Monthly Archives: November 2022

Open Access information specialist 1.0 FTE, permanent | Leibniz-Institut für Psychologie (ZPID)

Posted on by
Reply

English version via deepl.com:

We are looking for an Open Access Information Specialist (m/f/d), (pay grade TV-L E13, working hours 100%, permanent), start date February 01, 2023 or later

Tasks and Functions:

You are part of the department “Archiving and Publishing Services” at ZPID, which provides innovative products and services for psychology and related disciplines that follow the Open Science idea. One of the lead products of this infrastructure area is PsychOpen GOLD, ZPID’s open access publication platform for first publications in psychology and related disciplines. In close cooperation with renowned scholars, professional societies and international editorial boards, 15 journals are currently produced and published on PsychOpen GOLD.

Together with the PsychOpen GOLD team, you will provide operational support for all tasks arising in the context of the PsychOpen GOLD service catalog and, in coordination with other stakeholders (e.g., external service providers and scientific partners), contribute significantly to the optimization of the associated workflows. For detailed information on the PsychOpen GOLD service catalog, please see https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.4632. In addition, you will provide scientific support for the development of the platform and participate in the acquisition of third-party funding.

Your profile:

Master’s degree (or equivalent/higher) in information science or another relevant discipline, e.g., data science, library science, social and behavioral sciences.
Advanced experience in scientific work and publishing (e.g. as author, reviewer, etc.)
Expertise in publication-relevant application programs (e.g. in the area of office applications, graphics processing, PDF authoring)
IT skills preferably in the areas of markup languages (e.g. XML, HTML, LaTeX), transformation and stylesheet languages (e.g. XSL, CSS), scripting and programming languages (e.g. PHP, Javascript, Python), database systems and languages (e.g. MySQL).
Project management skills
Very good command of the German and English language, both written and spoken
Proactive, structured, result-oriented and independent way of working
Distinct ability to work in a team and social competence

Desirable:

Knowledge of scientific publication infrastructures (e.g., subject databases, DOI registration agencies), standards (e.g., metadata standards, Open Science Standards), and/or software systems (e.g., OJS, Editorial Manager)
Psychological expertise and methodological knowledge
Experience in the area of third-party funding acquisition
Basic knowledge of legal frameworks (licenses, copyright, data and privacy rights)

—

German original:

 

 

Wir suchen zum 01. Februar 2023 oder später eine*n:

Open Access Informationsspezialist*in (m/f/d)

(Entgeltgruppe TV-L E13, Arbeitszeit 100%, unbefristet)

 

Aufgaben und Funktionen:

Sie sind Teil der Abteilung “Archivierungs- und Veröffentlichungsdienste” am ZPID, die innovative und dem Open Science-Gedanken folgende Produkte und Dienstleistungen für die Psychologie und verwandte Disziplinen zur Verfügung stellt. Eines der Leitprodukte dieses Infrastrukturbereichs ist PsychOpen GOLD, die Open Access Publikationsplattform des ZPID für Erstveröffentlichungen aus der Psychologie und verwandten Fächern. In enger Zusammenarbeit mit renommierten Fachwissenschaftler*innen, Fachgesellschaften und international besetzten Editorial Boards werden aktuell 15 Zeitschriften auf PsychOpen GOLD produziert und veröffentlicht.

Gemeinsam mit dem PsychOpen GOLD Team werden Sie  sämtliche im Rahmen des PsychOpen GOLD Servicekatalogs anfallenden Aufgaben operativ unterstützen und in Abstimmung mit weiteren Stakeholdern (z.B. externe Dienstleister und Wissenschaftspartner) maßgeblich zur Optimierung der zugehörigen Workflows beitragen. Für detaillierte Informationen zum Servicekatalog von PsychOpen GOLD siehe https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.4632. Darüber hinaus werden Sie die Entwicklung der Plattform wissenschaftlich begleiten und sich bei der Akquise von Drittmitteln beteiligen.

Ihr Profil:

Masterabschluss (oder gleichwertig/höher) in den Informationswissenschaften oder einer anderen einschlägigen Disziplin, z.B. Data Science, Bibliothekswissenschaften, Sozial- und Verhaltenswissenschaften
Erweiterte Erfahrungen im wissenschaftlichen Arbeiten und Publizieren (z. B. als Autor*in, Gutachter*in, etc.)
Expertise bei publikationsrelevanten Anwendungsprogrammen (z. B. im Bereich Office-Anwendungen, Grafikbearbeitung, PDF-Authoring)
IT-Kompete

Fellowship – Open Climate

Posted on by
Reply

“Open Climate seeks seven (7) mid career professionals for the 2023 Open Climate Fellowship Program. We welcome applicants from backgrounds across the open and climate movements such as researchers, activists, developers, and educators who are excited to:

Explore the intersections between open technology projects and the climate crisis. 
 Connect with new people working with open technologies and/or climate and environmental justice, coordinating with our team to put ideas, projects and partnerships out into the world. Network development, community building, and sharing ideas are always at the top of your mind. 
Center the expansion of the knowledge commons for addressing climate change in your work….”

Mapping the chemistry of the Earth’s mantle

Posted on by
Reply

The Earth’s mantle makes up about 85% of the Earth’s volume and is made of solid rock. But what rock types is the mantle exactly made of, and how are they distributed throughout the mantle? An international team of researchers – including UT researcher Dr Juan Carlos Afonso (Faculty of ITC) – have been able to reveal the existence of pockets of rocks with abnormal properties that suggest that they were once created at the surface, transported to vast depths along subduction zones, and accumulated at specific depths inside the Earth’s mantle.

MetaArXiv Preprints | Crossref metadata for preprints: Discussions and recommendations

Posted on by
Reply

Abstract:  In 2016, Crossref launched a metadata schema for ‘posted content’ with the aim of better accommodating the metadata needs for preprints, working papers, theses, reports, and related outputs, which are not typically peer-reviewed. In 2021, Crossref formed an Advisory Group (AG) to discuss how the quality of metadata for preprints using this schema could be improved. The group focused on four topics: 1) preprints as an article type (rather than subtype of posted-content); 2) relationships to/from preprints; 3) versioning; and 4) withdrawal/removal of preprints. The recommendations that resulted from the group’s deliberations have been published previously. Here we provide further background to the recommendations and report more details of the discussions.

 

Organizing the Open Publishing Festival 2023, 13-17 November | Liberate Science

Posted on by
Reply

“We will be organizing the 2023 edition of the Open Publishing Festival together with Coko. Save the date: 13-17 November 2023. Organizing the Open Publishing Festival aligns perfectly our virtual-first event policy. We got inspired by the Festival at the start of the pandemic, and are excited we will co-organize it. We will be expanding in the 2023 edition of the Open Publishing Festival!  If you are interested, please suggest a session. It can be any kind of publishing—fact, fiction, art of any kind. Any kind of format, tool, or project—podcasts, software, video, books, articles, organisations, processes, methodologies, VR/AR – all of it! Anything that is open publishing! Are you interested to help with the 2023 edition? We are looking for sponsors and wranglers…”

IEEE Commits its Entire Hybrid Journal Portfolio to Transformative Journal Status Aligned with Plan S

Posted on by
Reply

IEEE, the world’s largest technical professional organization dedicated to advancing technology for humanity, announced today that it has committed its full portfolio of more than 160 hybrid journals, which publish both open access and subscription-based content, to become Transformative Journals under Plan S.

This commitment means that any authors receiving research grants from Coalition S, a group of research funders, are compliant with Plan S requirements when publishing their research articles in any IEEE fully open access or hybrid journals. In addition to the existing direct open access agreements with hundreds of institutions, all of IEEE’s hybrid journals now qualify as ‘Transformative Journals’ under Plan S.

Invest in Open Infrastructure Funders Summit 2022: Summary and resources | 29 November 2022

Posted on by
Reply

“Between October 31 and November 4, 2022, Invest in Open Infrastructure (IOI) organized our first Funders Summit, where we brought together over 80 funders, budget holders, and other key stakeholders involved in the financing and resourcing of open infrastructure to collaboratively explore and discuss a shared framework for investment in open research infrastructure and test out building an alternative funding mechanism. As outlined in our strategic plan, we recognize the need for global cooperation and coordination to increase and sustain open infrastructure investment at an ecosystem-wide level. In our many conversations with stakeholders throughout the past years, we have also come to understand the desire for more evidence-based strategic guidance and recommendations for funders looking to invest more meaningfully in open infrastructure, as well as the need to test new models and interventions. In organizing this Summit, we aimed to: Go beyond the “usual suspects”, to bring together diverse stakeholders from around the world, from those representing inter-governmental organizations to those from the broader digital and/or public infrastructure space. Share key research and data to spark discussions and challenge assumptions on what to fund and how to fund. Create a safe space for experimentation, to test out an alternative means to collectively fund open infrastructure and for all participants – including IOI – to learn from the experience. Below, we share a summary of the discussions at the Summit, as well as links to recordings, slides, and other related resources. We’ll reflect on the collective fund pilot run during the Summit and key lessons we learnt in the following weeks….

The shared notes and complete recordings remain accessible to Summit participants. The links and ways to access these additional artefacts can be found on our HackMD page.” 

https://hackmd.io/@investinopen/Funders-Summit-2022

The challenge of preprints for public health The challenge of preprints for public health

Posted on by
Reply

“Despite disagreements over whether this form of publication is actually beneficial or not, its advantages and problems present a high degree of convergence among advocates and detractors. On the one hand, preprint is beneficial because it is a quicker way to disseminate scientific content with open access to everyone; on the other hand, the lack of adequate vetting, especially for peer reviews, increases the risk of disseminating bad science and can lead to several problems 2. The dissent lies in considering to what extent possible risks overcome possible benefits (or vice versa).

 

The argument about this rapid dissemination has strong supporting evidence. A study on preprint publication showed that preprint are published on average 14 months earlier than peer-reviewed journal articles 1. This is expected considering that the time-intensive process of peer reviews and revising manuscripts is totally bypassed. However, in this strength lies its very fragility: how to assure that this shorter process will not compromise the quality of the publication?

 

ASAPbio (Accelerating Science and Publication in Biology) 3 is a group of biology researchers that promotes preprint publication and has produced a number of studies that attempt to allay concerns about its quality, claiming, for example, that published articles previously submitted to a preprint server did not show relevant changes for its publication 4. Authors from this group have argued that the current approaches to evaluate research and researchers hold back a more widespread adoption of the preprint methodology 5, which would explain its relatively small participation on the general panorama of scientific publication.

 

Despite claims to the contrary, however, there are examples of poor studies published as preprints, which caused undesirable consequences in public health. Two methodologically flawed studies about a protective effect of tobacco smoking against COVID-19 (one of which has an author with known connections with the tobacco industry), for example, increased the commercialization of tobacco products in France and Iran 6 and a virology study that erroneously stated that the SARS-COV-2 virus had “HIV insertions” fueled conspiracy theories about the former virus being a bioweapon, which lingered on even after the preprint was removed from the server due to its egregious errors 7. Studies have found that much of the public discussion and even policy was indeed driven by what was published in preprints rather than in scientific journals 7,8,9,10, thus, quality issues are a major cause of concern.

 

On the other hand, similar errors have been observed within traditional publishing; the publication of a poor quality paper with undisclosed conflicts of interest in one of the most prestigious medical journals, The Lancet, which became the trigger for the contemporary wave of anti-vaccine activism, is a major, and regretful, example. Understanding to what extent this problem is likely to occur with or without gatekeeping mechanisms is necessary….”

Chef’s Selections: Best Books Read and Favorite Cultural Creations During 2022, Part 1

Posted on by
Reply

The beginning of the holiday season means it’s time for our annual list of our favorite books read (and other cultural creations experienced) during the year. Part 1 today.

The post Chef’s Selections: Best Books Read and Favorite Cultural Creations During 2022, Part 1 appeared first on The Scholarly Kitchen.

IEEE Commits its Entire Hybrid Journal Portfolio to Transformative Journal Status Aligned with Plan S | STM Publishing News

Posted on by
Reply

“IEEE, the world’s largest technical professional organization dedicated to advancing technology for humanity, announced today that it has committed its full portfolio of more than 160 hybrid journals, which publish both open access and subscription-based content, to become Transformative Journals under Plan S. 

This commitment means that any authors receiving research grants from Coalition S, a group of research funders, are compliant with Plan S requirements when publishing their research articles in any IEEE fully open access or hybrid journals. In addition to the existing direct open access agreements with hundreds of institutions, all of IEEE’s hybrid journals now qualify as ‘Transformative Journals’ under Plan S….”

Publications | Free Full-Text | Adoption of Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) Guidelines across Journals

Posted on by
Reply

Abstract:  Journal policies continuously evolve to enable knowledge sharing and support reproducible science. However, that change happens within a certain framework. Eight modular standards with three levels of increasing stringency make Transparency and Openness Promotion (TOP) guidelines which can be used to evaluate to what extent and with which stringency journals promote open science. Guidelines define standards for data citation, transparency of data, material, code and design and analysis, replication, plan and study pre-registration, and two effective interventions: “Registered reports” and “Open science badges”, and levels of adoption summed up across standards define journal’s TOP Factor. In this paper, we analysed the status of adoption of TOP guidelines across two thousand journals reported in the TOP Factor metrics. We show that the majority of the journals’ policies align with at least one of the TOP’s standards, most likely “Data citation” (70%) followed by “Data transparency” (19%). Two-thirds of adoptions of TOP standard are of the stringency Level 1 (less stringent), whereas only 9% is of the stringency Level 3. Adoption of TOP standards differs across science disciplines and multidisciplinary journals (N = 1505) and journals from social sciences (N = 1077) show the greatest number of adoptions. Improvement of the measures that journals take to implement open science practices could be done: (1) discipline-specific, (2) journals that have not yet adopted TOP guidelines could do so, (3) the stringency of adoptions could be increased.

 

Announcing November 29, 2022 Open Government Engagement Session on Increasing Federal Data Access and Utility | OSTP | The White House

Posted on by
Reply

“To fulfill the Biden-Harris Administration’s commitment to transparent and equitable data, we are seeking input about how data can be more transparent, useful, and accessible. The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy will hold an engagement session on November 29, 2022 from 1:00 to 2:00 PM ET to get feedback from the public about proposed federal commitments to improve public access to data.

This session will inform the development of the United States’ Open Government National Action Plan: a set of public commitments the federal government is drafting with input from civil society to support a more equitable, transparent, and accountable government.    

At this session, we plan to further define commitments related to the following ideas brought up by participants in previous engagement sessions:

Strengthening access to government information through the Freedom of Information Act.
Creating better feedback loops between data practitioners and federal data stewards…”

Webinar recording: Rights Retention for Books and Book Chapters, November 23, 2022 | OASPA @ YouTube

Posted on by
Reply

Rights retention is gaining traction as a way to achieve open access without having to pay author-facing publication charges, for example by enabling the distribution of manuscripts through institutional repositories.

There are at least two common methods of rights retention – the Harvard approach (first adopted in 2008) and the Plan S approach (first announced in 2020)– practised by institutions or individual authors worldwide. A more recent development is the national implementation of rights retention, such as the 2022 decree in the Republic of Slovenia stipulating that exclusive authors’ rights of publicly funded research can no longer be transferred to publishers.

The focus of such rights retention policies tends to be on articles in scholarly journals. Is there a good reason why we would not consider doing the same for the manuscripts of books or book chapters? Do publishers object more to rights retention for these types of publication than for article manuscripts? Would it not be a good idea to make haste with a more general rights retention policy for books and book chapters now that more and more funders demand open access for other publication types than journal articles?

The webinar was chaired by Sally Rumsey (cOAlition S) and speakers include Lucy Barnes (Open Book Publishers), Per Pippin Aspaas (University of Tromsø – The Arctic University of Norway) and Peter Suber (Harvard University).

Webinar structure (60 minutes)

Introduction by chair, Sally Rumsey
Panelist presentations 

Peter Suber (Harvard University)
Per Pippin Aspaas (University of Tromsø – The Arctic University of Norway)
Lucy Barnes (Open Book Publishers)

Discussion and Q&A