Coherent Digital Announces Policy Commons to Launch in June 2020

“Toby Green, former Head of Publishing, OECD and now co-founder, Coherent Digital: “It took 60 years for scientific consensus on the dangers of asbestos to change public health policy. It’s been 120 years since researchers gave early warning about the climate, yet policy makers are only just beginning to take action. One of the reasons for the long delay between expert consensus and policy action is because most content from experts in IGOs, NGOs, think tanks and research centers is published informally. This makes discovery hard, cataloguing impossible and preservation a nightmare. Students struggle to learn, too. In reading lists and syllabi, we’ve found that 25% of links to documents are broken. We intend to fix these problems with Policy Commons.”

Policy Commons will be an open platform that makes it easy to find, catalog and preserve reports, working papers, policy briefs and data from a directory of over 5,000 IGOs, NGOs, think tanks and research centers. It will be a comprehensive service that covers born-digital and archival material from IGOs like the OECD, the UN, the World Bank, IMF, FAO and EU, as well as leading NGOs, such as Amnesty International, and smaller influential think tanks.

Anyone will be able to use Policy Commons to find the content they need – full text access will be offered via the original website, if still available. Subscribing institutions will be able to access preservation copies, exclusive content, and benefit from a full range of support services, including catalog data and usage tracking….”

Coherent Digital Announces Policy Commons to Launch in June 2020

“Toby Green, former Head of Publishing, OECD and now co-founder, Coherent Digital: “It took 60 years for scientific consensus on the dangers of asbestos to change public health policy. It’s been 120 years since researchers gave early warning about the climate, yet policy makers are only just beginning to take action. One of the reasons for the long delay between expert consensus and policy action is because most content from experts in IGOs, NGOs, think tanks and research centers is published informally. This makes discovery hard, cataloguing impossible and preservation a nightmare. Students struggle to learn, too. In reading lists and syllabi, we’ve found that 25% of links to documents are broken. We intend to fix these problems with Policy Commons.”

Policy Commons will be an open platform that makes it easy to find, catalog and preserve reports, working papers, policy briefs and data from a directory of over 5,000 IGOs, NGOs, think tanks and research centers. It will be a comprehensive service that covers born-digital and archival material from IGOs like the OECD, the UN, the World Bank, IMF, FAO and EU, as well as leading NGOs, such as Amnesty International, and smaller influential think tanks.

Anyone will be able to use Policy Commons to find the content they need – full text access will be offered via the original website, if still available. Subscribing institutions will be able to access preservation copies, exclusive content, and benefit from a full range of support services, including catalog data and usage tracking….”

The rise of the “open” discovery indexes? Lens.org, Semantic Scholar and Scinapse | Musings about librarianship oa.scite

“In this blog post, I will talk specifically on a very important source of data used by Academic Search engines – Microsoft Academic Graph (MAG) and do a brief review of four academic search engines – Microsoft Academic, Lens.org, Semantic Scholar and Scinapse ,which uses MAG among other sources….

We live in a time, where large (>50 million) Scholarly discovery indexes are no longer as hard to create as in the past, thanks to the availability of freely available Scholarly article index data like Crossref and MAG.”

Maximizing dissemination and engaging readers: The other 50% of an author’s day: A case study – Green – 2019 – Learned Publishing – Wiley Online Library

“Key points

 

Dissemination should be the other 50% of what authors do: being read and having impact will not happen by itself.
Authors can influence discovery and readership through owned media – i.e. their own communication activities.
Earned media – i.e. when influencers write about your work – is key to reaching larger and more diverse audiences.
There is plenty of data for tracking engagement and use of articles, but it is scattered across multiple tools and providers and can be misleading or even incorrect.
Listservs can have higher engagement than modern, ‘cool’, social networking tools….”

Meta-Research: Releasing a preprint is associated with more attention and citations for the peer-reviewed article | eLife

Abstract:  Preprints in biology are becoming more popular, but only a small fraction of the articles published in peer-reviewed journals have previously been released as preprints. To examine whether releasing a preprint on bioRxiv was associated with the attention and citations received by the corresponding peer-reviewed article, we assembled a dataset of 74,239 articles, 5,405 of which had a preprint, published in 39 journals. Using log-linear regression and random-effects meta-analysis, we found that articles with a preprint had, on average, a 49% higher Altmetric Attention Score and 36% more citations than articles without a preprint. These associations were independent of several other article- and author-level variables (such as scientific subfield and number of authors), and were unrelated to journal-level variables such as access model and Impact Factor. This observational study can help researchers and publishers make informed decisions about how to incorporate preprints into their work.

Meta-Research: Releasing a preprint is associated with more attention and citations for the peer-reviewed article | eLife

Abstract:  Preprints in biology are becoming more popular, but only a small fraction of the articles published in peer-reviewed journals have previously been released as preprints. To examine whether releasing a preprint on bioRxiv was associated with the attention and citations received by the corresponding peer-reviewed article, we assembled a dataset of 74,239 articles, 5,405 of which had a preprint, published in 39 journals. Using log-linear regression and random-effects meta-analysis, we found that articles with a preprint had, on average, a 49% higher Altmetric Attention Score and 36% more citations than articles without a preprint. These associations were independent of several other article- and author-level variables (such as scientific subfield and number of authors), and were unrelated to journal-level variables such as access model and Impact Factor. This observational study can help researchers and publishers make informed decisions about how to incorporate preprints into their work.

New service from publishers to streamline access to research

“Get Full Text Research (GetFTR) is a new, free to use solution that enables faster access for researchers to the published journal articles they need.

When researchers are using online tools to search for research, GetFTR will provide seamless pathways to the published journal articles they want. Researchers will be able to link directly to the most up to date and best version of an article. To create a seamless experience, researchers will be taken directly to the article, and just the article, from a wide variety of discovery tools that they are already using. Even if a researcher does not have the relevant institutional access to an article, publishers can provide an alternative version of the content. Importantly, GetFTR enables users to access content in this way both off-campus and on-campus.

Publishers and providers of online research services are encouraged and invited to take part in GetFTR’s development to help maximize its benefits for the research community….

When using today’s discovery tools and platforms, researchers will be able to easily tell which content their institution has made available to them via the GetFTR indicator. They will then be able to follow the enhanced links provided by GetFTR to seamlessly access research on publisher websites.

For users who do not have access based upon their institutional affiliation, participating publishers can provide access to an alternative version of the research, which will be more extensive than the abstract, enabling the user to better understand the nature of the article e.g. a preprint….”

Publishers Announce a Major New Service to Plug Leakage – The Scholarly Kitchen

“Today, a group of the largest scholarly publishers is announcing a new effort to improve discovery and access, fight piracy, compete with ResearchGate, and position their platforms for an open access ecosystem. Their new “Get Full Text Research” (GetFTR) service will meaningfully improve access for the vast majority of users who discover articles from starting points other than the publisher website. This important development in user experience more importantly provides further evidence that publishers are finally beginning to address digital strategy in an environment of growing leakage that has steadily eroded their ability to monetize the value they create. At the same time, it probably does not yet go far enough to reset the competitive environment….

Publishers have been working on improved discovery and access for several years now. The effort to create RA21 (now SeamlessAccess.org) is helping to overcome one major access stumbling block by making the authorization process smoother. GetFTR, a service that signals to the user whether they will have access to the full-text and then routes them directly to it, is a natural next step. 

Backed by the American Chemical Society, Elsevier, Springer Nature, Taylor & Francis, and Wiley, GetFTR has two components. First, it enables the discovery service to indicate whether the article full text is available to the user before clicking on a link to the publisher page and if so to link directly to it. It requires that a user has disclosed their institutional affiliation through the SeamlessAccess.Org “Where Are You From” service, which in turn stores the affiliation information locally on their browser. The user’s institutional affiliation is sent along with the article DOI to a service which then queries the appropriate publisher to determine whether the individual should be entitled to access the article. This should take place seamlessly in the background as a list of search results is loading. The user will see, in a list of search results, clear information such as a green or red button, on whether they will be able to access the full text of each article prior to clicking on the link to it. A user who then clicks on the link will be taken to their institutional login or directly to the article without any intermediate pages if they are already logged in during the current session. This is a natural next step to improve access by leveraging federated authentication that is being rolled out more broadly in the wake of RA21. If enough subscribing institutions adopt federated authentication and the GetFTR technical implementation is successful it will measurably improve user experience in many cases. 

In a way, however, the second aspect of GetFTR is more significant, because it recognizes that, in the workflow described above, many users are not entitled to access the licensed version. Naturally, a user with entitlements through a subscription will be routed to the version of record. But the service will also provide an alternative for others who do not have licensed access, an alternative that each publisher will be able to determine for itself. Some publishers might choose to provide access to a preprint or a read-only version, perhaps in some cases on some kind of metered basis. I expect publishers will typically enable some alternative version for their content, in which case the vast majority of scholarly content will be freely available through publishers even if it is not open access in terms of licensing. This alternative pathway is a modest technical development but will have far-reaching strategic implications. 

GetFTR is intended to be entirely invisible to the user other than an array of colored buttons indicating that the link will take them to the version of record, an alternative pathway, or (presumably in rare cases) no access at all. Thus, like RA21, the brand name is not intended to face towards users. Digital Science and Elsevier expect to pilot GetFTR in the first quarter of 2020 through their platforms Dimensions, Mendeley, and ReadCube Papers. GetFTR characterizes these kinds of discovery and scholarly collaboration platforms as “integration partners.” Technical details about the service and associated APIs for publishers and integration partners are available online. …

For publishers, this situation is increasingly untenable. Pirate sites include nearly 100% of licensed publisher content. In addition, various kinds of repositories make green versions available and scholarly collaboration networks provide access to tremendous amounts of content as well. But it is not just availability elsewhere that is a concern. The use of SciHub, ResearchGate, and other alternative sources of access has exploded. With usage growing rapidly through these alternatives, the share of usage taking place on the publisher site is declining….”

Report on Integrating Digital Humanities into the Web of Scholarship with SHARE – Association of Research Libraries

“The Association of Research Libraries (ARL) released today a white paper that reports the findings of a two-year project investigating the value SHARE could have for digital humanities scholars. SHARE is an open-source community that develops tools and services to connect related research outputs for new kinds of scholarly discovery.

This project, partly funded by a grant from the US National Endowment for the Humanities, explored how scholars promote discovery of their own digital humanities work, and how they find digital scholarship or its components for their own use….”