1. Does Adopting a Strict Data Sharing Policy Affect Submissions?
Setting the PLOS ONE example aside, is there any better data out there on how the adoption of a data sharing policy affects journal submissions? Do authors find these policies so off-putting they take their articles elsewhere, or do they not seem to care? Editors commonly fear that data policies will hurt submissions, but data from 12 evolution and ecology journals say otherwise, discusses Tim Vines, in his post in the Scholarly Kitchen Blog.
The blog post says (quote): Did the adoption of the JDAP cause the slowing of submissions growth? This is impossible to test without submissions data from similar journals that did not bring in a data policy. However, another potential cause can be identified by the rapid growth of ecology and evolution articles published in first PLOS ONE (to 2014) and then Scientific Reports (2014 onwards). Together, these journals put out 18,541 evolutionary biology and ecology articles between the start of 2011 and the end of 2015. Although many of these were probably reviewed and rejected by at least one of the 12 JDAP journals (and are thus included in the submissions data above), a significant fraction were likely sent directly to PLOS ONE or Scientific Reports instead………(unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
2. Is Knowledge Management Lagging in Fast-Moving Pharma Market?
Keeping up with the pace of change in pharma is a constant battle, but having an efficient knowledge management system in place can give you a head start. Ryan Clark, in his post in the CCC Blog, examines a new study that found a correlation between having a sophisticated knowledge management system and better organisational performance.
The blog post says (quote): Best Practices used five pillars as a framework to analyse how organisations across different industry sectors are managing knowledge to promote collaboration, develop greater market insights and support superior performance of new and in-line products. The study discovered that within a company, technology and management that actively support knowledge sharing are key to creating a strong knowledge sharing culture. According to Best Practices, having a standardised knowledge management process is a leading indicator of how well a company handles its information and resources. The study also suggested that automation can help accelerate knowledge entry and curation, improving timeliness, user uptake and standardisation across the enterprise. Alongside technology, the other major drivers of a strong knowledge management organisation are ample staffing levels, and an organisational structure that supports collaboration………(unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
3. The academic conference is an underexploited space for stimulating policy impact
Despite often having an explicit policy focus, many academic conferences fail to produce policy briefs or even promote papers that are accessible to those working in policy. Sarah Foxen, in her post in the LSE Impact of Social Sciences Blog, highlights the rich potential of academic conferences as fantastic sites at which to stimulate and facilitate policy impact, collecting all the academic and policy experts on a topic together in the same place at the same time and offering opportunities for skills development.
The blog post says (quote): Face-to-face contact and networks facilitate policy impact. Conferences can be fantastic moments in which policymakers, policyshapers, and academics can meet, converse, exchange business cards, and then take it from there. And yet, my suspicion is that policymakers and policyshapers don't go to conferences as much as they would like to because, as with the conference mentioned above, session titles can sometimes appear incomprehensible or irrelevant. Over the past few years, conference formats have diversified somewhat: as part of the impact agenda a number now include a public engagement aspect, such as a public talk, show-and-tell, or exhibition. How often, though, does a conference committee contemplate a talk for policymakers, or a policy-focused show-and-tell or exhibition? Yet policy engagement, just like public engagement, can lead to impact. Maybe there is more potential to be harnessed here?……… (unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
4. 7 ways journalists can access academic research for free
Many academic journals keep the published work of scholars and research organisations behind paywalls. Newsrooms can not always afford to subscribe, leaving journalists to find other ways to access that knowledge. Denise-Marie Ordway, in her post in the Journalist’s Resource Blog, discusses seven ways to find access.
The blog post says (quote): Public libraries often subscribe to academic journals and anyone with a library card can read them. The good news for busy journalists is some libraries allow their users to access online databases of peer-reviewed research from any location. Ask a research librarian for help tracking down research on narrow or specialised topics. Some of the more popular journals give journalists complimentary access. The American Economic Association (AEA), for instance, offers reporters free two-year accounts, allowing them to read published and forthcoming articles for all eight of its journals, including the American Economic Review. One can request an account through the association’s press page. A bonus: That free AEA account also gives journalists access to the data that researchers used in their analyses. It’s worth noting that many journals will share embargoed copies of research articles with journalists and alert them to new research on a topic of interest………(unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
5. Why a Society Publisher is Moving Toward Read and Publish Models
Read & Publish models have been in the spotlight for some time in Europe, and in July they arrived in the US with MIT signing the first such deal with the Royal Society of Chemistry. Emma Wilson, in her post in the Scholarly Kitchen Blog, discusses their Read and Publish strategies for a transition to open access.
The blog post says (quote): The more Read & Publish customers they have, the higher the number of OA articles they will publish, and the 'Read' fee decreases for every Read & Publish customer. At the same time the transition discount on the publishing fee decreases so the publication fee increases. Therefore, 'trailblazers' who take up the deal first will only see the benefit if other institutions come on board – the benefit is most when the model is taken up by many, and they aim to work with the librarian stakeholders to encourage uptake. If customers like it, then the OA content will increase. As Joe Esposito has emphasised, this has implications for less intensive research institutes that have a traditional package subscription (read-only) deal with them. If there is an increase in the number of OA articles in the hybrid journals this will be taken into account when they assess the pricing for those staying on the subscription-only model………(unquote)
The full entry can be read Here.
Leave a Reply