Chance discovery of forgotten 1960s ‘preprint’ experiment

“For years, scientists have complained that it can take months or even years for a scientific discovery to be published, because of the slowness of peer review. To cut through this problem, researchers in physics and mathematics have long used “preprints” – preliminary versions of their scientific findings published on internet servers for anyone to read. In 2013, similar services were launched for biology, and many scientists now use them. This is traditionally viewed as an example of biology finally catching up with physics, but following a chance discovery in the archives of Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Matthew Cobb, a scientist and historian at the University of Manchester, has unearthed a long-forgotten experiment in biology preprints that took place in the 1960s, and has written about them in a study publishing 16 November in the open access journal PLOS Biology.”

A journal is a club: A new economic model for scholarly publishing | hc:16143 | Humanities CORE

“A new economic model for analysis of scholarly publishing—journal publishing in particular—is proposed that draws on club theory. The standard approach builds on market failure in the private production (by research scholars) of a public good (new scholarly knowledge). In that model publishing is communication, as the dissemination of information. But a club model views publishing differently: namely as group formation, where members form groups in order to confer externalities on each other, subject to congestion. A journal is a self-constituted group, endeavouring to create new knowledge. In this sense ‘a journal is a club’. The knowledge club model of a journal seeks to balance the positive externalities due to a shared resource (readers, citations, referees) against negative externalities due to crowding (decreased prospect of publishing in that journal). A new economic model of a journal as a ‘knowledge club’ is elaborated. We suggest some consequences for the management of journals and financial models that might be developed to support them.”

Measures of Change in Academic Library Behavior | Lewis | Library Leadership & Management

“Goal 3: Change collection focus from “outside in” to “inside out”. This is the critical flip in strategy that academic libraries need to make….Measures: 1. The number of library staff that is allocated to “inside-out” activities, including scholarly communication, data management, repository management, digitization, etc. This might also be expressed as a percentage of all library staff or of staff involved in collections, including selection, acquisitions, cataloging, and circulation. 2. The portion of the collections budget, defined to include funds allocated to digital scholarship activities like Open Access Authors fund and to support community Open Access projects. 3. The amount of money invested in the acquisitions of special collections. This could be represented in dollars or as a percentage of the collections budget….”

Sharing the work of sharing Harvard’s research

“In early 2016, the Office for Scholarly Communication (OSC) launched a pilot project to recruit help from around the university to deposit faculty-authored articles in DASH, Harvard’s open-access repository. This project has the full support of the Harvard Library.  In January of this year, the project emerged from the pilot phase, and was officially renamed the Distributed DASH Deposits program, or D3. All Harvard schools have made a start with D3, and the next goal is to scale up.”

Digital Library Software Engineer – Job Details

“Harvard University Information Technology (HUIT) is a community of Information Technology professionals committed to understanding our users and devoted to making it easier for faculty, students, and staff to teach, research, learn, and work through the effective use of information technology.  We are recruiting an IT workforce that has both breadth in their ability to collaborate and innovate across disciplines – and depth in specific areas of expertise.  HUIT offers opportunities for IT professionals to learn and work in a unique technology landscape and service-focused environment.  If you are a technically proficient, nimble, user-focused and accountable IT professional who also connects with the importance of collaborating well in a team environment we are looking for you!

Provide technical support and for the systems and services used by the Office for Scholarly Communications as well as services provided to scholars to support open access policies and system infrastructure. …”

Towards a Scholarly Commons – Moving to Open since 2017

“Welcome! This is the modest home page for our immodest effort to reclaim the system of scholarly communication by encouraging investment in open technologies and open content, and through collective action, create the infrastructure, policies, and practices needed to effect this change….”

Impact of Social Sciences – The next stage of SocArXiv’s development: bringing greater transparency and efficiency to the peer review process

“Almost 1,500 papers have been uploaded to SocArXiv since its launch last year. Up to now the platform has operated alongside the peer-review journal system rather than seriously disrupting it. Looking ahead to the next stage of its development, Philip Cohen considers how SocArXiv might challenge the peer review system to be more efficient and transparent, firstly by confronting the bias that leads many who benefit from the status quo to characterise mooted alternatives as extreme. The value and implications of openness at the various decision points in the system must be debated, as should potentially more disruptive innovations such as non-exclusive review and publication or crowdsourcing reviews.”

Access Denied? Public Scholarship and the peril of being a woman – Digital Islander: No (Wo)Man Is An Island

“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….”

Understanding Open Science: Definitions and framework

Understanding Open Science: Definitions and framework

  1. 1. Understanding Open Science: Definitions and framework Dr. Nancy Pontika Open Access Aggregation Officer CORE Twitter: @nancypontika
  2. 2. What is Open Science
  3. 3. Research Lifecycle: as simple as it gets Idea Methodology Data Collection Analysis Publish
  4. 4. Idea Methodology Data Collection Analysis Publish Journal article, Dissertation, Book, Source Code, etc. Experiments, Interviews, Observations, etc. Numbers, Code, Text, Images, sound records, etc. Statistics, processes, analysis, documentation, etc. Research Lifecycle: focus on the steps”