Open Access Book Metrics Survey for Authors and Editors

With the introduction of books in a digital format, a number of opportunities to analyse usage and impact arise allowing us to learn more about how books are used than ever before. But, what does it all mean? Is the online reader as valuable as someone who bought the book in a bookstore? What does it mean if someone recommended reading the work to their friends on Facebook? How can we see if the book makes an impact outside academia?

This survey aims to collect information on how authors and editors of Open Access books (monographs, anthologies, edited collections, book chapters) make meaning of measures (or metrics) regarding usage and interactions with published books.

Examples of metrics collected about published books in digital format are usage (downloads/views), citations andmentions in social media (altmetrics). The print version of books is measured in the number of sold copies….”

News & Views: Open Access Charges – A Market Slowly Maturing – Delta Think

Over the last few years changes in numbers of journals have been less pronounced. Our samples suggest that for the major publishers, on average:

  • The number of hybrid journals has continued to increase, typically by a low single-digit percent.
  • Amongst the largest publishers, the number of fully OA journals has decreased (again by a low single-digit percent), while mid-sized publishers increased their numbers of fully OA journals.
  • This appears to be due to changes in line up of publishers’ portfolios (e.g., transfers) rather than fully OA “flipping” to hybrid.

Prices Show No Dramatic Changes

  • Maximum APCs this year have fallen slightly to $5,200 from $5,300 for non-discounted, CC BY charges. With one exception last year, this maximum has not changed over the last four years, so the top end of the market appears to be holding steady.
  • Business model is no predictor the highest prices, with both hybrid and fully OA journals asking the highest prices in different market segments.
  • At the lower end of the market, fully OA journal APCs are less expensive than hybrid, and falling. In this segment, hybrid journal APCs have increased.
  • Overall average hybrid APCs are largely holding steady and saw only the smallest of increases (less than 1%) over the last few years.
  • Contrast this with fully OA average APCs, which have been rising slowly but surely: up around 10% over the last four years and up by around 4% in the last year or so….”

News & Views: Open Access Charges – A Market Slowly Maturing – Delta Think

Over the last few years changes in numbers of journals have been less pronounced. Our samples suggest that for the major publishers, on average:

  • The number of hybrid journals has continued to increase, typically by a low single-digit percent.
  • Amongst the largest publishers, the number of fully OA journals has decreased (again by a low single-digit percent), while mid-sized publishers increased their numbers of fully OA journals.
  • This appears to be due to changes in line up of publishers’ portfolios (e.g., transfers) rather than fully OA “flipping” to hybrid.

Prices Show No Dramatic Changes

  • Maximum APCs this year have fallen slightly to $5,200 from $5,300 for non-discounted, CC BY charges. With one exception last year, this maximum has not changed over the last four years, so the top end of the market appears to be holding steady.
  • Business model is no predictor the highest prices, with both hybrid and fully OA journals asking the highest prices in different market segments.
  • At the lower end of the market, fully OA journal APCs are less expensive than hybrid, and falling. In this segment, hybrid journal APCs have increased.
  • Overall average hybrid APCs are largely holding steady and saw only the smallest of increases (less than 1%) over the last few years.
  • Contrast this with fully OA average APCs, which have been rising slowly but surely: up around 10% over the last four years and up by around 4% in the last year or so….”

Self-archiving options on social networks: a review of options

Abstract:  Purpose

 

The purpose of the study is to investigate the extent to which academic librarians in Nigerian universities utilize self-archiving options to make their research papers visible globally.

Design/methodology/approach

 

An online survey was designed using SurveyMonkey software to collect data from 394 academic librarians in Nigerian universities.

Findings

 

The study revealed that the academic librarians in Nigerian universities know and actually use self-archiving options such as ResearchGate, institutional repository and academia.edu to self-archive their publications. While, self-archiving platforms like Kudos, Mendeley.com and personal websites/servers are not popularly used by the academic librarians. Factors such as increased exposure to previously published work broadens the dissemination of academic research generally, which increases institutions’ visibility, were among the options the academic librarians indicated as very important factors that motivate them to contribute their scholarly output to self-archiving options.

Practical implications

 

The study called for academic librarians in developing countries to voluntarily sign-up to register with self-archiving options such as ResearchGate, Kudos, Mendeley.com, Academia.edu and others to enable them to self-archive their published papers for access globally by students, researchers.

Originality/value

 

Self-archiving of papers by authors will lead to an increased visibility of the author and possible citation of the work and chances of collaboration with international colleagues for research projects.

OA Landscape Survey

“In 2019 Springer Nature will publish a report on book authors’ attitudes to publishing and the awareness and perceived benefits of open access. We’d like to ask for your contribution to this research by answering these survey questions, and you will also be able to indicate at the end of the survey if you would like to receive a copy of this report. The anonymized raw data of this survey will be made publicly available after the survey has been closed. You’ll also have the chance to win one of five $100 gift cards

 

All academic book and chapter authors are invited to complete the survey, whether you have published an open access book, or know absolutely nothing about open access….”

Second Big Deals survey: Preview of the results

“EUA has published a preview of the results of the latest edition of its Big Deals survey. The large-scale initiative covers 31 consortia in Europe, representing universities and other organisations, responsible for the negotiation of Big Deal contracts with publishers. 

The preliminary results show that more than one billion euros are spent every year across Europe in electronic resources, of which more than 700 million go to periodicals alone. These numbers are subject to an average annual increase of 3.6%. Notably, universities support about 72% of these costs. 

The survey results illustrate EUA’s contribution to increasing transparency in the publishing area, particularly from the point of view of universities. This aim is also in line with the recent complaint that EUA presented to the European Commission, DG Competition, on the lack of transparency and competition in the academic publishing market in Europe and beyond. 

Conducted in 2018, this is EUA’s second Big Deals survey. The first edition was published early last year. Not only has the number of surveyed consortia increased from 27, but the quality of the data gathered has improved greatly. EUA will link the outcomes of this survey with other key areas in its work, namely institutional policies on Open Access, research assessment methodologies and its impact analysis of Plan S . 

The full survey report will be published in April 2019 on the occasion of the EUA Annual Conference….”

African Open Science Platform Survey

“This survey – which is the second survey distributed as part of the African Open Science Platform Pilot – will help to contribute to extensive awareness of what is happening on the continent in terms of data sharing and Open Science. It consists of 14 straightforward questions and should only take a few minutes to complete.  …”

Build free and open source scientific equipment following demand

“Your participation will enable us to develop a series of online tutorials related to building affordable equipment. It will also help us identify opportunities for the creation of equipment distributed under open/permissive licenses. Under these types of licenses, the created equipment can be used, modified, copied, and improved for new use cases.

It should take less then 10 minutes to complete this questionnaire. By participating in this survey, you can opt-in to a lottery for one of two books related to science and open source hardware….”

Scholarly Communication Survey Results on Open Access Themes – Teaching, Research & Learning

Of the 309 people who answered this survey question, 94% were in favor of implementing an open access policy at Penn, with 68% strongly in favor. Of those 309, 188 (61%) had never heard of or used ScholarlyCommons, but the percent in favor was nearly identical – 93% in favor, with 68% strongly in favor.

Looking at specific populations, faculty (tenured and tenure track) closely followed this pattern (93% in favor, with 62% strongly in favor), and all 68 graduate students who answered this question were in favor of an open access policy, with none opposed….”

Open data: growing pains | Research Information

“In its latest State of Open Data survey, Figshare revealed that a hefty 64 per cent of respondents made their data openly available in 2018.

The percentage, up four per cent from last year and seven per cent from 2016, indicates a healthy awareness of open data and for Daniel Hook, chief executive of Figshare’s parent company, Digital Science, it spells good news….

For example, the majority of respondents – 63 per cent – support national mandates for open data, an eight  per cent rise from 2017. And, at the same time, nearly half of the respondents – 46 per cent – reckon data citations motivate them to make data openly available. This figure is up seven per cent from last year….

Yet, amid the data-sharing success stories, myriad worries remain. Top of the pile is the potential for data misuse….

Inappropriate sharing of data is another key concern….

Results indicated that a mighty 58 per cent of respondents felt they do not receive sufficient credit for sharing data, while only nine per cent felt they do….

Coko recently won funding from the Sloan Foundation to build DataSeer, an online service that will use Natural Language Processing to identify datasets that are associated with a particular article. …”