Abstract: This paper studies a selection of eleven Norwegian journals in the humanities and social sciences and their conversion from subscription to open access, a move heavily incentivized by governmental mandates and open access policies. By investigating the journals’ visiting logs in the period 2014-2019, the study finds that a conversion to open access induces higher visiting numbers; all journals in the study had a significant increase which can be attributed to the conversion. Converting a journal had no spillover in terms of increased visits to previously published articles still behind the paywall in the same journals. Visits from previously subscribing Norwegian higher education institutions did not account for the increase in visits, indicating that the increase must be accounted for by visitors from other sectors. The results could be relevant for policymakers concerning the effects of strict polices targeting economically vulnerable national journals, and could further inform journal owners and editors on the effects of converting to open access.
“Changes are afoot in the way the scientific community is approaching the practice and reporting of research. Spurred by concerns about the fundamental reliability (i.e., replicability), or rather lack thereof, of contemporary psychological science (e.g., Open Science Collaboration, 2015), as well as how we go about our business (e.g., Gelman & Loken, 2014), several recommendations have been furthered for increasing the rigor of the published research through openness and transparency. The Journal has long prized and published the type of research with features, like large sample sizes (Fraley & Vazire, 2014), that has fared well by replicability standards (Soto, 2019). The type of work traditionally published here, often relying on longitudinal samples, large public datasets (e.g., Midlife in the United States Study), or complex data collection designs (e.g., ambulatory assessment and behavioral coding) did not seem to fit neatly into the template of the emerging transparency practices. However, as thinking in the open science movement has progressed and matured, we have decided to full?throatedly endorse these practices and join the growing chorus of voices that are encouraging and rewarding more transparent work in psychological science. We believe this can be achieved while maintaining the “big tent” spirit of personality research at the Journal with a broad scope in content, methods, and analytical tools that has made it so special and successful all of these years. Moving forward, we will be rigorously implementing a number of procedures for openness and transparency consistent with the Transparency and Open Science Promotion (TOP) Guidelines.
The TOP Guidelines are organized into eight standards, each of which can be implemented at three levels of stringency (Nosek et al., 2015). In what follows, we outline the initial TOP Standards Levels adopted by the Journal and the associated rationale. Generally, we have adopted Level 2 standards, as we believe these strike a desirable balance between compelling a high degree of openness and transparency while not being overly onerous and a deterrent for authors interested in the Journal as an outlet for their work….”
Abstract: The Journal of Information Technology in Construction (ITcon), was founded in 1996, using the new innovative open access business model enabled by the World wide web. A quarter century later Open Access (OA) journals have established themselves in all fields of science, in particular in biomedicine, so that around a fifth of all high quality peer reviewed articles are currently published in OA journals. In building and construction there are half a dozen active full OA journals, although ITcon remains the only one dedicated specifically to construction IT research. The development of OA has been slower than anticipated in the early years. An analysis using Michael Porter’s five forces model of the competitive environment of scholarly publishing helps to highlight the reasons for this. Particularly important as a barrier to change is the strong emphasis in academic evaluations on impact factors, which favors old established journals. Despite such hurdles OA continuously grows in importance and pioneering journals like ITcon have helped to pave the way.
Abstract: The open access journal Communications in Information Literacy (CIL) began publication in 2007. After ten years of continuous growth, CIL migrated from Online Journals Systems (OJS) and a commercial web host to Portland State’s Digital Commons (bepress) publishing platform, PDXScholar. The presenters provide brief overviews of CIL and PDXScholar, and they detail the challenges and ultimate successes of this multi-institutional model for advancing open access journals and reclaiming control of the scholarly record. They highlight the content migration process from OJS to PDXScholar, post-migration actions to correct metadata, the introduction of functioning DOIs, and coordinating with both free web and commercial indexers to ensure proper access to the newly moved journal. The presenters also discuss the practicalities and the policy implications of this move, particularly in light of Elsevier’s acquisition of bepress. Finally, the presenters advance their partnership as an exemplar of transformational publishing and as a viable, sustainable model for scholars in other fields to emulate.
Abstract: The European Journal of Psychotraumatology, owned by the European Society for Traumatic Stress Studies (ESTSS), launched as one of the first full Open Access ‘specialist’ journals in its field. Has this Open Access model worked in how the Journal has performed? With the European Journal of Psychotraumatology celebrating its ten-year anniversary we look back at the past decade of sharing our research with the world and with how the journal sits with the broader movement beyond Open Access to Open Research and we present new policies we have adopted to move the field of psychotraumatology to the next level of Open Research. While we as researchers now make our publications more often freely available to all, how often do we share our protocols, our statistical analysis plans, or our data? We all gain from more transparency and reproducibility, and big steps are being made in this direction. The journal’s decennial performance as well as the exciting new Open Research developments are presented in this editorial. The journal is no longer in its infancy and eager to step into the next decade of Open Research.
“Since I started as the Editor?in?Chief in 2012, submission of manuscripts has almost tripled, despite transition to an open access journal a few years ago. Despite COVID?19, the number of submissions to PBJ [Plant Biotechnology Journal] continued to increase in 2020….”
“Let’s take a step back. Why was ChemistryOpen launched in the first place? In the first decade of the new century, some of the European governments part of ChemPubSoc Europe (now Chemistry Europe Chemistry Europe) have started to recommend that all the research conducted with their funding be freely accessible for all readers, irrespective of socioeconomic or geographical considerations. As a response, and with the endorsement of the owner societies, ChemPubSoc Europe has launched ChemistryOpen. Back then, there was quite some skepticism regarding the open access publishing model. However, the involvement of the societies has been crucial in promoting the journal and its high ethical and quality standards among the chemistry community in Europe and worldwide. And 10 years later ChemistryOpen is one of the leading open access chemistry journals! …
Once again this year, ChemistryOpen has receive the highest number yearly submissions to date, and has achieved a record?breaking number of downloads. A big thanks to all of our authors for sending us your fascinating research from all over the world, and enabling the journal to reach a strong positioning in the everchanging and expanding publishing landscape. …”
“EUPHA [European Public Health Association] has also advocated for maintaining the learned societies’ role in the running of scientific journals. Many ‘pure’ open access journals are just catalogues of scientific manuscripts, whereas societies want to include editorials, viewpoint papers, commentaries, society news etc., in their journals. EUPHA is determined to keep the European Journal of Public Health (EJPH) as a society journal, combining high level scientific publication with policy papers, debates, and public health news. This is an important part of EUPHA’s knowledge translation policy, implying a priority for the association to strengthen public health science, policy and practice in Europe.
During the past year, EUPHA and its members have discussed a possible shift for the EJPH to a complete open access journal. Overall, reactions have been positive, although there remains concern regarding weaker institutions and authors without funding to pay for open access….
Beginning in January 2022, this journal will be published fully open access. The current structure with six issues per year, and with editorials, viewpoints and European public health news, will remain. Paper copies that are currently being distributed in big packs all over Europe, will no longer exist, to the benefit of the environment. Certain supplements, for which paper copies are important for targeted dissemination, can still opt for paper copies. Thus 2021 will be a transition year, when we publish all papers accepted on the current agreement, whereas papers submitted from May 2021 will be published under the new agreement….”