Útnak indul a RoMEO magyar változata (Hungarian Version of RoMEO Released)

Posted on May 22, 2012 by romeo

A SHERPA adatbázis örömmel jelenti, hogy elérhet? a RoMEO adatbázis magyar nyelvu változata: http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/?la=hu

Magyar partnerünk, a HUNOR Konzorcium elkezdte a nemzeti kiadókra és folyóiratokra vonatkozó adatok folyamatos feltöltését.

Köszönjük a HUNORos kollégáknak az eredeti angol oldal fordítását!

A portugál verziót 2010-ben, a spanyol verziót 2011-ben indítottuk útjára, és a SHERPA terveiben szerepel az oldal lefordítása további nyelvekre. Amennyiben közremuködne valamelyik nyelvi verzió elkészítésében, vegye fel velünk a kapcsolatot!

SHERPA is pleased to announce that a new Hungarian language version of its RoMEO database is now available at: http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/?la=hu

The RoMEO interface has already been translated into Hungarian, and our Hungarian partners HUNOR have started adding RoMEO data directly for Hungarian publishers and journals. Existing RoMEO data for other publishers is in the process of being translated.

We are grateful to our colleagues in HUNOR for translating the original English into Hungarian.

Portuguese and Spanish versions of RoMEO were released in 2010 and 2011 respectively, and SHERPA is working on further language versions for release in the future. Please contact us if you are interested in any specific languages and would like to help with translations.

RoMEO

A RoMEO a kiadói politikák, copyright szerz?dések tartalmának kereshet? adatbázisa a folyóirat cikkek szerz?i archiválására vonatkozóan, amelyet repozitóriumi adminisztrátorok és egyetemi kutatók világszerte használnak. A jelenlegi RoMEO fejlesztéseket a JISC támogatja. A folyóiratokra vonatkozó információk forrásai között találjuk a British Library MIMAS által fenntartott Zetoc szolgáltatást, a Lundi Egyetemi Könyvtár által létrehozott Open Access Folyóiratok Jegyzékét (DOAJ), és az NCBI Entrez folyóirat listáját.

HUNOR

A HUNOR (HUNgarian Open Repositories) konzorciumot a magyar fels?oktatási intézmények és az MTA Könyvtára hozta létre a nyílt hozzáférés (open access) hazai gyakorlatának kialakítása céljából.

A HUNOR tagjai a magyar tudomány hazai és nemzetközi elismerésének javítását a tudományos eredmények hatékony disszeminációjával kívánják elérni, nevezetesen nyílt elérésu repozitóriumok országos infrastrukturális hálózatának kialakításával, módszertani központ létrehozásával, a külföldi know-how és nemzetközi szabványok hazai alkalmazásával, a tudományos kommunikáció komplementer csatornáinak meghonosításával, nemzetközi kapcsolatrendszer kiépítésével (http://www.openaccess.hu/). A HUNOR tevékenységeit a Debreceni Egyetem Egyetemi és Nemzeti Könyvtára koordinálja. (http://www.lib.unideb.hu/).

About RoMEO

RoMEO is the key database of publisher’s open access policies, used worldwide by repository administrators and academics to check their rights to self-archive their publications. RoMEO is currently funded by JISC. In addition to our own journals database, journal information is kindly provided by: the British Library’s Zetoc service hosted by MIMAS; DOAJ, a service from Lund University Libraries, and Entrez hosted by NCBI.

About HUNOR

The HUNOR (HUNgarian Open Repositories) consortium was established by the libraries of Hungarian higher education institutions and the Library of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences to advance national open access practices (http://www.lib.unideb.hu/).

The members of HUNOR are dedicated to promoting Hungarian research both nationally and internationally and to achieving effective dissemination of scientific outputs through the implementation of a national infrastructure of open access repositories. Other activities include the operation of a methodology centre, adopting international know-how and standards, the establishment of complementary scientific communication channels, and international relations. HUNOR is coordinated by the National and University Library of University of Debrecen (http://www.lib.unideb.hu/).

Peter Millington, SHERPA Technical Development Officer, University of Nottingham

Görögh Edit, Debreceni Egyetem Egyetemi és Nemzeti Könyvtára

Brain and Behavior and Ecology and Evolution Now Searchable in PubMed

Posted on May 21, 2012 by chodgkinson

Brain and Behavior and Ecology and Evolution are now fully searchable in PubMed. This will enable scholars using PubMed as a search engine to quickly and easily find articles which have been published in the journals and to click through to Wiley Online Library or PubMed Central (PMC) to read the full article. Shortly after publication in an issue, all articles are deposited and freely available in PubMed Central (PMC) and made searchable in PubMed. The main source of all Wiley articles is Wiley Online Library and all articles continue to be hosted there in HTML and PDF formats. As Brain and Behavior and Ecology and Evolution are open access, any reader can view, download and share the whole article from Wiley Online Library.

Click here to search for Brain and Behavior articles on PubMed>

Click here to search for Ecology and Evolution articles on PubMed>

Sign the White House Petition on Open Access to Research Today!

Posted on May 21, 2012 by Andrea Higginbotham

Hello Open Access Week Participants! We have an exciting way for you to get involved in leading real change. As you know, the Obama Administration has been actively considering the issue of Public Access to the results of Federally Funded research for the past several years. We’ve worked hard to make the case that the NIH Public Access Policy has been a true success, and that it should be expanded across all U.S. Federal Science Agencies – responding in force to calls for public comments, participating in stakeholder meetings, supporting FRPAA, and educating both policymaker and members of the public alike.

As a result, attention to this issue in Washington is at all all-time high. We now have a brief, critical window of opportunity to demonstrate that we as a community firmly believe should be a high priority for the Administration to act on right now.

To help accomplish this, today, May 21st, a petition calling for Public Access to all Federally Funded Research has been posted to the White House’s “We the People” Website. If the petition garners25,000 signatures within 30 days, it will be reviewed by White House staff, and considered for action.

To reach this number of signatures, we urge you to sign the petition today. We also ask you to do all that you can to encourage your colleagues, friends and family to do the same. To sign the petition, you must be at least 13 years old and have a valid email address. That’s all. Signing is easy, it’s fast, and it can have an enormous impact on our chances of expanding access to the results of scientific research that we have helped to fund.

So take some time today to not only sign onto the petition, but to spread the word far and wide. Consider a blog post, an email to constituencies, a Tweet (use hashtag #openaccess), a Facebook share, an action in your library or on your campus – anything that tells as many people as possible “I support this petition, I’m signing this petition, and you should, too.”

Thanks in advance for your support for this effort – it is truly a critical time, and taking this action now *can* make a difference!

Short URL to share: http://wh.gov/6TH

Long: https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petitions/#!/petition/require-free-access-over-internet-scientific-journal-articles-arising-taxpayer-funded-research/wDX82FLQ

Call to Action: Sign White House petition for free access to publicly funded research

Posted on May 21, 2012 by Right to Research Coalition - Full Feed

The Challenge | What You Can Do | Background

The Challenge

To get 25,000 signatures in under 30 days on a White House petition calling for President Obama to make taxpayer-funded research articles freely available.

If we can hit this target – or better yet, blow it out of the water – we can revolutionize students’ access to information, increase access to affordable education, and accelerate the pace of science. Each year, we spend $60 billion in government research grants that fund the bulk of published research articles. Yet, even though we paid for the research, our institutions can’t get access to the results without paying millions for often-expensive academic journals. Students are limited to what their institutions can afford (and even Harvard can’t afford access to all its students need), and institutions with already-stretched budgets are forced to spend millions on subscriptions to rent access to a subset of journals.

With a simple directive, the President could provide students free access to these crucial resources that we paid for in the first place. The Administration has repeatedly shown interest in opening access to publicly funded research, and we strongly believe this petition will be a catalyst for the President to take decisive action.

As the recent negotiations on student loan debt have shown, President Obama cares what students have to say. Your voice matters. Sign the petition and encourage your friends and family to do the same. Together, we can send a signal that will make an education limited by paywalls a thing of the past.

What You Can Do

1. Sign the petition on the White House website.

2. Share with your friends, family, and colleagues. If we’re going to blow past 25,000 signatures, we need your help. Share our call to action on facebook and twitter (#openaccess), write an op-ed for your campus newspaper, blog about it, email a link to your friends – whatever you can do to spread the word will make a difference.

3. Stay connected. Enter your email address below to receive infrequent updates from the Right to Research Coalition on future calls to action and other significant developments.

Loading…

Background

Among students, finding what seems to be the perfect article only to realize you don’t have access to the full-text is about as common an experience as there is. What you might not realize is that this problem is as unnecessary as it is common.

As taxpayers, we fund the bulk of published research through federal science agencies like the National Institutes of Health; however, even though we’ve paid for the research, we can’t read the resulting articles without paying often-expensive prices for the journals they’re published in. In 15 academic disciplines, the average journal costs more than $1,000 per year, and some journals can cost as much as $25,000 or more for a single subscription for one year. It’s common for the largest commercial publishers of academic journals to make profit margins in excess of 35% year in and year out, even though colleges and universities struggle to make ends meet without sacrificing college affordability.

Opening up access to these articles would give all students access to these resources crucial for a complete, up-to-date education – regardless of ability to pay for expensive journal subscriptions.

Through a Presidential directive, President Obama has the power to open all federally funded research immediately, and his administration has shown strong interest in doing so. Within the first year of his term, the White House issued a Request for Information about the merits of a policy requiring all federally funded research to be made available. Just this winter, the Obama Administration issued another Request for Information asking not if such a policy is a good idea, but rather how to implement it.

This interest means the petition isn’t just a shot in the dark. We know the Administration is listening, and we know they are already considering taking action. A strong show of support can catalyze interest into action, turning requests for information into decisive policy.

More information and news can be found at the petition campaign website: www.access2research.org.

Sign the White House Petition on Open Access to Research Today!

Posted on May 21, 2012 by Heather Joseph

We now have a brief, critical window of opportunity to demonstrate that we as a community firmly believe should be a high priority for the Administration to act on right now. To help accomplish this, today, May 21st, a petition calling for Public Access to all Federally Funded Research has been posted to the White House’s “We the People” Website. If the petition garners 25,000 signatures within 30 days, it will be reviewed by White House staff, and considered for action.

Tags:

obama,

Open access,

research,

white house

Sign the White House Petition on Open Access to Research Today!

Posted on May 21, 2012 by Heather Joseph

Tags:

Today we mobilize the forces of academic Freedom

Posted on May 21, 2012 by pm286

I’m attaching a mail that’s going round the academic twittersphere – mobilizing everyone to sign a WhiteHouse (US) petition requiring that all federally funded research be made publicly available.

It’s a no-brainer. :

Find the site below
Sign
Mail this message to your contacts

Will it do any good?

Yes.

Every bit of publicity is good and every indication of support helps. This isn’t asking you to occupy the streets. It’s simply, democratically, asking the US government to act.

The US government has been flooded with contrary bills from vested interests (SOPA, ACTA, RAW, etc.) and public opinion has killed some of them and is chopping off the hydra heads as they emerge. It is unsustainable.

Meanwhile we are now taking positive measures. It make sense to everyone except those with a narrow view of corporate power over material they haven’t produced and have little moral right to control.

S, in simple words:

ALL FEDERALLY FUNDED RESEARCH SHOULD BE MANDATORILY POSTED ON THE WEB.

The funders want this to happen.

The authors want this to happen

The readers (that’s YOU) want this to happen.

The #scholarlyPoor want this to happen.

It’s not revolution. It’s our right and our responsibility.

SIGN.

On *Monday, May 21*, we lodge a petition on the White House’s “We the People” page asking the Obama administration to require that all federally funded research be posted on the Web – extending the principle of the NIH policy to all federal agencies.

1. What We’re Asking

· Publicity/ Call for Participation. Please help line up publicity for the petition before Monday. Specifically, can you help get it on the front pages of Reddit, Tumblr, Wikipedia, Boing Boing, and send out an all-hands-on-deck request through your own blogs/twitter feeds, etc?

· 25,000 signatures in 30 days gets an official Administration response. We want to hit that number fast to escalate this issue inside the White House. We believe the policy has support but is stuck. This could well be the event that gets it through.

· Please sign the petition on Monday.

2. Social Media links/handles

The official campaign website is at http://access2research.org and there are already Facebook pages (http://facebook.com/access2research) and Twitter handles (@access2research) in place.

3. Petition Text (800 character limit)

WE PETITION THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO: [This doesn’t count toward the character count]

Require free access over the Internet to journal articles arising from taxpayer-funded research.

We believe in the power of the Internet to foster innovation, research, and education. Requiring the published results of taxpayer-funded research to be posted on the Internet would give access to entrepreneurs, researchers, patients, caregivers, and students, who currently are blocked by high costs. We know this works without disturbing the process of scientific publishing because the National Institutes of Health is already doing it through its highly successful Public Access Policy. All other federal agencies that fund research should have similar policies.

President Obama, please act now to make federally-funded research freely available to taxpayers on the Internet.

4. The Ask to Others

To sign the petition:

– Have to be 13 years or older
– Have to create an account on whitehouse.gov, which requires giving a name and an email address and then clicking the validation link sent to that address
– Click to sign

5. Further Context

After years of work on promoting policy change to make federally-funded research available on the Internet, and after winning the battle to implement a public access policy at NIH, it has become clear that being on the right side of the issue is necessary but not sufficient. We’ve had the meetings, done the hearings, replied to the requests for information.

But we’re opposed in our work by a small set of publishers who profit enormously from the existing system, even though there is no evidence that the NIH policy has had any measurable impact on their business models. They can – and do – outspend those of us who have chosen to make a huge part of our daily work the expansion of access to knowledge. This puts the idea of access at a disadvantage. We know there is a serious debate about the extension of public access to taxpayer funded research going on right now in the White House, but we also know that we need more than our current approaches to get that extension made into federal policy.

The best approach that we have yet to try is to make a broad public appeal for support, straight to the people. The Obama Administration has created a web platform to petition the White House directly called We The People. Any petition receiving more than 25,000 digital signatures is placed on the desk of the President’s Chief of Staff and must be integrated into policy and political discussions. But there’s a catch – a petition only has 30 days to gather the required number of signatures to qualify.

We can get 25,000 signatures. And if we not only get 25,000, but an order of magnitude more, we can change the debate happening right now.

Next week we will publish our petition and the 30 day cycle begins. What we’re asking you to do is to leverage your personal and professional networks to get the word out.

You can do this in any way that makes you feel comfortable. A blog post, an email to constituencies, a tweet, a facebook share, you name it – something that tells thousands of people “I support this petition, I’m signing this petition, and I thought you should know about it too.” Because this isn’t just slacktivism with a “like” or a retweet – people need to go to the White House website, enter their name and email address, and hit the button.

Qualified signers must be 13 years old or more, and have a valid email address. That’s all.

The goal is not just to get 25,000, but to get far more to show the White House that this issue matters to people, not just a few publishers.

We are launching the campaign on Monday May 21. The petition will go live late Sunday night May 20, so that the waves can start in the EU and sweep west with the sunrise. We’re asking you to turn on your networks on Monday morning.

Thanks for considering this. If we can all come together to get the word out at once, and stay behind it for 30 days, we have a real chance to get access to taxpayer funded research across the entire government, and send a signal that the people have a voice in this debate, not just publishers and activists.

How to Maximize Compliance With Funder OA Mandates: Potentiate Institutional Mandates

Posted on May 19, 2012 by Eberhard R. Hilf

Richard Poynder has raised some interesting questions in “Open Access Mandates: Ensuring Compliance“. Here are some suggestions as to why neither NIH nor the Wellcome Trust (WT) has a compliance rate of 100% — and what could be done to remedy that:

1. How To Comply. Both the NIH and WT mandates designate Gold OA publishing as one of the means of fulfilling the mandate, instead of uniformly designating fundee self-archiving as the sole means of compliance (whether or not the fundee publishes in a Gold OA journal.

2. Who Complies. Funder mandates only apply to fundees: only fundees are bound by them. Yet fulfillment can be done by either fundees or non-fundees (publishers, especially in the case of WT), instead of uniformly designating fundee self-archiving as the sole means of compliance.

3. When To Comply. The designated timing for compliance with both mandates is not immediately upon publication — instead of uniformly designating fundee self-archiving immediately upon publication as the sole means of compliance (even if the self-archived draft is not made immediately OA). As noted, it is in publishers’ interests to make compliance as delayed as possible, and to leave it in their hands rather than the fundees’.

4. What Version To Deposit. It contributes to the delay in compliance and the ambiguity as to who is fulfilling the mandate (the fundee or the publisher) if compliance can wait for the publisher’s PDF instead of uniformly designating fundee self-archiving of the refereed final draft immediately upon publication as the sole means of compliance (even if the self-archived draft is not made immediately OA and the publisher’s PDF is optionally deposited later).

5. Where To Deposit. Both NIH and WT grants stress direct deposit in PubMed Central (PMC), instead of uniformly designating fundee self-archiving of the refereed final draft in the fundee’s own institutional reposiitory immediately upon publication as the sole means of compliance (even if the self-archived draft is not made immediately OA and the publisher’s PDF is optionally deposited later), thereby recruiting fundees’ institutions to monitor and ensure compliance with the fulfillment conditions of the grant (as institutions are always very eager to do!).

Institututional ID/OA Mandates Work. None of these delays, ambiguities or uncertainties applies to (effective) institutional mandates such as U. Liege’s model ID/OA (immediate-deposit/optional-access) mandate. Not only can author self-archiving in the institutional repository be designated by institutions as the sole means of submitting research for institutional reporting and performance assessment (as Cameron Neylon correctly points out), but institutions are in a position to monitor deposits continuously, not just when a research project grant (which may last for years) has elapsed.

Mutual Potentiation Between Institutional and Funder Mandates. In addition, designating institutional repository self-archiving as the means of compliance for both funder and institutional mandates motivates institutions to adopt self-archiving mandates of their own, for all of their research output, in all disciplines, not just NIH- or WT-funded research. (Institutions are the universal providers of all published research, funded and unfunded.) Funder mandates designating institutional deposit make institutional and funder mandates convergent and mutually reinforcing — rather than divergent and competitive, as funder mandates requiring direct institution-external deposit in PMC (instead of just automated harvesting or export from institutional repositories) do.

Effective Institutional Mandates Can Generate 100% OA Globally. The Liege model institutional ID/OA mandate really works. If funders and institutions worldwide collaborate, 100% OA can be reached not just for NIH and WT funded research but for all research.

PLoS ONE – a personal farewell

Posted on May 18, 2012 by Peter Binfield

This is my last day as the Publisher of PLoS ONE, and I wanted to mark it with a brief blog post.

When I came to work on PLoS ONE (in March 2008), the journal was in its infancy, but was clearly going places. At that time it was receiving about 280 submissions, and publishing about 170 articles, per month. The journal is now receiving over 3,100 submissions per month and in May it should exceed 2,000 publications for the first time ever. PLoS ONE now publishes more articles per month than all but about 20 journals worldwide publish in a year, and in 2012 it could publish almost 3% of the STM literature.

But although the publication volume of the journal has made it very visible, it is how it got there which is the truly interesting story. PLoS ONE was a radical concept when proposed by the PLoS Founders – a journal which would judge submissions only on scientific and methodological soundness, leaving any subjective determinations of impact, scope, or relevance to the post-publication phase. As a result, many commentators felt that it could become a dumping ground for otherwise unpublishable work, or would in some way be a vanity press. But this was never the case. In fact, PLoS ONE has applied exemplary standards to its publication practices; it has rigorously enforced global and local ethical standards; it has treated all authors with courtesy and respect; and it has peer reviewed all submitted content to the highest levels – collectively, these are things which have shown that the journal is serious about the ways in which it will evaluate and handle submitted articles. Today, more than 75% of authors who publish in PLoS ONE have selected the journal as their first or second choice publication venue, and the citation activity of published articles is incredibly high (for example, for those articles which are 12 months or older, 88% have 1 or more citations, and 66% have 3 or more). In addition, the journal has won two awards for Innovation from Industry and Community bodies.

Clearly this radical approach to the evaluation and publication of scientific results has been extremely well received. As a result it is my belief that PLoS ONE has caused (and will continue to cause) a seismic shift in the scholarly publication landscape. It represents a real force for positive change in the way in which academic articles are evaluated and distributed.

Therefore, it is with a sense of considerable sadness that today is my last day on the Journal – running PLoS ONE has been the high point of my career. I would like to take this opportunity to thank everyone who has worked on the journal over the years – without the efforts of the Academic Editors (who now number more than 3,000), the Peer Reviewers (who number almost 75,000) and the staff (located in both our offices, and in various partner organizations) PLoS ONE would not have been the success it is. The journal is, of course, in safe hands – we have a strong organization of experienced staff, and dedicated Academic Editors who, I know, will take the journal to new heights in the coming years.

Thank you,

Peter Binfield,

Publisher PLoS ONE

Wiley Launches New Open Access Journal: Food Science & Nutrition

Posted on May 17, 2012 by wileyopenaccess

Food Science & Nutrition has been launched as part of the Wiley Open Access publishing program. The journal will provide authors with a new platform for the rapid dissemination of the latest research and will be published in collaboration with the Society of Chemical Industry, the Institute of Food Science & Technology and other prominent societies.

Food Science & Nutrition will publish the latest peer reviewed research from across all areas of food sciences, but will focus on the results of fundamental and applied research related to human food and nutrition. The journal will also publish reviews, research methods, invited editorial pieces and commentaries.

Food Science & Nutrition will be edited by Dr. Y. Martin Lo, Associate Professor of Food Bioprocess Engineering at the University of Maryland. Dr. Lo is also the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Food Processing and Preservation, a position he has held since 2007. An expert team of editorial board members will work alongside Dr. Lo, including Associate Editor, Dr. Berna Magnuson of the University of Toronto.

Food Science & Nutrition is the latest addition to Wiley’s portfolio of food science journals and will benefit from relationships with titles including Molecular Nutrition & Food Research which has an Impact factor of 4.3 and holds the top ISI rank for Food Science and Technology.

Dr. Lo commented that, “The science of food has evolved significantly over the last two decades and it has become clear that integrated research to interpret the interface between food science and nutrition is critical in attaining full comprehension of functional foods. Additionally, many countries are still in dire need of appropriate technologies to add value to their abundant agriculture products/byproducts, while developed countries are seeking better practices to sustain agriculture. All these efforts take time and need a proper outlet to usher continuous development and stimulate effective communications. It is my vision for Food Science & Nutrition to be the one-stop hub for such.”

For more information and to sign up for email content alerts please visit the journal’s website.