Strengthening the Open Science Ecosystem Through Preprints

“When rapid and open sharing occurs, it is usually in venues (like scientific conferences or within networks of collaborators) accessible only to researchers from well-resourced and established institutions, creating additional barriers to researchers from emerging countries or under-resourced areas, preventing them from participating in the scientific discourse.

Preprints are poised to change this. In addition to enabling rapid sharing, preprints also 1) offer novel opportunities for feedback and peer review; 2) improve the overall quality, integrity, and reproducibility of research outputs; and 3) help prevent scooping and incentivize early collaboration.

These benefits can be dramatically enhanced by third-party services (authoring tools, commenting platforms, and machine extraction projects) that act as both inputs and outputs to preprints. As arXiv founder Paul Ginsparg envisioned in the early 1990s, preprints can provide “a relatively complete raw archive, unfettered by any unnecessary delays in availability” on top of which “any type of information could be overlayed… and maintained by any third parties,” including tools for validation, filtering, and communication….”

Breaking down publication to share the full story of your research

“Are traditional research articles still meeting researchers’ communication needs? Over the past decade, Open Science and the rise in digital publications together have facilitated a more agile ecosystem of research-sharing. For researchers, that means: faster pathways to sharing their discoveries; greater transparency of assessment which helps increase reliability and public trust; and more opportunities for collaborations that accelerate advancements in the field.

With increased options for sharing and evaluating science, we’re looking at ways to segment the research-sharing lifecycle to fit the research process. How do we share important, urgent discoveries earlier, without compromising quality? What other essential products of research can we be more transparent about?…”

PLOS Joins Other Publishers and Societies in Support of the Proposed White House Policy Regarding Federally Funded Research

Note: PLOS and other prominent organizations delivered the following letter to the Trump Administration on January 17, 2020. We encourage all publishing organizations and scholarly societies who would like to join us in support of OA in the USA to reach out to us at community@plos.org — we can prepare an expanded letter with more signatories as necessary. Please also consider voicing your support on social media with the hashtag #OAintheUSA.

Decentralized Science. Bringing transparency to academic peer reviewing

“P2P Models explores a new way of building collaborative platforms harnessing the blockchain. We are building a software framework to build decentralized infrastructure for collaborative economy organizations that do not depend on central authorities….

We are a team based at the Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM), developing an ERC Granted research project led by Samer Hassan, Faculty Associate at the Berkman Klein Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University and Associate Professor at UCM. Thus, we combine research and software development efforts, and we have to navigate the jungle of academic papers and publications and survive the academic’s “publish or perish” curse.  As do many others, we think academic publication and peer reviewing can be improved in many ways, such as its fairness, quality, performance, cost, etc. Moreover, an oligopoly of publishers owns more than half of the market, making a large profit from the free work of editors, reviewers and authors. Fortunately, in P2P Models we are studying how blockchain based solutions can help us improve the governance and value distribution in online communities, and we decided to apply our own proposals to improve science publication and peer reviewing. This is how the Decentralized Science project was born, as an effort to solve the problems we were facing in academia and promote the values of Open Access and Open Science movements with the tools we were designing and researching in the P2P Models project….”

Decentralized Science. Bringing transparency to academic peer reviewing

“P2P Models explores a new way of building collaborative platforms harnessing the blockchain. We are building a software framework to build decentralized infrastructure for collaborative economy organizations that do not depend on central authorities….

We are a team based at the Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM), developing an ERC Granted research project led by Samer Hassan, Faculty Associate at the Berkman Klein Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University and Associate Professor at UCM. Thus, we combine research and software development efforts, and we have to navigate the jungle of academic papers and publications and survive the academic’s “publish or perish” curse.  As do many others, we think academic publication and peer reviewing can be improved in many ways, such as its fairness, quality, performance, cost, etc. Moreover, an oligopoly of publishers owns more than half of the market, making a large profit from the free work of editors, reviewers and authors. Fortunately, in P2P Models we are studying how blockchain based solutions can help us improve the governance and value distribution in online communities, and we decided to apply our own proposals to improve science publication and peer reviewing. This is how the Decentralized Science project was born, as an effort to solve the problems we were facing in academia and promote the values of Open Access and Open Science movements with the tools we were designing and researching in the P2P Models project….”

Decentralized Science

“Through disruptive distributed technologies such as Blockchain, we both enable decentralization and relieve the pains of traditional publication processes.

 

This is accomplished by providing a reputation system of peer reviewers that will improve quality and ensure faster reviews and distribution, helping editors, reviewers and authors.”

 

Decentralized Science

“Through disruptive distributed technologies such as Blockchain, we both enable decentralization and relieve the pains of traditional publication processes.

 

This is accomplished by providing a reputation system of peer reviewers that will improve quality and ensure faster reviews and distribution, helping editors, reviewers and authors.”

 

Registered Reports are Coming to PLOS ONE | EveryONE: The PLOS ONE blog

“I’m very excited to announce that PLOS ONE will soon offer a new preregistration article type, Registered Reports! The benefits that preregistration can bring to the entire research community tie so closely with PLOS ONE’s mission, that we see this as a natural fit for the journal and we’re pleased to open this option to our authors. …”

Registered Reports are Coming to PLOS ONE | EveryONE: The PLOS ONE blog

“I’m very excited to announce that PLOS ONE will soon offer a new preregistration article type, Registered Reports! The benefits that preregistration can bring to the entire research community tie so closely with PLOS ONE’s mission, that we see this as a natural fit for the journal and we’re pleased to open this option to our authors. …”

The FEBS Journal in 2020: Open Access and quality versus quantity publishing – Martin – 2020 – The FEBS Journal – Wiley Online Library

Abstract:  The FEBS Journal, a leading multidisciplinary journal in the life sciences, continues to grow in visibility and impact. Here, Editor?in?Chief Seamus Martin discusses the potential impact of the ‘author pays’ publishing model on research quality, and some of the highlights at the journal over the past year.