The Living Library: a process-based tool for open literature review, probing the boundaries of open science

Authors : Elisabeth Angerer, Maura Cassidy Burke, Simon Dirks, Arthur Bakker, Aitana Bilinski Torres, Toine Pieters

The Living Library is a novel tool for opening the scientific process of literature reviewing. We here present its core features, set-up and workflow, and provide the open-source code via GitHub (https://github.com/Simon-Dirks/living-library). The Living Library allows researchers to sort articles thematically and temporally, has a built-in open logbook, and uses a responsive methodology.

These core features render the Living Library both a practical tool, and an educative framework for reflection on the research process. Its use deepened our understanding of what it means and what it takes to open science, which we summarise in three main lessons: openness is multidirectional, involving sharing and receiving; openness is relational and as such requires boundary work; and openness entails judgments of relevance.

This highlights the intimate connection between research relevance and open science: Opening science is no categorical practice, but the continuous syncing to a world in motion—opening up for it and to it, to varying degrees at different boundaries, in response to what is happening and what matters.

The Living Library models what such syncing can look like in relation to the evolving academic conversation. We encourage further experimentation with the Living Library to probe the boundaries of open science.

URL : The Living Library: a process-based tool for open literature review, probing the boundaries of open science

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s43545-024-00964-z

Is open access disrupting the journal business? A perspective from comparing full adopters, partial adopters, and non-adopters

Author : Xijie Zhang

Two decades after the inception of open access publishing (OA), its impact has remained a focal point in academic discourse. This study adopted a disruptive innovation framework to examine OA’s influence on the traditional subscription market. It assesses the market power of gold journals (OA full adopters) in comparison with hybrid journals and closed-access journals (partial adopters and non-adopters). Additionally, it contrasts the market power between hybrid journals (partial adopters) and closed-access journals (non-adopters).

Using the Lerner index to measure market power through price elasticity of demand, this study employs difference tests and multiple regressions. These findings indicate that OA full adopters disrupt the market power of non-adopting incumbents. However, by integrating the OA option into their business models, partial adopters can effectively mitigate this disruption and expand their influence from the traditional subscription market to the emerging OA paradigm.

URL : Is open access disrupting the journal business? A perspective from comparing full adopters, partial adopters, and non-adopters

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2024.101574

“Academic Publishing is a Business Interest”: Reconciling Faculty Serials Needs and Economic Realities at a Carnegie R2 University

Authors : Rachel E. Scott, Anne Shelley, Chad E. Buckley, Cassie Thayer-Styes, Julie A. Murphy

Introduction

This article explores faculty conceptions of academic publishers, their willingness to circumvent paywalls and share content, and their understanding of who holds the responsibility to pay for this body of scholarly work to which they all contribute.

Methods

The authors conducted semi-structured interviews with 25 faculty at their Carnegie R2 university to explore scholars’ perspectives with respect to the costs of serials and the responsibilities of the University and library in support of scholarly publishing.

Results

Participants reported a broad spectrum of perspectives with respect to circumventing publisher paywalls and offered nuanced practices for interacting with paywalled content. They explained which library services work well and offered suggestions on how best to support faculty needs for serial literature. Although most participants agree that the University has the responsibility of making academic literature available to the community, they differ in their conceptions of academic publishers as good-faith partners in the knowledge enterprise.

Discussion

The results suggest a great deal of ambiguity and diversity of beliefs among faculty: some would support boycotting all commercial publishers; some understand academic publishers to be integral to the dissemination of their work, not to mention tenure and promotion processes; and many acknowledge a variety of tensions in what feels to them an exploitative and fraught relationship.

These findings have implications for library services in acquisitions, collection management, scholarly communication, discovery, and access.

Conclusion

The data provide insight into the nuanced perceptions that faculty members at a Carnegie R2 hold concerning the costs of scholarly publishing and the role of academic publishers within scholarly communication.

URL : “Academic Publishing is a Business Interest”: Reconciling Faculty Serials Needs and Economic Realities at a Carnegie R2 University

DOI : https://doi.org/10.31274/jlsc.16232

Closing the Loop: Automating Links to Open Access Versions of Articles in Faculty Profiles at a Large Research Institution

Authors : Andrew M. Johnson, Don Elsborg

Introduction

Universities implement faculty profile systems for a variety of reasons, including to increase visibility of research produced at the institution. These profiles often connect with other campus systems, particularly institutional repositories.

This article describes a collaboration at the University of Colorado Boulder aimed at integrating the institutional repository with the faculty profile system, which then expanded to encompass the automated creation of profile links to open access versions of faculty articles from any journal or repository.

Description of Program

To achieve the initial project goals, a cross-campus team from the University Libraries and the Faculty Information System developed a strategy of using Unpaywall as an intermediary data source to connect the institutional repository with the faculty profile system.

This also allowed for the development of an automated process for generating links to open access content from any journal or repository, which resulted in the creation of over 35,000 links to openly available content in faculty profiles, including over 2,900 links to content in the institutional repository.

These links provide public users of the faculty profile system with a simple way to access all openly available research produced at the university. This article describes the development and implementation of this project as well as lessons learned.

Next Steps

The ongoing collaboration provides additional opportunities to unlock data for monitoring rates of open access publishing and self-archiving, informing library collection development decisions, and connecting to other data sources to reveal further insights.

URL : Closing the Loop: Automating Links to Open Access Versions of Articles in Faculty Profiles at a Large Research Institution

DOI : https://doi.org/10.31274/jlsc.17242

La valorisation de HAL. Finalités, outils et process

Auteur.ices/Authors : Joachim Schöpfel, Hélène Prost, Bernard Jacquemin, Éric Kergosien, Florence Thiault

L’article présente les résultats d’une analyse qualitative de l’utilisation de la plateforme HAL par les laboratoires de recherche. L’analyse s’appuie sur des entretiens semi-directifs avec des représentants de 50 laboratoires affiliés aux dix universités de recherche Udice. Elle porte sur la fonction que remplit HAL pour les laboratoires, sur sa valeur ajoutée pour leur fonctionnement et leur développement.

En particulier, nous interrogeons les finalités de l’utilisation de HAL par les laboratoires, le recours à des outils internes et externes, et les trajectoires des pratiques. Nous discutons les résultats sous trois angles : les discours et les communautés de pratiques dans les laboratoires ; le périmètre et les enjeux des dispositifs mis en place par les laboratoires en amont et en aval de HAL ; et la transformation de HAL d’une plateforme d’auto-archivage et de communication scientifique directe vers une infrastructure de suivi et d’évaluation de la performance scientifique. Il s’agit du premier d’une série de trois articles issus du projet HAL/LO.

URL : La valorisation de HAL. Finalités, outils et process

DOI : https://doi.org/10.46298/jdmdh.13051

Reproducible and Attributable Materials Science Curation Practices: A Case Study

Authors : Ye Li, Sarah Laura Wilson, Micah Altman

While small labs produce much of the fundamental experimental research in Material Science and Engineering (MSE), little is known about their data management and sharing practices and the extent to which they promote trust in, and transparency of, the published research.

In this research, we conduct a case study of a leading MSE research lab to characterize the limits of current data management and sharing practices concerning reproducibility and attribution. We systematically reconstruct the workflows, underpinning four research projects by combining interviews, document review, and digital forensics. We then apply information graph analysis and computer-assisted retrospective auditing to identify where critical research information is unavailable or at risk.

We find that while data management and sharing practices in this leading lab protect against computer and disk failure, they are insufficient to ensure reproducibility or correct attribution of work — especially when a group member withdraws before project completion.

We conclude with recommendations for adjustments to MSE data management and sharing practices to promote trustworthiness and transparency by adding lightweight automated file-level auditing and automated data transfer processes.

URL : Reproducible and Attributable Materials Science Curation Practices: A Case Study

DOI : https://doi.org/10.2218/ijdc.v18i1.940

The role of non-scientific factors vis-à-vis the quality of publications in determining their scholarly impact

Authors : Giovanni Abramo, Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo, Leonardo Grilli

In the evaluation of scientific publications’ impact, the interplay between intrinsic quality and non-scientific factors remains a subject of debate. While peer review traditionally assesses quality, bibliometric techniques gauge scholarly impact.

This study investigates the role of non-scientific attributes alongside quality scores from peer review in determining scholarly impact. Leveraging data from the first Italian Research Assessment Exercise (VTR 2001–2003) and Web of Science citations, we analyse the relationship between quality scores, non-scientific factors, and publication short- and long-term impact.

Our findings shed light on the significance of non-scientific elements overlooked in peer review, offering policymakers and research management insights in choosing evaluation methodologies. Sections delve into the debate, identify non-scientific influences, detail methodologies, present results, and discuss implications.

URL : The role of non-scientific factors vis-à-vis the quality of publications in determining their scholarly impact

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-024-05106-z