“So how do we strike a balance between advocating for online open public scholarship and supporting the psychological and professional safety of those people who are more likely to be subjected to the trauma of online harassment? I don’t know the answer yet, but I think one direction may lie in creating new options for academic publishing. I imagine a cooperative and collaborative online open access journal, run via each institution, which supports anonymous or pseudonymous research sharing by members of the academic community. A publication in which researchers can submit plain language blog posts which can be cross posted to social media by the institution and which represents the output of the research. Once submitted, the academic who wrote the post does not assume the responsibility of moderating the post, rather the responsibility lies with the institution. And the benefit of such a system would be that the work itself would be removed from the identity of the person who wrote about the work. In this case, it’s the research dissemination equivalent of musicians auditioning for the symphony behind a screen – and it thus could have a levelling effect….”
“The increasingly open and transparent nature of academic research is something I’ve touched upon many times on this blog in recent years. Further evidence of this general trend has emerged via the launch of MNI Open Research, a new platform for the publication of neuroscience research.
The platform aims to facilitate open and transparent peer-review, with all of the data used in the studies published, including null results, so that other researchers can avoid duplication, and also test the replicability of research.”
“COAR has been working to strengthen our role in terms of capacity building. We launched the COAR Webinar and Discussion Series to help raise awareness of our activities as well as important trends for repositories. We have also been actively seeking opportunities to develop more concrete training activities for repository managers, through leveraging relationships with partners and looking for external funding opportunities. It is expected that we will be able to launch some training events in 2017, with a special focus on developing regions. While sustainability and staffing continues to be a challenge for COAR, since the reduction of membership fees several years ago, we did gain several new members in 2016 and expect membership to continue to rise in 2017. We continue to benefit greatly from the voluntary participation of members and external experts in many of our activities, and these contributions are fundamental to COAR’s progress. On behalf of the Executive Board, and the COAR staff, I want to thank you for your participation in COAR and I look forward to continued engagement and collaboration in 2017-2018 year….”
This article outlines the rise and development of New University Presses and Academic-Led Presses in the UK or publishing for the UK market. Based on the Jisc research project, Changing publishing ecologies: a landscape study of new university presses and academic-led publishing, commonalities between these two types of presses are identified to better assess their future needs and requirements. Based on this analysis, the article argues for the development of a publishing toolkit, for further research into the creation of a typology of presses and publishing initiatives, and for support with community building to help these initiatives grow and develop further, whilst promoting a more diverse publishing ecology.
“One of the plans of KCSE [Korean Council of Science Editors] in 2017 is to conduct 10 workshops and forums for journal and manuscript editors. Journals are evolving digitally and editors are trying to internationalize journals. Local journal and manuscript editors should be aware of advanced systems of submission, review, editing, and distribution as well as about open access trends and policies….”
Abstract: The explosion of open access (OA) journals in recent years has not only impacted on how libraries manage contents and budgets, but also the choice of journals for academic researcher submission of their article for publication. A study conducted at the University of Hong Kong indicated that academic researchers have a gradual tendency in shifting some of their publications toward OA journals, and interestingly the shifts are discipline specific. While OA does offer an alternative to the unsustainable pricing of serials and supports a core value of ensuring openness to knowledge, the perceived value toward the impact of OA journals are still lacking consensus among stakeholders.
The aims of this study are to better understand from the perspective of academic researchers in 4 broad disciplines—Health Science, Life Science, Physical Science and Social Science, their preferences in paper submission. Data on actual article submission trends at HKU will be analyzed together with qualitative feedback from researchers to examine the trend and incentive in shifting toward OA publishing in different disciplines. Researcher’s attitude will be understood within the context of the university’s open policy and research assessment, as well as the current OA landscape to inform the scholarly communication trend going forward.
“The experts agreed on two long-term trends: increasing the accessibility of research content, as well as rethinking library spaces to foster more hands-on activities and training opportunities. The former has been gradually growing, largely due to the open content movement as more libraries facilitate open access models for research outputs; the latter is the result of the ways in which the move away from print materials are freeing up physical areas of libraries that can be dedicated to facilitating workshops, media production, and training….”