1. Have We Been Hacked By Sci-Hub?
Recent announcements from the creator of Sci-Hub raise the distinct possibility that Scholarly Publishers have been systematically compromised. There’s only one way that can be true. If publishers themselves or perhaps the suppliers of publisher deliver platforms, have been hacked, notes David Smith, in his post in the Scholarly Kitchen Blog.
The blog post says (quote): A Vulnerability Scanner basically goes looking for servers and then systematically tries to collect information on those servers before deploying a series of tests to see whether there's anything there that can be exploited. Some are commercial, used by companies to probe digital real estate for vulnerabilities. Some are open source. And some are the tools of the hacker community; frameworks and libraries that allow malign individuals with variable skill levels to assemble weapons with which to cause damage and trouble. The good ones give a nice (or not so nice depending on how secure the systems are) report that tells what the publishers need to do to sort things out......(unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
2. 3 Steps to Turn Analytics into Actionable Insights
Companies might understand the value of data, but they often lack the ability to turn it into actionable insights. In the corporate library setting, information managers are tasked with making content decisions for their organisations and they need analytics to support their historical knowledge, discusses Casey Pickering, in her post in the CCC Blog.
The blog post says (quote): The starting point is data - the raw, unprocessed facts that take the form of numbers and text and generally live in spreadsheets and databases. Once that data has been processed and organised into a more user-friendly format it becomes information. By analysing that information and drawing conclusions, insights can be generated. Once there is enough insight that a proper course of action can be made from it, then this result is considered as an actionable insight. Insights that make business leaders rethink an idea or push them into a new direction are particularly valuable. For example, for a corporate librarian a list of top content users may be helpful from a practical standpoint. It will help him or her understand who uses content and at what cost. But for stakeholders, who are less interested in day-to-day content use, this may not be considered actionable.......(unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
3. Defining a New Content Type: The Exploratory Resource
Scholarly publishers have long thought in categories such as journals, monographs, textbooks, and reference. Reference as a category is splitting in two. Each of the two halves are recombining with other tools and services, notes Roger C. Schonfeld, in his post in the Scholarly Kitchen Blog.
The blog post says (quote): The second direction of what we once saw as reference consists of exploratory resources, tools like encyclopedias and bibliographies that allow a researcher to learn about a subject area or field of study and then deepen their learning through a curated set of potential further readings and other content types. These tools are often especially valuable to students learning more about a field, but they may be equally valuable as more scholars cross disciplinary lines and seek guidance to familiarise themselves with unfamiliar territory. Exploratory resources are being redefined at the intersection between content and discovery, and there are interesting new opportunities in this category as it becomes more defined.......(unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
4. Formalised data citation practices would encourage more authors to make their data available for reuse
It is increasingly common for researchers to make their data freely available. Once data is reused, the researchers who have provided access to it should be acknowledged for their contributions, much as authors are recognised for their publications through citation. In their post in The Impact Blog, Hyoungjoo Park and Dietmar Wolfram have studied characteristics of data sharing, reuse, and citation and found that current data citation practices do not yet benefit data sharers, with little or no consistency in their format.
The blog post says (quote): Data recitation by one or more co-authors of earlier studies (i.e. self-citation) is common, which reduces the broader impact of data sharing by limiting much of the reuse to the original authors. This observation represents a key challenge to the identification of data reuse without analysing the content of the citing document to determine if data reuse actually took place. This finding demonstrates that an increase in citations does not necessarily indicate new and unique citers. Co-author self-citation needs to be studied in further detail in data citation........(unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
5. Digital marketing scales and that could create new opportunities for capable publishers
There are three new promotion and marketing opportunities for publishers of ebooks that have been created by the original upstart ebook publisher, Open Road Integrated Media. They all come from OR/M’s development of tools to promote their own extensive list of ebooks, but which now actually benefit from the inclusion of a broader array of titles than the publisher can provide on its own, notes Mike Shatzkin, in his post in The Shatzkin Files Blog.
The blog post says (quote): Open Road has invested significantly in building its marketing expertise. That includes using its own tools and lists, but also using other media, responding to signals in the marketplace, and using price promotion in targeted ways. In the past 18 months that the company has focused on developing these capabilities, it has achieved 40% annual revenue growth for its own list. Open Road has such confidence in what its team and techniques can do that it is making what is literally a "no-risk" offer to other publishers willing to put a collection of titles into their hands for complete marketing management. What Open Road is looking for are clusters of titles that have a reasonably steady baseline of sales. Then, if the publisher will make Open Road the "vendor of record" for these titles for a minimum of a year, they will guarantee the historical level of revenue to the publisher and only take a share of the incremental lift they produce........(unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
6. Should Journals Be Responsible for Reproducibility?
Replication and verification policies promote the integrity of scientific research and, as such, should be made a routine part of the academic publication process. If more journals were to adopt similar policies, real progress could be made towards solving many of science’s current challenges around reproducibility, transparency, and openness, notes William G. Jacoby Sophia Lafferty-Hess and Thu-Mai Christian, in their post in the Inside Higher ED post.
The blog post says (quote): The financial cost of the verification process is not trivial, and is covered by the Midwest Political Science Association, the professional organisation that owns the AJPS. The vast majority of authors have to correct and resubmit their replication materials at least once (the mean number of resubmissions is 1.7). Most of the resubmissions involve incomplete replication materials; requests for additional information, such as more detail in codebooks; or minor inconsistencies between the replication results and the manuscript. In virtually all cases, authors have been able to make the necessary corrections and adjustments relatively easily, without requiring major changes to their manuscripts. Thus far, our verification process has not revealed many major research flaws, but rather has served as a mechanism for ensuring that all the materials necessary for replication are in place and can be executed successfully by a third party.......(unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
Leave a Reply