labour. Yet, we suggest, OA creates several opportunities for innovation. One of these is to encourage collective projects, thus to minimise the cost to individuals of Gold OA. Yet, this may fly in the face of the individualistic performativity underpinning many national research performance assessment audit tools….OA, despite its appropriation by the publishing houses to further enrich themselves at the expense of scholarly labour, does represent a valiant effort to regain the IP rights of scholars to their own work….”