Arcadia supports Redalyc and AmeliCA in its endeavor to advance diamond Open Access

The Autonomous University of the State of Mexico (UAEM) awarded $3.6 Million grant from Arcadia – a charitable of Lisbet Rausing and Peter Baldwin – for Redalyc and AmeliCA. The project’s purpose is to strengthen and expand the current efforts of these two initiatives on non-commercial Open Access through the consolidation of an Open Infrastructure for capacity building, visibility, discoverability, quality assurance, technological development and sustainability of diamond OA publishing that yields more equitable and inclusive participation in the communication of science.



Personalised publication recommendation service for open-access digital archives – Ahmet Aníl Müngen, 2022

Abstract:  Increase in the number of open-access academic publications and open-access institutional academic archives led more researchers use these archives. No model offers personalised publication suggestions in academic archives. A central service architecture has been proposed towards personalised academic article recommendations for open-access digital archives. Thus, it has been possible to make personalised suggestions for open-access digital archives and enable researchers to discover new publications. A service based on the centralised micro-service architecture model was proposed in the study. Also, TF-IDF and article classification methods were used together for the personalised publication suggestion system. For the first time globally, the proposed method was used with 1464 real users in 49 open-access archives. F-measure success value was found to be higher than 0.8 for recommended publications.


An Interview with DOAJ’s Joanna Ball | EBSCO Community

“I started in my role as Managing Director at DOAJ in January 2022, having spent my career until then in libraries. Supporting researchers has been a theme throughout my career, and of course in recent years, this has been synonymous with facilitating open research, ranging from developing Open Access policies and workflows to implementing research data management services. I also advocated for libraries to divert a proportion of their budgets away from purchasing and subscribing content to provide support for open infrastructures and initiatives, and set up funds for this purpose.

 My role at DOAJ is a new one, and I’m responsible for strategic leadership of the organisation: setting our overall direction and ensuring that our resources are properly managed to enable us to meet our strategic objectives, as well as advocating for DOAJ and Open Access on a global level. The organisation has grown organically over the past nearly 20 years, and now has a core team of over 20, supported by a global network of over 100 volunteers either acting as ambassadors or reviewing journal applications. An important aspect of my role will be to ensure a sustainable future for DOAJ – we’re proud that over 80% of our funding comes from libraries and other public institutions – but we’re an ambitious organisation with an index which is constantly growing – so there’s more fundraising to do….”

Modern geoscience publishing – GEOSCIENTIST

“The preprint is the initial version of a research article, often (but not always) before submission to a journal and before formal peer-review. Preprints help modernise geoscience by removing barriers that inhibit broad participation in the scientific process, and which are slowing progress towards a more open and transparent research culture. …

Preprints have many well-documented benefits for both researchers and the public (e.g., Bourne et al., 2017; Sarabipour et al., 2019; Pourret et al., 2020). For example, preprints enable:


• Rapid sharing of research results, which can be critical for time-sensitive studies (such as after disasters), as well as for early career researchers applying for jobs, or any academic applying for grants or a promotion, given that journal-led peer review can take many months to years;
• Greater visibility and accessibility for research outputs, given there is no charge for posting or reading a preprint, especially for those who do not have access to pay-walled journals, or limited access due to remote working (such as during lockdowns);
• Additional peer feedback beyond that provided by journal-led peer review, enhancing the possibility of collaboration via community input and discussion;
• Researchers to establish priority (or a precedent) on their results, mitigating the chance of being ‘scooped’;
• Breakdown of the silos that traditional journals uphold, by exposing us to broader research than we might encounter otherwise, and giving a home to works that do not have a clear destination in a traditional publication;
• Research to be more open and transparent, with the intention of improving the overall quality, integrity, and reproducibility of results. …”

Does Open Access Really Increase Impact? A Large-Scale Randomized Analysis

The Open Access Citation Advantage (OACA) has been a major topic of discussion in the literature over the past twenty years. In this paper, we propose a method to constitute a control group to isolate the OACA effect. Thus, we compared citation impact (MNCS) of 2,458,378 publications in fully OA journals to that (weighted MNCS) of a control group of non-OA publications (\#10,310,842). Similarly, we did the same exercise for OA publications in hybrid journals (\#1,024,430) and their control group (\#11,533,001), over the period 2010-2020. The results showed that there is no OACA for publications in fully OA journals, and that there is rather a disadvantage. Conversely, the OACA seems to be a reality in hybrid journals, suggesting that a better accessibility in this context tends to improve the visibility of publications. The lack of OACA for publications in fully OA journals is to be expected, as a great proportion of OA journals are newly created and less attractive to high-impact senior researchers.Another striking result of this paper is the fall of the OACA from 2016. The citation advantage fell from 70% to 9% between 2016 and 2020 (for publications in hybrid journals). We wonder if this fall is linked to the increase in the notoriety of pirate sites (eg Sci-Hub) from 2016. In other words, the democratization of pirate sites instantly cancels the positive effect of OA publication insofar as the question of access to scientific content no longer arises.

Navigating Open scholarship for neurodivergent researchers | FORRT – Framework for Open and Reproducible Research Training

“We are a group of early-career neurotypical and neurodivergent researchers that are a part of the Framework of Open Reproducible Research and Training (FORRT) community, aiming to make academia and the open scholarship community more open to neurodiversity. Everyone, no matter what they identify with, is welcome in this group. We aim to discuss how open scholarship can be intersected with the neurodiversity movement, and emphasise how differences should be highlighted and accepted, whilst supporting the idea of accessibility. Our neurodiversity team is a group that currently consists of individuals that have autism, dyspraxia/DCD, speech-language differences, ADHD, dyslexia, or are neurotypical allies. If you have these or other neurominorities and wish to be part of the team, you are more than welcome to join!…

Discussions have been, however, scarce regarding not only how open scholarship can advance the neurodiverse movement, but also how it can benefit from it. It is thus a priority to build community to discuss how the neurodiversity movement can be included in open scholarship, as the lived experience of neurodivergent individuals (including encountered barriers) may help to enhance accessibility, allowing open scholarship to be truly open (Whitaker & Guest, 2020)….”