1. Citation Cartel Or Editor Gone Rogue?
How much can a single editor distort the citation record? Investigation documents rogue editor’s coercion of authors to cite his journal, papers, notes Phil Davis, in his post in the Scholarly Kitchen Blog.
The blog post says (quote): While the European Geosciences Union could not identify more than one editor engaging in coercive citation behaviour, its investigation was limited to EGU journals. The publisher has informed Wiley, publisher of LDD, and Elsevier, publisher of Catena and Geoderma, of their findings. Citation coercion is not a new phenomenon in academic publishing. A large author survey in the social sciences indicated that one-in-five respondents were coerced by editors to cite more papers without specifying relevant articles or indicating that their manuscripts were lacking in attribution. While other EGU editors have been cleared of any wrongdoing, the investigation clearly hurt the reputations of fellow editorial board members on affected journals..…………… (unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
2. The starting pistol has been fired - now is the time to heed the drive towards open access books
The Consultation on the Second Research Excellence Framework (REF) revealed funding bodies’ intention to extend open access policy to also include monographs by the time of the third REF in the mid-2020s. Despite this being some time away, Martin Eve, in his post in The Impact Blog, argues that the preparations must begin now.
The blog post says (quote): Two Open Access Publishing in European Networks (OAPEN) studies on open access monographs have been conducted; Professor Geoffrey Crossick published a lengthy and sensible report on the subject; Knowledge Unlatched has successfully made a wide range of books open access through its consortial model; and younger entities such as Open Book Publishers, Open Humanities Press, and Punctum Books have demonstrated new business models. Yet monographs were excluded from current open access REF mandates out of an acknowledgement that monographs are harder to make OA. But the starting pistol has now been fired and we need to work out what to do about it. Sensible institutions will already have been thinking about how it might be possible to unlock the unspecified ‘extra credit’ for exceeding the open access requirements of REF2021..…………… (unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
3. Why is the business technology side of eJournals so unnecessarily complex? Tracy Gardner reflects...
eJournal technology is an essential part of the scholarly publishing industry. In her post in the ALPSP Blog, Lesley Ogg presents Tracy Gardner’s views on why is the business technology side of eJournals so unnecessarily complex.
The blog post says (quote): For those in operational or technology roles, the business technology side of eJournals can seem unnecessarily complex and, especially for those new to the industry, the way the information community works can seem counter to the way many other business sectors operate. What makes sense in classic B2B or B2C environments will not make sense within the academic research community. By helping people who work in publishing houses understand how the eJournal technology works and how they can most effectively work with libraries to maximise discovery and use of their content..…………… (unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
4. Lessons for Small Academic Publishers: Sales Edition
It is difficult for smaller publishers, especially when attending an event like London Book Fair, not to feel completely dwarfed by the big players with their vast resources. But small publishers can still see big successes when using the right methods, explains Melissanne Scheld, in her post in the Ingenta Blog.
The blog post says (quote): Small publishers mean small teams and they are likely already stretched in too many directions. Working with external partners means the small publishers can expand their bandwidth without logging more hours at your desk. And it might not be as expensive as you think as third-party agencies often have scalable pricing. Saying they want to ‘increase sales’ may actually be too tall an order. Breaking it down into smaller activities may be more manageable. Champion one journal or product for a period of time, and then add the second, once they have some confidence in that project. Small publishers need to automate as a way to find more time. Producing brochures, posters, logos and having them easily available (e.g. in Dropbox) will help sales partners respond to potential customers faster. And in this industry, reps who show up first often win that budget allocation..…………… (unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
5. Everyone’s downloading pirated science papers… and that might be a good thing
An innovative portal called Sci-Hub is offering free scientific papers to the world. Big journals are making massive (arguably unjustified) profits while in many parts of the world, students and researchers are starving for science. In his post in the ZME Science, Mihai Andrei notes that without her work, millions of students and scientists would not have been able to finish their projects, or it would have taken them immensely more time and effort.
The blog post says (quote): You might think this is only a problem in poorer, underdeveloped parts of the world. That alone could arguably justify Sci-Hub’s existence, but it’s not just them. Harvard and Cornell, two of the biggest and most active universities in the world have recently declared that paying for journals is simply too expensive. Researchers are also taking a stand, with 15,000 scientists vowing to boycott publisher Elsevier. Governments are discussing ways to make all science open-access and China is set on having everything free. Some journals are starting to open up, but it’s only a minority. Looking at the map of Sci-Hub users, it’s a lot like a global map of productivity, with some parts being reversed. Everyone is using it. Even people who have access to journals prefer using it just for the easier interface..…………… (unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
6. Digital print to transform publishing industry
Notwithstanding the exponential growth of the publishing industry in Kenya in the last decade, its contribution to economic development of the country remains minimal. However, this might change if digital publishing is anything to go by. Currently, the publishing industry is estimated to be worth Sh12 billion. A post in the Mediamax Blog notes that the digital printing will create new opportunities for publishers to keep their content impactful, updated, and relevant.
The blog post says (quote): The argument for digital publishing is that publishers have only to contend with fixed costs as variable costs are almost negligible in digital publishing. This couldn’t be further from the truth. Publishers will need to provide services such as maintaining subscriber records, sending renewal notices and billing. Variable costs will be inevitable as publishers will need to provide innovative services to authors and new readers. What digital publishing is guaranteed to do is temper costs, which should improve publishing houses profit margins. On the other hand, market demand by readers and libraries for electronic publishing will determine the extent of penetration, uptake and even costing of digital publishing services..…………… (unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
7. The Global Gender Gap: Research and Researchers
Is there a gender gap in scholarly research? Is it widening or closing? Which countries are closest to equality and which are lagging behind? In her post in the Scholarly Kitchen Blog, Alice Meadows looks at Elsevier’s new report on the gender gap in global research.
The blog post says (quote): The proportion of women among researchers and inventors has increased over time in all 12 comparator countries and regions. Brazil and Portugal, where 49 percent of researchers are now women, lead the field, and women represent more than 40 percent of researchers in all but three countries studied. Given that in 1996-2000 only Portugal had more than 40 percent women researchers, this is a big improvement (Japan lags far behind, however, with just 20 percent, up from 15 percent). In addition, in most countries and regions studied, women now compose between 40-60 percent of researchers in a number of fields, including health and life sciences, psychology, and most notably, nursing. Gender research is also growing - especially in the European Union - and is now distributed more evenly between the US(34 percent) and the EU (35 percent), compared with 20 years ago when a full 50 percent of papers in this field were published in the US..…………… (unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
Leave a Reply