Revisiting: Turning a Critical Eye on Reference Lists

In today’s post, Angela Cochran revisits her call to provide more editorial scrutiny to journal article references. Several new automated tools now available will help editors determine whether references are appropriate for including in scholarly works.

The post Revisiting: Turning a Critical Eye on Reference Lists appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.

Content at Scale – The Third Wave

Judy Luther looks back at the waves of change that have reshaped our industry. Looking ahead, the next big wave is to use analytics and AI as we complete the transition to open content.

The post Content at Scale – The Third Wave appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.

Guest Post – Starting a Novel Software Journal within the Existing Scholarly Publishing Ecosystem: Technical and Social Lessons

The Journal of Open Source Software was designed from scratch using the principles of open source and software design practices. This has both advantages and disadvantages, particularly with respect to elements of the traditional scholarly publishing ecosystem.

The post Guest Post – Starting a Novel Software Journal within the Existing Scholarly Publishing Ecosystem: Technical and Social Lessons appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.

The AUPresses Global Partner Program Begins: An Interview with the Partner Presses

A pilot program that seeks to deepen transnational dialogue and collaboration among mission-driven scholarly publishers.

The post The AUPresses Global Partner Program Begins: An Interview with the Partner Presses appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.

Guest Post — A Unified, Common Ground Approach to Open

Global initiatives in open are decentralized and disconnected, lacking researcher input and buy-in. An “opens solutions” approach can both embrace and leverage that diversity, ensuring that it all contributes to the greater whole.

The post Guest Post — A Unified, Common Ground Approach to Open appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.

Opening the Window of Discourse for Citizen Science

COVID has democratised data science and increasingly the public expect open data, research, and interpretation in more aspects of their lives. Who will be the ones to provide this knowledge for citizens? A proposed community publication The Citizen Science Guide for Research Libraries by the LIBER Citizen Science Working Group looks to explore these questions – putting forward that research…

Source

Don’t Let Science Publisher Elsevier Hold Knowledge for Ransom

It’s Open Access Week and we’re joining SPARC and dozens of other organizations this week to discuss the importance of open access to scientific research publications. 

An academic publisher should widely disseminate the knowledge produced by scholars, not hold it for ransom. But ransoming scientific research back to the academic community is essentially the business model of the world’s largest publisher of scientific journals: Elsevier.

In February of this year, after drawn-out negotiations broke down, the University of California terminated its subscription with Elsevier. A central sticking point in these negotiations was around open access: specifically Elsevier’s refusal to provide universal open access to UC research, a problem exacerbated by skyrocketing subscription fees.

This has been an ongoing fight, not just in California. Many academics (and EFF) believe that scholarly research most effectively advances scientific progress when it is widely available to the public, and not subject to the paywalls erected by publishers. Scientific research is a driving force behind technological innovations, medical breakthroughs, and policy decisions, and the bulk of it in the U.S. is publicly funded. When libraries, universities, individuals, and even researchers themselves have to pay to access academic work, we all suffer.

Elsevier boasts profit margins in excess of 30%, much of it derived from taxpayer dollars. Academics effectively volunteer their time to publishers to write articles, conduct peer review, and sit on editorial boards, and then publishers demand ownership of the copyright and control over dissemination. Universities and other institutions fund these researchers, and a mega-publisher like Elsevier reaps the benefits while trapping all of that work behind a paywall.

In response to this outdated and deleterious system, two UCSF researchers have started a petition to boycott Elsevier, calling on all academics to refuse to publish in Elsevier journals, peer-review their articles, or sit on their editorial boards (as many already have). They’ve also written a piece calling for a wider re-imagining of the academic publishing system, that’s more in line with an open access model. A large and growing number of scholars have signed the petition already.

This is far from the first time someone has called for a boycott of Elsevier. Efforts go back to 2012 with a call to action from mathematician Timothy Gowers which led to the “The Cost of Knowledge” campaign. Since then, boycotts have extended across entire countries, across Asia, Europe, and