Transparent peer review and open data at Communications Biology | Communications Biology

“As of January 1st 2019, authors submitting manuscripts to Communications Biology can choose to publish the reviewer reports and author replies with their articles. The first articles with associated reviewer reports have now been published, representing an important step in our broader journey toward greater openness….

In addition, we ask that the data underlying plots and graphs in the main figures are available either in the supplementary materials or via an online generalist repository….Given the positive outcome of our trial, we are now making source data mandatory for published papers from today….”

Peter Suber: The largest obstacles to open access are unfamiliarity and misunderstanding of open access itself

I’ve already complained about the slowness of progress. So I can’t pretend to be patient. Nevertheless, we need patience to avoid mistaking slow progress for lack of progress, and I’m sorry to see some friends and allies make this mistake. We need impatience to accelerate progress, and patience to put slow progress in perspective. The rate of OA growth is fast relative to the obstacles, and slow relative to the opportunities.”

Peter Suber: The largest obstacles to open access are unfamiliarity and misunderstanding of open access itself

I’ve already complained about the slowness of progress. So I can’t pretend to be patient. Nevertheless, we need patience to avoid mistaking slow progress for lack of progress, and I’m sorry to see some friends and allies make this mistake. We need impatience to accelerate progress, and patience to put slow progress in perspective. The rate of OA growth is fast relative to the obstacles, and slow relative to the opportunities.”

PEERS

From Google’s English: 

“PEERS is a non-profit scientific publishing platform built from the joint initiative of researchers in epistemology, metacognition and critical theory…

  • Posting and reading on PEERS is and will always be free.
  • All publications are available free of charge in .epub and .pdf versions
  • PEERS is a non-profit organization working to protect research and its accessibility
  • By publishing on PEERS, you make your data accessible to readers.
  • The project pages allow you to share data while your search is progressing.
  • All data sharing tools are automatically integrated into your documents
  • PEERS contains an evaluation mode for each reader. The reader can, anonymous or not, point out errors or raise questionable points. Authors can correct mistakes by reviewing their work in a dedicated thread 
  • For quantitative research, PEERS contains the tools to re-analyze the data contained in the product work….

We need open access. The most important research is becoming less and less acceptable for academics. Most of us would like to become more accessible. We want our students to-have access to all of the available literature, and we do not want public money to be spent just to make the research we-have written available.

We need open data. Back in the “paper era”, was not shared, but it was almost impossible to share. But now, there is no excuse for prohibiting the reader of an authoritative work to a workable data set. The practice of open data is slowly spreading through some academic disciplines, while others ignore it completely. Sharing open data lacks unity in formatting and in practices. Ideally, researchers would share their data as soon as the research starts, so be sure to follow the highest standards of transparency.

Sharing your data is scary, so this move must be valued by our community. Everybody makes mistakes. The faster we know it, the better is it. The generalization of open data, but it will also allow for a deep collective effort that can produce wonders.

We need open review . Reviews are essential for every actor of the research process. But we want them to be done openly, in front of everyone else….”

PEERS

From Google’s English: 

“PEERS is a non-profit scientific publishing platform built from the joint initiative of researchers in epistemology, metacognition and critical theory…

  • Posting and reading on PEERS is and will always be free.
  • All publications are available free of charge in .epub and .pdf versions
  • PEERS is a non-profit organization working to protect research and its accessibility
  • By publishing on PEERS, you make your data accessible to readers.
  • The project pages allow you to share data while your search is progressing.
  • All data sharing tools are automatically integrated into your documents
  • PEERS contains an evaluation mode for each reader. The reader can, anonymous or not, point out errors or raise questionable points. Authors can correct mistakes by reviewing their work in a dedicated thread 
  • For quantitative research, PEERS contains the tools to re-analyze the data contained in the product work….

We need open access. The most important research is becoming less and less acceptable for academics. Most of us would like to become more accessible. We want our students to-have access to all of the available literature, and we do not want public money to be spent just to make the research we-have written available.

We need open data. Back in the “paper era”, was not shared, but it was almost impossible to share. But now, there is no excuse for prohibiting the reader of an authoritative work to a workable data set. The practice of open data is slowly spreading through some academic disciplines, while others ignore it completely. Sharing open data lacks unity in formatting and in practices. Ideally, researchers would share their data as soon as the research starts, so be sure to follow the highest standards of transparency.

Sharing your data is scary, so this move must be valued by our community. Everybody makes mistakes. The faster we know it, the better is it. The generalization of open data, but it will also allow for a deep collective effort that can produce wonders.

We need open review . Reviews are essential for every actor of the research process. But we want them to be done openly, in front of everyone else….”

Launching Transpose, a database of journal policies on preprinting & peer review – ASAPbio

“Today, we’re excited to announce the launch of Transpose (@TransposeSCI), a database of journal peer review, co-reviewing, and preprint policies relating to media coverage, licensing, versions, and citation.

These policies can often be difficult to find, unclear, or undefined. Our hope is to bring them to light so that authors, readers, reviewers, and other stakeholders can more easily find journals that align with their values. At the same time, editors can use this resource to draw inspiration from changing practices at other journals. (Read more user stories here.)

In addition to searching for individual journals, users can select up to three journals to compare side-by-side. For instance, when planning when to preprint, researchers may wish to look up the preprint policies for up to three journals they’re likely to submit to and check which are supportive of preprints and any conditions attached to this….”

The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance

“This is the Pubpub site for The Good Drone: How Social Movements Democratize Surveillance by Austin Choi-Fitzpatrick. It was used for open peer review through May 1, 2019….

Data should be open. The source data that represents the evidenciary basis for this book is freely available from the library of one of my home institutions. 

Knowledge should be free. Upon publication, this book will be available in traditional forms (physical book and e-copy), but it will also be a free, downloadable, open access PDF. Open Access is about democratizing dissemination.

Free knowledge should be well-informed. This project has been through peer review @MITPress, and has benefitted from input from dozens of other readers. Open Peer Review is an opportunity to hear from an even broader range of voices. In other words, Open Peer Review goes some way toward democratizing knowledge production….

I am considering launching a “living version” of this book after it is published in fixed physical and digital form (as bound book or static PDF). What would happen if subsequent technological developments, theoretical insights, random heckling, and informed critique could be concentrated around the body of the text itself? What if the online version of the manuscript is opened to user contributions of video, datasets, supporting and contradicting evidence, Github links, source-files for 3D printed drones, and the like.

What does the future of publishing look like? I’m not sure, but am happy to be part of an experiment along the way….”

UKeiG CPD Workshop: Open access, open monographs, open data, open peer review

The concept of Open Access to research outputs has been common currency for many years. The rapid growth of the Internet has made different publication models easily available. More recent thinking has expanded the concept of openness even further, to Open Science, which aims to transform science by making research more open, global, collaborative, creative and closer to society. This approach is being embraced by all academic disciplines. The shift is extremely important for the development and exploitation of research, and hence for the professionals who support it….

Research support, information and library professionals keen to understand the impact of Open Access, Open Data, Open Peer Review and Open Science on their organisations and on current and future service provision. The key aim of the workshop is to provide a state of the art overview of Open Access issues and to encourage discussion amongst library and information professionals who support research. It will benefit LIS professionals across all subjects….”

Guidelines for open peer review implementation | Research Integrity and Peer Review | Full Text

Abstract:  Open peer review (OPR) is moving into the mainstream, but it is often poorly understood and surveys of researcher attitudes show important barriers to implementation. As more journals move to implement and experiment with the myriad of innovations covered by this term, there is a clear need for best practice guidelines to guide implementation. This brief article aims to address this knowledge gap, reporting work based on an interactive stakeholder workshop to create best-practice guidelines for editors and journals who wish to transition to OPR. Although the advice is aimed mainly at editors and publishers of scientific journals, since this is the area in which OPR is at its most mature, many of the principles may also be applicable for the implementation of OPR in other areas (e.g., books, conference submissions).