Monday, October 5, 2015

OATP primary

OATP primary

6th open days Access Management - Sciencesconf.org

Posted: 05 Oct 2015 06:13 AM PDT

"Two years after the days of January 2013 which saw Madame Geneviève Fioraso, Minister of Higher Education and Research, describe the position of the France Open Access, these days have several objectives: issues and measure the progress of OA in France and Europe take stock of the actions undertaken nationally and at the institutional level, within the context of the digital future law, study the advisability of new sustainable ways to publish Open Access think about the next steps in the open science"

COS | News -- Center for Open Science issues 29 grants to develop open tools and services to support scientific research

Posted: 05 Oct 2015 06:11 AM PDT

"The Center for Open Science is pleased to announce 29 grants totalling nearly $300,000 for advancing openness, integrity, and reproducibility in science. All tools and services developed with these grant funds will have open licenses to maximize collaboration, reuse, and community support, and many will integrate with the growing Open Science Framework (OSF) ecosystem. These grants were made possible by an anonymous donation to the Center for Open Science ..."

Retrospective analysis of the quality of reports by author-suggested and non-author-suggested reviewers in journals operating on open or single-blind peer review models -- Kowalczuk et al. 5 (9) -- BMJ Open

Posted: 05 Oct 2015 06:09 AM PDT

[Abstract] Objectives To assess whether reports from reviewers recommended by authors show a bias in quality and recommendation for editorial decision, compared with reviewers suggested by other parties, and whether reviewer reports for journals operating on open or single-blind peer review models differ with regard to report quality and reviewer recommendations. Design Retrospective analysis of the quality of reviewer reports using an established Review Quality Instrument, and analysis of reviewer recommendations and author satisfaction surveys. Setting BioMed Central biology and medical journals. BMC Infectious Diseases and BMC Microbiology are similar in size, rejection rates, impact factors and editorial processes, but the former uses open peer review while the latter uses single-blind peer review. The Journal of Inflammation has operated under both peer review models. Sample Two hundred reviewer reports submitted to BMC Infectious Diseases, 200 reviewer reports submitted to BMC Microbiology and 400 reviewer reports submitted to the Journal of Inflammation. Results For each journal, author-suggested reviewers provided reports of comparable quality to non-author-suggested reviewers, but were significantly more likely to recommend acceptance, irrespective of the peer review model (p<0.0001 for BMC Infectious Diseases, BMC Microbiology and the Journal of Inflammation). For BMC Infectious Diseases, the overall quality of reviewer reports measured by the Review Quality Instrument was 5% higher than for BMC Microbiology (p=0.042). For the Journal of Inflammation, the quality of reports was the same irrespective of the peer review model used. Conclusions Reviewers suggested by authors provide reports of comparable quality to non-author-suggested reviewers, but are significantly more likely to recommend acceptance. Open peer review reports for BMC Infectious Diseases were of higher quality than single-blind reports for BMC Microbiology. There was no difference in quality of peer review in the Journal of Inflammation under open peer review compared with single blind.

Researcher examines complexities of data-sharing in four research projects

Posted: 05 Oct 2015 06:07 AM PDT

" ... ' Data are complex, compound, heterogeneous and messy objects that rarely lend themselves to easy sharing or reuse," said Borgman, the Distinguished Professor and Presidential Chair in Information Studies at UCLA and a scholar with degrees in mathematics, library and information science, and communication research. Borgman and her research team at UCLA's Center for Knowledge Infrastructures will be analyzing how data are handled in four different research projects in astronomy, biology and the medical sciences with the aim of simplifying the complexities of data practices and challenging prevailing assumptions about the value of sharing data. To help them accomplish this, the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation recently awarded her research group a three-year grant that posed this question in its title: 'If data sharing is the answer, what is the question?'' By presenting their findings to these scientific communities as well as to funding agencies, government agencies, publishers and other key stakeholders, the team hopes to change policy, she explained ..."

Academic Social Network Hopes to Change the Culture of Peer Review – Wired Campus - Blogs - The Chronicle of Higher Education

Posted: 05 Oct 2015 06:04 AM PDT

"An academic social network has added a tool it hopes will shake up the system of peer review. The network is called Academia.edu, and it has grown to more than 25 million registered participants, who use it mainly to post their published papers in order to help others find them (and, it's hoped, cite them). The site's new tool, called Sessions, lets researchers post papers that are still in progress, and invite colleagues to comment on them so the papers can be improved before being submitted to peer-reviewed journals. Richard Price, chief executive of Academia.edu, says the intention is to recreate online what happens at academic conferences, where scholars present new research and face questions and critiques from peers in the field. In Sessions, researchers upload a draft paper and then invite a list of other scholars on the network to comment on it during a 20-day period. After that time, the author can either extend the session for another 20 days or close off comments. But since scholars already attend conferences and spend time reviewing unpublished papers for scholarly journals, why would they want to take more time to voluntarily review other drafts? 'There is something thrilling about discussing cutting-edge science,' argues Mr. Price. 'And the author's right there, and you can actually ask the author a question and get an answer.' And as at conferences, young scholars can build their reputations by asking good questions in front of their peers, Mr. Price notes ..."

Most research spending is wasted on bad studies. These billionaires want to change that. - Vox

Posted: 05 Oct 2015 05:53 AM PDT

"Scientific research is often conducted in a highly unscientific manner. About $200 billion — or about 85 percent of global spending on research — is routinely wasted on poorly designed and redundant studies. As much as 30 percent of the most influential original medical research papers later turn out to be wrong or exaggerated. But finally, there's a massive push to fix these problems — and it's largely being financed by a billionaire couple from Houston. The Laura and John Arnold Foundation helped establish Metrics, a Stanford institute focused on 'meta research' — or research on research — to identify problems in the scientific process. They've backed large-scale "reproducibility projects" dedicated to rerunning hundreds of important experiments in everything from neuroscience to psychology, to figure out which ones are actually reliable. They've even funded crusading scientists who want to make the research process more transparent and hold their peers to higher standards. The Arnolds made a fortune (estimated at $4 billion) in finance in their 30s, and promptly started to give it all away, establishing their foundation in 2008. They aren't concerned with short-term rewards, like seeing their names on the side of buildings. Instead, they want to invest in solving long-term, systemic problems, including those in science. And they're filling a very important gap that's been left by traditional science-funding agencies, which often focus on innovation and breakthroughs. I spoke to Laura Arnold, a former corporate lawyer and businesswoman, about her vision and why she became interested in fixing science ..."

Upcoming Webinar | DataONE -- The Open Science Framework: Increasing Reproducibility Across the Entire Research Lifecycle

Posted: 05 Oct 2015 05:51 AM PDT

"Over the past few years there has been a growing movement to make data and code openly available to increase the reproducibility of scientific research. While these steps are important, they leave out information about how research questions, hypotheses, and analytical decisions may have changed over time. This type of information can have important implications for the reproducibility and interpretation of scientific findings. This webinar will discuss how different points in the research lifecycle can affect reproducibility and why tracking how research evolves over time is important for reproducibility. The webinar will also introduce the Open Science Framework, a free, open source webtool designed by the Center for Open Science to help researchers manage, document, and share their entire research lifecycle."

Journal of Open Research Software: Become a Reviewer

Posted: 05 Oct 2015 05:50 AM PDT

"Peer review is an integral part of the scholarly publishing process. By registering as a reviewer, you are supporting the academic community by providing constructive feedback on new research, helping to ensure both the quality and integrity of published work in your field. Once registered, you may be asked to undertake reviews of scholarly articles that match your research interests. Reviewers always have the option to decline an invitation to review and we take care not to overburden our reviewers with excessive requests ..."

Mozilla Study Groups October Update | Mozilla Science Lab

Posted: 05 Oct 2015 05:49 AM PDT

"Every month, we round up what's new in the Mozilla Study Group program, our community led, worldwide network of get-togethers for students, scientists and researchers to get together and share their open science skills with each other. If you'd like to learn more about the Study Group program, check out the Study Group Handbook, and if you'd like to start your own Study Group, email the Science Lab and we'll help you get started! ..."

Open Science and Development: The Importance of Cross-Disciplinary Learning | OCSDNET

Posted: 05 Oct 2015 05:47 AM PDT

"Summary: • It is important for Open Science to recognise the 'human' and ethical dimensions of an open and collaborative approach to research, and much can be learned from the field of development in this regard. •On the other hand, literature around participation, collaboration and transparency within the field of development is often short-sighted in its methodology, such that final research results are often published in closed journal articles. • OCSDNet projects seek to look at the intersection of science and development and are composed of interdisciplinary teams, often using participatory research methods, working to make their own research processes as open and accessible as possible – from data collection to final publication."

Open Access Week 2015 | Scholarly Communication

Posted: 05 Oct 2015 05:44 AM PDT

"It's that time of year again!  On October 19th-23rd, IU Bloomington will celebrate Open Access Week 2015.  Open Access Week is a great opportunity for students, faculty, and librarians to learn more about the potential benefits of open access scholarship and research.  In lieu of this year's theme, 'Open for Collaboration,' IU Bloomington has put together a great series of workshops with speakers from the Office of the Vice Provost for Undergraduate Education, The Indiana University Journal of Undergraduate Research, Indiana University Press, and the IU Libraries.  Topics of discussion will include data management, academic publishing for early-career researchers, journal publishing agreements, and more.  All are encouraged to attend and learn from each other! See below for a detailed list of workshops to be held during Open Access Week 2015 ..."

Copernicus Publications - Interactive Public Peer Review

Posted: 05 Oct 2015 05:43 AM PDT

To foster scientific discussion and to enhance the effectiveness and transparency of scientific quality assurance, in 2001 Copernicus Publications started with an innovative two-stage publication process, the so called Interactive Public Peer ReviewTM. The respective journals are comprised of the fully peer-reviewed journal itself and an access-reviewed discussion forum. In the first stage, manuscripts that pass a streamlined access-review are immediately typeset and published in the discussion forum in our on-screen format optimized for online reading. They then undergo an interactive public discussion, during which the referees' comments (anonymous or attributed), additional short comments by other members of the scientific community (attributed), and the authors' replies are published. In the second stage, the peer-review process is completed and, if accepted, the final revised papers are published in the journal. To ensure publication precedence for authors and to provide a lasting record of the scientific discussions, the discussion forum and the journal are both ISSN-registered, archived, and fully citable (incl. DOI).

StoryWeaver

Posted: 05 Oct 2015 05:40 AM PDT

"Welcome to StoryWeaver from Pratham Books, a whole new world of children's stories, where all barriers fall away. It is a platform that hosts stories in languages from all across India and beyond. So that every child can have an endless stream of stories in her mother tongue to read and enjoy. StoryWeaver is an open platform designed to be innovative and interactive. It invites both, the weaver of stories and the reader to connect and share the fascinating world of words and illustrations. This then, marks a new chapter in children's literature and publishing. Come discover the magic of stories and the joy of reading - a cornucopia that will delight endlessly."

Digital Republic - Bill for a digital republic - Article 9 - Open access to scientific publications of public research

Posted: 05 Oct 2015 05:38 AM PDT

[Fom Google's English] "Objective: To encourage open access to public research. Explanation: The academic world has a considerable body of scientific information access remains complicated by the exclusive rights held by some journals and publishers. The bill proposes to promote the dissemination of open access research results to promote knowledge circulation and thus innovation. It is proposed to enshrine in law a right for secondary upgrading scientific publications. The author may as well make publicly available its creation after a period of 12 months for the scientific, technical and medical and 24 months for the works of human and social sciences. Example: scientists in public research will now have the right to publish their articles on open sites accessible to everyone, including specialized public archives after a short embargo period ..."

Open Access in Iran: an Editor Q+A with Mohammad Abdollahi - On Health

Posted: 05 Oct 2015 05:33 AM PDT

"Mohammad Abdollahi acquired a PharmD in 1988 from the University of Tehran and has since completed a PhD in Pharmacology and Toxicology. He has also gained postdoctoral training in the field of Mechanistic Toxicology at the University of Toronto. As author of more than 650 papers, Professor Mohammad has chaired the Department of Toxicology & Pharmacology for three terms and was the Secretary of the National Board of Toxicology for nine years. He has also chaired the National Society of Toxicology for eight years. Now, Mohammad leads the Secretary of National Board of General and Specialty Pharmacy. Mohammad has been a Council Member of COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics) and ACSE (Asian Council of Science Editors). Mohammad's primary research focus has been on Mechanistic and Environmental Toxicology, Evidence-based Medicine, and Pharmacology. This includes his uncovering of the critical mechanistic connections between the toxicity of chemicals and the etiology of human diseases. Now, Mohammad tells us more about this journal, including how it has advanced and what he hopes will be achieved in the future ..."

UNU-WIDER : Aid Policy and the Macroeconomic Management of Aid

Posted: 05 Oct 2015 05:29 AM PDT

This is an introduction to the UNU-WIDER special issue of World Development on aid policy and the macroeconomic management of aid. We provide an overview of the 10 studies, grouping them under three sub-themes: the aid–growth relationship; the supply-side of aid (including its level, volatility, and coordination of donors); and the macroeconomic framework around aid. The studies in the special issue demonstrate the centrality of research methodology, the importance of disaggregation, and the need to account for country-specific situations and problems. This introduction concludes that the sometimes 'over heated' debate on aid needs redirecting toward more rigorous analysis, in which the advantages—and disadvantages—of using aid for development can be evaluated in a calmer manner."

DuraSpace | Open technologies for durable digital content

Posted: 05 Oct 2015 05:27 AM PDT

"The Telling DSpace Stories work group got underway this fall. The goal is to introduce DSpace community members and the work they are doing by sharing each others stories. The first five stories are now available to answer questions about how others have implemented DSpace at several types of institutions in different parts of the world ... Does this effort look interesting? Do you know of a story you would like to share? We invite you to consider joining DSpace storytellers. This is a grassroots effort and there are no meetings. The stories are generated from interviews conducted by members from other DSpace institutions using a simple set of questions. More information including guidelines and interview questions is available here.  Once the stories are approved by the interviewee they are published widely throughout the DSpace and DuraSpace communities. This growing corpus of real-world examples serves the community by making it easier for new DSpace users to learn more about how other community members went about implementing DSpace ..."

Four different reasons to post preprints | Sauropod Vertebra Picture of the Week

Posted: 05 Oct 2015 04:13 AM PDT

"Preprints are in the air! A few weeks ago, Stephen Curry had a piece about them in the Guardian (Peer review, preprints and the speed of science) and pterosaur palaeontologist Liz Martin published Preprints in science on her blog Musings of Clumsy Palaeontologist. The latter in particular has spawned a prolific and fascinating comment stream. Then SV-POW!'s favourite journal, PeerJ, weighed in on its own blog with A PeerJ PrePrint – so just what is that exactly?. Following on from that, I was invited to contribute a guest-post to the PeerJ blog: they're asking several people about their experiences with PeerJ Preprints, and publishing the results in a series. I started to write my answers in an email, but they soon got long enough that I concluded it made more sense to write my own post instead. This is that post. As a matter of fact, I've submitted four PeerJ preprints, and all of them for quite different reasons ..."

Released: RIOXX mapping to OpenAIRE

Posted: 05 Oct 2015 04:12 AM PDT

"RIOXX and OpenAIRE are metadata profiles designed to operate in overlapping contexts. The RIOXX team at EDINA has produced a document which explains how these profiles relate to each other, and is intended to allow RIOXX 2.0 to map onto OpenAIRE 3.0. The team at OpenAIRE assisted in this, then reviewed and approved the document. The RIOXX Guidelines and Application Profile provide a mechanism to help institutional repositories comply with the Research Councils UK (RCUK) policy on open access. The profile and guidelines have been developed by EDINA and Chygrove Ltd (and previously by UKOLN), working closely with RCUK who have acted as sponsor, and in collaboration with HEFCE who support and endorse this work. This work was aided by funding and support from Jisc."

Complying With the National Institutes of Health Public Access Policy to Facilitate Science Availability for All

Posted: 05 Oct 2015 04:10 AM PDT

Use the link to access pay-per-view options for that article published in the journal Research on Social Work Practice.  [Abstract] Social work researchers are making significant advances in science funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) to improve the health of underserved and marginalized populations throughout the world. Unfortunately, research results are often only available to other scientists at academic institutions, limiting their impact. To facilitate the dissemination of science to the public who paid for it, NIH has implemented a mandatory Public Access Policy that requires articles supported by NIH funds to be deposited in the National Library of Medicine's PubMed Central within 12 months of publication. Funding for investigators who do not adhere to this policy is being actively delayed and withheld until they are in compliance. This article describes how to comply with the new Public Access Policy for social work researchers funded by NIH, with an emphasis on articles accepted and published in Research on Social Work Practice.

Evolution of Nursing Science

Posted: 05 Oct 2015 04:06 AM PDT

Use the link to access pay-per-view options for the article published in Nursing Science Quarterly.  [Abstract] The open access movement where journal content is made freely available over the Internet is purported to increase scientific exchange, yet has pros and cons. There are issues related to quality that need to be examined in relation to evolution of nursing science.

Biomedical Journals and Open Access Institutional Repositories: An Ongoing Review : American Journal of Roentgenology: Vol. 205, No. 4 (AJR)

Posted: 05 Oct 2015 03:51 AM PDT

Use the link to access pay-per-view options for the artcile published in the American Journal of Roentgenology.

Collective health - The political dimension of open access: knowledge as a public good or as a commodity?

Posted: 05 Oct 2015 03:48 AM PDT

" ... There are many other false associations of this type, like the one in the experiment by John Bohannon, published in the journal Science ( 3 ), in which manufactured items with dummy data to send to magazines exclusively Open Access, for which selected a large percentage of magazines list generated and updated by Jeffrey Beall, librarian at the University of Colorado, USA The Beall's list ( 4 , 5 ) includes publishers and magazines called "predatory", using open access and display very unclear practices, such as having fictitious editorial boards, advertise a factor value no impact, lock files control to prevent plagiarism, send requests to revise articles through mass emails ( spam ) ( 6 ), among many other practices that aim to capture pressured by post, willing to pay and with little experience in publishing authors, allowing them to generate a highly lucrative business, funded by unsuspecting authors ..."

Unuploaded experiments have no result

Posted: 05 Oct 2015 03:45 AM PDT

[Abstract] The aim of this note is to attract once again attention of the quantum community to statistical analysis of data which was reported as violating Bell's inequality. This analysis suffers of a number of problems. And the main problem is that rough data is practically unavailable. However, experiments which are not followed by the open access to the rough data have to be considered as with no result. The absence of rough data generates a variety of problems in statistical interpretation of the results of Bell's type experiment. One may hope that this note would stimulate experimenters to create the open access data-base for, e.g., Bell tests. Unfortunately, recently announced experimental loophole-free violation of a Bell inequality using entangled electron spins separated by 1.3 km was not supported by open-access data. Therefore in accordance with our approach "it has no result." The promising data after publication is, of course, a step towards fair analysis quantum experiments. May be this is a consequence of appearance of this preprint, v1. But there are a few questions which would be interesting to clarify before publication (and which we shall discuss in this note).

BU International Open Access Week : 19 – 25 October 2015 | BU Research Blog

Posted: 05 Oct 2015 03:43 AM PDT

Use the link to access the schedule of events.

Creating an open data firestarter: Help us improve our draft executive order - Sunlight Foundation Blog

Posted: 05 Oct 2015 03:42 AM PDT

"Here at the Sunlight Foundation, we've worked for several years to provide you with the best of what we've found out in the field as governments and activists have come up with ideas to make their public data more accessible and usable. We bring you stories from the people who are opening up their data to provide inspiration for how best to do this. We help cross-pollinate the field through analysis and by linking people together at events like TransparencyCamp. So far, the most useful way we've found to provide the distillation of all of these experiences is through our Open Data Policy Guidelines. We used insights from public practice at the federal, state and local levels to create these guidelines, and they've been extremely useful in sharing best practices with groups from across the country. Our guidelines have helped open data advocates at a variety of points along their path, whether by helping groups that are already working on a policy draft find ways to strengthen their effort, or by helping spur further interest in formalizing processes for opening up public data ... However, while we've continued to get lots of positive feedback about our Open Data Policy Guidelines, one of the things we've learned from open data advocates inside and outside of government is that some would like be able to start their conversations with more concrete language. In other words, if we considered our guidelines to be carefully chosen pieces of wood to use in building a toasty open data campfire, what we heard was that some advocates wanted some lighter fluid.  As we here at the Sunlight Foundation always aim to please, we have developed a draft open data executive order that advocates can use in order to provide that faster start to an open data policy conversation. We designed it particularly to start municipal policy conversations, like the kind that we have through participating in the What Works Cities initiative, but please feel free to try it on for size in whatever governmental context you'd like ..."

All 8,400 Apollo Moon Mission Photos Just Went Online. Here Are Some of Our Faves. | Mother Jones

Posted: 05 Oct 2015 03:38 AM PDT

"Every photo ever taken by Apollo astronauts on moon missions is now available online, on the Project Apollo Archive's Flickr account. That's about 8,400 images, grouped by the roll of film they were shot on. You can finally see all the blurry images, mistakes, and unrecognized gems for yourself. The unprocessed Hasseblad photos (basically raw scans of the negatives) uploaded by the Project Apollo Archive offer a fascinating behind-the-scenes peek at the various moon missions…as well as lots and lots (and lots) of photos detailing the surface of the moon. Here's a very small taste. All photos by NASA/The Project Apollo Archive ..."

Changing the model to more affordable-access medical education. | theNursePath

Posted: 05 Oct 2015 03:36 AM PDT

"I recently sent a tweet to the Journal of Advanced Nursing (JAN) questioning the motive behind their twitter feed which often provides links to their latest journal articles. Unfortunately many of the links are not open access, meaning that the only information available to many nurses is the abstract page. @jadvnursing Im not sure if your tweets are more education or more advertising? Full disclosure here, I do have full access to all these articles via my hospitals subscription service. I can even access them remotely from home. I am lucky. The JAN is one journal that often has some really fantastic work on offer, so I get a little frustrated when I see a good research paper or update that might change our clinical practice locked away behind a paywall. The full evidence hidden away from many nurses. Now, I am in no way singling out the JAN here. Most of the nursing and medical journals I read do not provide open access for the majority of their articles ..."

Publication delays at PLOS and 3,475 other journals

Posted: 05 Oct 2015 03:28 AM PDT

"On April 22, 2015 my research was formally accepted to PLOS Computational Biology. 68 days later the article has yet to be published. My current project builds on the forthcoming study and would benefit from its publication. Frustrated, I decided to investigate whether such delays are commonplace at PLOS ... I started by retrieving all PubMed records for the 7 PLOS journals. For each journal, I randomly selected 1000 articles and scraped the PLOS website for receival, acceptance, and publication timestamps. Using this scraped data, I plotted publishing delays over time ... I am not alone! Starting in 2011, publications delays at PLOS Computational Biology began regularly breaching 80 days. PLOS Genetics, Pathogens, andNeglected Tropical Diseases experienced similar publishing delay explosions in 2011, although appear to have recently improved. These extreme temporal fluctuations suggest that delays are not an innate and immutable characteristic of publishing, but instead dependent on operational efficiency and organizational well-being.  The two oldest and most established PLOS journals, Biology and Medicine, followed a different pattern: long delays in their early years followed by stability at 40 days since 2009. The dearth of PLOS Biology records prior to 2009, resulted from broken DOI redirects. Before my scraper finished its duties, PLOS fixed the issue resulting in the few visible Biology articles of that period ..."

Predatory journals published 400,000 papers in 2014: Report - Retraction Watch at Retraction Watch

Posted: 05 Oct 2015 02:09 AM PDT

"The number of so-called 'predatory' open-access journals that allegedly sidestep publishing standards in order to make money off of article processing charges has dramatically expanded in recent years, and three-quarters of authors are based in either Asia or Africa, according to a new analysis from BMC Medicine.* The number of articles published by predatory journals spiked from 53,000 in 2010 to around 420,000 in 2014, appearing in 8,000 active journals. By comparison, some 1.4-2 million papers are indexed in PubMed and similar vetted databases every year. These types of papers have become a major problem, according to Jeffrey Beall, a librarian at the University of Colorado Denver who studies the phenomenon ..."

bjoern.brembs.blog » So many symptoms, only one disease: a public good in private hands

Posted: 05 Oct 2015 02:08 AM PDT

"Science has infected itself (voluntarily!) with a life-threatening parasite. It has  given away its crown jewels, the scientific knowledge contained in the scholarly archives, to entities with orthogonal interests: corporate publishers whose fiduciary duty is not knowledge dissemination or scholarly communication, but profit maximization. After a 350-year incubation time, the parasite has taken over the communication centers and drained them of their energy, leading to a number of different symptoms. Symptoms for which scientists and activists have come up with sometimes quite bizarre treatments ... I'll leave it at these five randomly chosen examples, there are probably many more. While I understand and share the good intentions of all involved and applaud and support their effort, dedication, patience and passion, I can't help but feel utterly depressed and frustrated by how little we have accomplished. Not counting the endless stream of meetings, presentations and workshops where always the same questions and ideas are being rehashed ad nauseam, our solutions essentially encompass three components: [1] asking politicians, funders and lately even Wikipedia editors to help us clean up the mess we ourselves have caused to begin with [2] wasting time with unnecessary extra paperwork [3] wasting time and money with unnecessary extra research What is it, that keeps us from being 'radical' in the best sense of the word? ...  This plan entails two initial actions: one is to cut subscriptions to regain access to the funds required to implement a modern scholarly infrastructure. The other is to use the existing mechanisms (e.g. LOCKSS) to ensure the back-archives remain accessible for us indefinitely. As many have realized, this is a collective action problem. If properly organized, this will bring the back-archives back into our control and provide us with sufficient leverage and funds to negotiate the terms at which they can be made publicly accessible. Subsequently, using the remaining subscription funds, the scholarlyinfrastructure will take care of all our scholarly communication needs: we have all the technology, it just needs to be implemented.  After a short transition period, at least in the sciences, publications in top-ranked journals (to which then only individuals subscribe, if any) will be about as irrelevant for promotion and funding as monographs are today ..."
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)