The Experts below are selected from a list of 6292557 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Stevan Harnad - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The Rent’s too High: Self-Archive for Fair Online Publication Costs
2018Co-Authors: Robert T. Thibault, Stevan Harnad, Amanda Macpherson, Amir RazAbstract:The main contributors of scientific knowledge—researchers—generally aim to disseminate their findings far and wide. And yet, publishing companies have largely kept these findings behind a paywall. With digital publication technology markedly reducing cost, this enduring wall seems disproportionate and unjustified; moreover, it has sparked a topical exchange concerning how to modernize academic publishing. This discussion, however, seems to focus on how to compensate major publishers for providing open access through a pay-to-publish model, in turn transferring financial burdens from libraries to authors and their funders. Large publishing companies, including Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley, PLoS, and Frontiers, continue to earn exorbitant revenues each year—hundreds of millions of dollars of which now come from processing charges for open-access articles. A less expensive and equally accessible alternative exists—widespread self-archiving of peer-reviewed articles. All we need is awareness of this alternative and the will to employ it.
-
Citation Advantage For OA Self-Archiving Is Independent of Journal Impact Factor, Article Age, and Number of Co-Authors
arXiv: Information Retrieval, 2007Co-Authors: Chawki Hajjem, Stevan HarnadAbstract:Eysenbach has suggested that the OA (Green) self-archiving advantage might just be an artifact of potential uncontrolled confounding factors such as article age (older articles may be both more cited and more likely to be Self-Archived), number of authors (articles with more authors might be more cited and more Self-Archived), subject matter (the subjects that are cited more, Self-Archive more), country (same thing), number of authors, citation counts of authors, etc. Chawki Hajjem (doctoral candidate, UQaM) had already shown that the OA advantage was present in all cases when articles were analysed separately by age, subject matter or country. He has now done a multiple regression analysis jointly testing (1) article age, (2) journal impact factor, (3) number of authors, and (4) OA self-archiving as separate factors for 442,750 articles in 576 (biomedical) journals across 11 years, and has shown that each of the four factors contributes an independent, statistically significant increment to the citation counts. The OA-self-archiving advantage remains a robust, independent factor. Having successfully responded to his challenge, we now challenge Eysenbach to demonstrate -- by testing a sufficiently broad and representative sample of journals at all levels of the journal quality, visibility and prestige hierarchy -- that his finding of a citation advantage for Gold OA (articles published OA on the high-profile website of the only journal he tested (PNAS) over Green OA articles in the same journal (Self-Archived on the author's website) was not just an artifact of having tested only one very high-profile journal.
-
Preprints, Postprints, Peer Review, and Institutional vs. Central Self-Archiving
2006Co-Authors: Stevan HarnadAbstract:Arxiv is a Central Repository (CR) in which physicists have been self-archiving their unrefereed preprints and their peer-reviewed postprints since 1991. There is now a growing movement toward distributed Institutional Repositories (IRs). Thanks to the OAI Protocol, all OAI-compliant IRs and CRs are now interoperable: their metadata can be harvested into search engines that treat all of their contents as if they were in one big virtual CR. What authors Self-Archive is their peer-reviewed publications, not just their unrefereed preprints. An archive is merely a repository, not a certifier of having met a peer-reviewed journal's quality standards. Since the research institutions themselves are the primary research providers, with the direct interest in maximising the uptake and usage of their own research output, the natural place for them to deposit their own output is in their own IRs. Any central collections can be harvested via OAI. Institutions are also best placed to monitor and reward compliance with self-archiving mandates, both their own institutional mandates and those of the funders of their institutional research output. Arxiv has played an important role in getting us where we are, but it is likely that the era of CRs is coming to a close, and the era of distributed, interoperable IRs is now coming into its own in an entirely natural way, in keeping with the distributed nature of the Net/Web itself.
-
Optimizing OA Self-Archiving Mandates: What? Where? When? Why? How?
2006Co-Authors: Stevan HarnadAbstract:With the adoption of Open Access Self-Archiving Mandates worldwide so near, this is the opportune time to think of optimizing how they are formulated. Seemingly small parametric or verbal variants can make a vast difference to their success, speed, and completeness of coverage: --What to mandate: The primary target content is the author's final, peer-reviewed draft ("postprint") of all journal articles accepted for publication. --Why to mandate self-archiving: The purpose of mandating OA self-archiving is to maximize research usage and impact by maximizing user access to research findings. --Where to Self-Archive: The optimal locus for self-archiving is the author's own OAI-compliant Institutional Repository (IR). (It is highly inadvisable to mandate direct deposit in a Central Repository (CR) -- whether discipline-based, funder-based, multidisciplinary or national. The right way to get OA content into CRs is to harvest it from the IRs (via the OAI protocol).) --When to Self-Archive: The author's final, peer-reviewed draft (postprint) should be deposited in the author's IR immediately upon acceptance for publication. (The deposit must be immediate; any allowable delay or embargo should apply only to the access-setting, i.e., whether access to the deposited article is immediately set to Open Access or provisionally set to Closed Access, in which only the author can access the deposited text.) --How to Self-Archive: Depositing a postprint in an author's IR and keying in its metadata (author, title, journal, date, etc.) takes less than 10 minutes per paper. Deposit analyses comparing mandated and unmandated self-archiving rates have shown that mandates (and only mandates) work, with self-archiving approaching 100% of annual institutional research output within a few years. Without a mandate, IR content just hovers for years at the spontaneous 15% self-archiving rate.
-
Generic Rationale for University Open Access Self-Archiving Policy
2006Co-Authors: Stevan HarnadAbstract:There are 24,000 peer-reviewed journals worldwide, publishing 2.5 million articles per year. No university can afford all or most of the journals its researchers may need. Hence all articles are losing some of their research impact (usage and citations). Recent findings show that articles whose authors supplement subscription-based access by self-archiving their own final drafts free for all on the web are downloaded and cited twice as much across all 12 disciplines analysed so far. Citation counts are robust indicators of research performance; Self-Archived articles have a substantial competitive. Only 15% of the 2.5 million articles published annually are being spontaneously Self-Archived worldwide today. Creating an Institutional Repository (IR) and encouraging staff to Self-Archive is a good first step, but the only institutions that are reliably approaching a 100% annual self-archiving rate today are those that not only create an IR and provide library help for depositing, but also adopt a self-archiving policy requirement or mandate. There is no need for any penalties for non-compliance. Two international, cross-disciplinary JISC surveys have found that 95% of authors will comply.The four institutions worldwide that have adopted a self-archiving mandate to date have confirmed this. 93% of journals have already endorsed author self-archiving; only 7% of journals have not. What needs to be mandated: (1) immediately upon acceptance for publication (2) deposit in the Institution’s OA Repository (3) the author’s final accepted draft (not the publisher’s proprietary PDF) (4) both its full-text and its bibliographic metadata (author, date, title, journal, etc.) (Note that only the depositing itself needs to be mandated. Setting the access privileges to the full-text can be left up to the author, with Open Access strongly encouraged, but not mandated.) Self-archiving is effortless, taking only a few minutes and a few keystrokes; library help is available too (but hardly necessary). The mandate need have no penalties or sanctions in order to be successful; it need only be formally adopted, with the support of Heads of Schools, the library, and computing services. The rest will take care of itself naturally of its own accord, as the experience of Southampton ECS, Minho, QUT and CERN has already demonstrated.
T S Metcalfe - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the citation impact of digital preprint archives for solar physics papers
Solar Physics, 2006Co-Authors: T S MetcalfeAbstract:Papers that are posted to a digital preprint archive are typically cited twice as often as papers that are not posted. This has been demonstrated for papers published in a wide variety of journals, and in many different subfields of astronomy. Most astronomers now use the arXiv.org server (astro-ph) to distribute preprints, but the solar physics community has an independent archive hosted at Montana State University. For several samples of solar physics papers published in 2003, I quantify the boost in citation rates for preprints posted to each of these servers. I show that papers on the MSU archive typically have citation rates 1.7 times higher than the average of similar papers that are not posted as preprints, while those posted to astro-ph get 2.6 times the average. A comparable boost is found for papers published in conference proceedings, suggesting that the higher citation rates are not the result of self-selection of above-average papers.
-
The Citation Impact of Digital Preprint Archives for Solar Physics Papers
Solar Physics, 2006Co-Authors: T S MetcalfeAbstract:Papers that are posted to a digital preprint archive are typically cited twice as often as papers that are not posted. This has been demonstrated for papers published in a wide variety of journals, and in many different subfields of astronomy. Most astronomers now use the arXiv.org server (astro-ph) to distribute preprints, but the solar physics community has an independent archive hosted at Montana State University. For several samples of solar physics papers published in 2003, I quantify the boost in citation rates for preprints posted to each of these servers. I show that papers on the MSU archive typically have citation rates 1.7 times higher than the average of similar papers that are not posted as preprints, while those posted to astro-ph get 2.6 times the average. A comparable boost is found for papers published in conference proceedings, suggesting that the higher citation rates are not the result of self-selection of above-average papers.Comment: 5 pages, 1 table, Solar Physics accepte
Bochrister Bjork - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
anatomy of green open access
Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2014Co-Authors: Bochrister Bjork, Mikael Laakso, Patrik Welling, Patrik PaetauAbstract:Open access (OA) is free, unrestricted access to electronic versions of scholarly publications. For peer-reviewed journal articles, there are two main routes to OA: publishing in OA journals (gold OA) or archiving of article copies or manuscripts at other web locations (green OA). This study focuses on summarizing and extending current knowledge about green OA. A synthesis of previous studies indicates that green OA coverage of all published journal articles is approximately 12%, with substantial disciplinary variation. Typically, green OA copies become available after considerable time delays, partly caused by publisher-imposed embargo periods, and partly by author tendencies to archive manuscripts only periodically. Although green OA copies should ideally be archived in proper repositories, a large share is stored on home pages and similar locations, with no assurance of long-term preservation. Often such locations contain exact copies of published articles, which may infringe on the publisher's exclusive rights. The technical foundation for green OA uploading is becoming increasingly solid largely due to the rapid increase in the number of institutional repositories. The number of articles within the scope of OA mandates, which strongly influence the self-archival rate of articles, is nevertheless still low.
-
re engineering the scientific publishing process for the internetworked global academic community
International Conference on Electronic Publishing, 2002Co-Authors: Bochrister Bjork, Ziga Turk, Bob MartensAbstract:The SciX (Open, self organising repository for scientific infor- mation exchange) project is funded by the European Commission in order to demonstrate the feasibility of new alternative models of scientific pub- lishing made possible by the Internet. The project builds upon the previous experience of some of the partners in running an electronic peer reviewed journal and in setting up an e-prints archive. The project includes both the- oretical work in making a formal model of the scientific publishing process, to be used as a basis for studying the life-cycle costs of alternative business models, and a demonstrator of a functioning e-prints archive.
-
ELPUB - Re-Engineering the Scientific Publishing Process for the "Internetworked" Global Academic Community
2002Co-Authors: Bochrister Bjork, Ziga Turk, Bob MartensAbstract:The SciX (Open, self organising repository for scientific infor- mation exchange) project is funded by the European Commission in order to demonstrate the feasibility of new alternative models of scientific pub- lishing made possible by the Internet. The project builds upon the previous experience of some of the partners in running an electronic peer reviewed journal and in setting up an e-prints archive. The project includes both the- oretical work in making a formal model of the scientific publishing process, to be used as a basis for studying the life-cycle costs of alternative business models, and a demonstrator of a functioning e-prints archive.
Noor Harun Abdul Karim - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
malaysian authors acceptance to self archive in institutional repositories
The Electronic Library, 2013Co-Authors: Feria Wirba Singeh, A Abrizah, Noor Harun Abdul KarimAbstract:Purpose – The aim of this paper is to evaluate Malaysian authors' readiness to self‐archive in open access repositories. The effectiveness of open access repositories to support knowledge‐sharing is expected to be highly dependent on the readiness of authors to self‐archive their research output.Design/methodology/approach – The study has adopted a quantitative research design and a web based survey method was used for data‐gathering. The subjects of the study were authors within the five research‐intensive universities in Malaysia. An e‐mail invitation was sent out to 1,000 authors within the five intensive universities, of which 108 responded. This study uses the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) model, which postulates the constructs of performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence and facilitating conditions on using technology. These constructs determine the behavioral intent, which influences the usage behavior of this technology.Findings – The findings from th...
-
Malaysian authors' acceptance to self‐archive in institutional repositories: Towards a unified view
The Electronic Library, 2013Co-Authors: Feria Wirba Singeh, Abdullah Abrizah, Noor Harun Abdul KarimAbstract:Purpose – The aim of this paper is to evaluate Malaysian authors' readiness to self‐archive in open access repositories. The effectiveness of open access repositories to support knowledge‐sharing is expected to be highly dependent on the readiness of authors to self‐archive their research output.Design/methodology/approach – The study has adopted a quantitative research design and a web based survey method was used for data‐gathering. The subjects of the study were authors within the five research‐intensive universities in Malaysia. An e‐mail invitation was sent out to 1,000 authors within the five intensive universities, of which 108 responded. This study uses the unified theory of acceptance and use of technology (UTAUT) model, which postulates the constructs of performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence and facilitating conditions on using technology. These constructs determine the behavioral intent, which influences the usage behavior of this technology.Findings – The findings from th...
-
what inhibits authors to self archive in open access repositories a malaysian case
Information Development, 2013Co-Authors: Feria Wirba Singeh, A Abrizah, Noor Harun Abdul KarimAbstract:This paper reports on a survey carried out on academics in five Malaysian research-intensive universities, investigating their readiness to self archive in Open Access institutional repositories. The study revolves around the following issues: (a) academics’ awareness of self archiving in an institutional repository within their institution; (b) their perceptions about self archiving scientific information into institutional repositories; (c) their perceptions regarding obligations to self archive in institutional repositories; and (d) the possible reasons that inhibit them in contributing to institutional repositories. The answers were identified from 72 academics through a web-based survey. The study reveals that the majority of academics in this study have no or little knowledge of, or experience with, institutional repositories and are unfamiliar with self-archiving opportunities. However most of them endorse the principle of Open Access and are willing to contribute content to an institutional reposi...
Patrik Paetau - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
anatomy of green open access
Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 2014Co-Authors: Bochrister Bjork, Mikael Laakso, Patrik Welling, Patrik PaetauAbstract:Open access (OA) is free, unrestricted access to electronic versions of scholarly publications. For peer-reviewed journal articles, there are two main routes to OA: publishing in OA journals (gold OA) or archiving of article copies or manuscripts at other web locations (green OA). This study focuses on summarizing and extending current knowledge about green OA. A synthesis of previous studies indicates that green OA coverage of all published journal articles is approximately 12%, with substantial disciplinary variation. Typically, green OA copies become available after considerable time delays, partly caused by publisher-imposed embargo periods, and partly by author tendencies to archive manuscripts only periodically. Although green OA copies should ideally be archived in proper repositories, a large share is stored on home pages and similar locations, with no assurance of long-term preservation. Often such locations contain exact copies of published articles, which may infringe on the publisher's exclusive rights. The technical foundation for green OA uploading is becoming increasingly solid largely due to the rapid increase in the number of institutional repositories. The number of articles within the scope of OA mandates, which strongly influence the self-archival rate of articles, is nevertheless still low.