1. The Illicit Love Affair between Open Access and Traditional Publishing
At the recent PSP conference there was a panel on the cost of complying with the many new open access mandates from funding bodies. The panel explored the cost of compliance and how to reduce those costs. The current regulatory regime is complicated and administratively expensive, but the mandates will continue to be promulgated because the people calling for them are not the ones that have to implement them, notes Joseph Esposito, in his post in the Scholarly Kitchen Blog.
The blog post says (quote): I don't challenge the right of funding agencies to stipulate how materials are to be published; after all, he who pays the piper calls the tune. It's not a matter of right; it's a matter of wisdom. And I would add to that a matter of hypocrisy. It's unwise because the actual administration of the implementations has not been thought through, and it's hypocritical because publishers are derided on one hand as parasites and, on the other, are brought into the system as necessary if unloved participants. For those who truly want to disrupt publishing, here is how to go about it: Forget OA mandates for published material. Have funding agencies (governments, philanthropies, universities) require that every research project result in a comprehensive report.......(unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
2. SAGE, Publons and the Love-in Between Publishers and Start-ups
SAGE recently announced that it has taken a minority stake in peer review start-up Publons. In his post in the Scholarly Kitchen Blog, Charlie Rapple discusses why publishers are investing in workflow tools, and why start-ups are accepting publishers' money.
The blog post says (quote): One way or another, the obvious answer to the obvious question is that Publons couldn't continue to grow without an injection of cash, and they took the best option available to them. And obviously what they will say publicly about this is mostly point 5. Now let's look at this from the other side. Why would SAGE want to take a minority stake in Publons? Because the future's bright; the future's workflow. For publishers, it's a smart move to make the transition to tools. Read a few of their annual reports and this new positioning is clear. Springer's got its Papers, Holtzbrinck its Digital Science, Elsevier its Mendeley, its SciVal, its PURE. Even non-behemoths are making moves, such as ASPB's launch of Plantae........(unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
3. High prices to access scholarly research could drive developing country researchers to use pirate sites like SciHub.
Developing countries are investing more in research and higher education and it should be no surprise that publishers are building commercial relationships to expand access and services. But prices are often still too high. In his post in The Impact Blog, Jonathan Harle argues now is a good time for the research community to reflect on what can be done to bring the cost of access down.
The blog post says (quote): If researchers and students are still struggling to access what they need, then that's a major obstacle to them reaching their full potential. That's not just an issue for individual careers. It's an issue for nations that need their researchers to help them tackle entrenched problems of poverty, ill health, hunger, the emerging effects of climate change. Developing nations need deeper understanding in a whole host of questions, and they need their graduates to be able to play a full and active role in society - whether it’s in the public, private or civil society sectors........(unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
4. How to get your first academic paper published
Getting your first academic paper published can be a challenge. In his post in the Times Higher Education Blog, Kevin O'Gorman, professor of management and business history at Heriot-Watt University, offers his top tips on breaking into the world of journals.
The blog post says (quote): If you want to hit a top-ranked journal, then you need a clearly articulated theoretical gap, whatever the subject of your research. It's not your thing, it is your theory what matters! You should also be thinking about why these abstract academic chatterings should be of significant applied interest to the relevant industry professionals. Research that ultimately offers practical suggestions for managers distinguishes itself from the rest by demonstrating the critical self-awareness that most claim but few enact........(unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
5. Why We Have to Work Together on Article Sharing
No issue better embodies the tension between academic researchers and publishers than journal article sharing. The classic narrative pits the individual researcher trying to advance progress against publishers focused on copyright and subscription access. The truth is, of course, a bit more nuanced. This is fortunate, because in that nuance lies the foundation for a solution to the problem of ensuring swift article access for all those who need it, when they need it, notes Nicko Goncharoff, in his post in the Perspectives Blog.
The blog post says (quote): The advent of scholarly collaborative networks (SCNs) like Academia.edu, ResearchGate, Mendeley and others has dramatically expanded the scope of sharing activity. This has made it easier for researchers to access papers related to their research, but is seen as a threat to publisher business models. However, I believe it's less a threat and more an opportunity for publishers, institutions and scholarly collaborative networks to work together to solve this issue for the ultimate customer they all share – the researcher. Article sharing is never going away, but only by working together can the stakeholders of scholarly communication ensure it's sustainable, seamless and beneficial to all........(unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
Leave a Reply