InfoDoc MicroVeille – Page 102 – Veille dédiée aux Sciences de l'Information et des Bibliothèques // Collecting and Sharing research papers in Library and Information science ISSN 2429-3938

Impact and visibility of Norwegian, Finnish and Spanish journals in the fields of humanities

Posted on 11 octobre 2021 by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Elías Sanz-Casado, Daniela De Filippo, Rafael Aleixandre Benavent, Vidar Røeggen, Janne Pölönen

This article analyses the impact and visibility of scholarly journals in the humanities that are publishing in the national languages in Finland, Norway and Spain. Three types of publishers are considered: commercial publishers, scholarly society as publisher, and research organizations as publishers.

Indicators of visibility and impact were obtained from Web of Science, SCOPUS, Google Metrics, Scimago Journal Rank and Journal Citation Report.

The findings compiled show that in Spain the categories “History and Archaeology” and “Language and Literature” account for almost 70% of the journals analysed, while the other countries offer a more homogeneous distribution.

In Finland, the scholarly society publisher is predominant, in Spain, research organization as publishers, mostly universities, have a greater weighting, while in Norway, the commercial publishers take centre stage.

The results show that journals from Finland and Norway will have reduced possibilities in terms of impact and visibility, since the vernacular language appeals to a smaller readership. Conversely, the Spanish journals are more attractive for indexing in commercial databases. Distribution in open access ranges from 64 to 70% in Norwegian and Finish journals, and to 91% in Spanish journals.

The existence of DOI range from 31 to 41% in Nordic journals to 60% in Spanish journals and has a more widespread bearing on the citations received in all three countries (journals with DOI and open access are cited more frequently).

URL : Impact and visibility of Norwegian, Finnish and Spanish journals in the fields of humanities

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-04169-6

FAIR Forever? Accountabilities and Responsibilities in the Preservation of Research Data

Posted on 11 octobre 2021 by Hans Dillaerts

Author : Amy Currie, William Kilbride

Digital preservation is a fast-moving and growing community of practice of ubiquitous relevance, but in which capability is unevenly distributed. Within the open science and research data communities, digital preservation has a close alignment to the FAIR principles and is delivered through a complex specialist infrastructure comprising technology, staff and policy.

However, capacity erodes quickly, establishing a need for ongoing examination and review to ensure that skills, technology, and policy remain fit for changing purpose. To address this challenge, the Digital Preservation Coalition (DPC) conducted the FAIR Forever study, commissioned by the European Open Science Cloud (EOSC) Sustainability Working Group and funded by the EOSC Secretariat Project in 2020, to assess the current strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats to the preservation of research data across EOSC, and the feasibility of establishing shared approaches, workflows and services that would benefit EOSC stakeholders.

This paper draws from the FAIR Forever study to document and explore its key findings on the identified strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats to the preservation of FAIR data in EOSC, and to the preservation of research data more broadly.

It begins with background of the study and an overview of the methodology employed, which involved a desk-based assessment of the emerging EOSC vision, interviews with representatives of EOSC stakeholders, and focus groups with digital preservation specialists and data managers in research organizations.

It summarizes key findings on the need for clarity on digital preservation in the EOSC vision and for elucidation of roles, responsibilities, and accountabilities to mitigate risks of data loss, reputation, and sustainability. It then outlines the recommendations provided in the final report presented to the EOSC Sustainability Working Group.

To better ensure that research data can be FAIRer for longer, the recommendations of the study are presented with discussion on how they can be extended and applied to various research data stakeholders in and outside of EOSC, and suggest ways to bring together research data curation, management, and preservation communities to better ensure FAIRness now and in the long term.

URL : FAIR Forever? Accountabilities and Responsibilities in the Preservation of Research Data

DOI : https://doi.org/10.2218/ijdc.v16i1.768

Do I-PASS for FAIR? Measuring the FAIR-ness of Research Organizations

Posted on 8 octobre 2021 by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Jacquelijn Ringersma, Margriet Miedema

Given the increased use of the FAIR acronym as adjective for other contexts than data or data sets, the Dutch National Coordination Point for Research Data Management initiated a Task Group to work out the concept of a FAIR research organization.

The results of this Task Groups are a definition of a FAIR enabling organization and a method to measure the FAIR-ness of a research organization (The Do-I-PASS for FAIR method). The method can also aid in developing FAIR-enabling Road Maps for individual research institutions and at a national level.

This practice paper describes the development of the method and provides a couple of use cases for the application of the method in daily research data management practices in research organizations.

URL : Do I-PASS for FAIR? Measuring the FAIR-ness of Research Organizations

DOI : http://doi.org/10.5334/dsj-2021-030

Sharing published short academic works in institutional repositories after six months : The implementation of the article 25fa (Taverne Amendment) in the Dutch Copyright Act

Posted on 7 octobre 2021 by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Jeroen Sondervan, Arjan Schalken, Saskia Woutersen-Windhouwer

The ambition of the Netherlands, laid down in the National Plan Open Science, is to achieve 100% open access for academic publications. The ambition was to be achieved by 2020. However, it is to be expected that for the year 2020 between 70% and 75% of the articles will be open access.

Until recently, the focus of the Netherlands has been on the gold route – open access via journals and publishers’ platforms. This is likely to be costly and it is also impossible to cover all articles and other publication types this way.

Since 2015, Dutch Copyright Act has offered an alternative with the implementation of Article 25fa (also known as the ‘Taverne Amendment’), facilitating the green route, i.e. open access via (trusted) repositories.

This amendment allows researchers to share short scientific works (e.g. articles and book chapters in edited collections), regardless of any restrictive guidelines from publishers. From February 2019 until August 2019 all Dutch universities participated in the pilot ‘You Share, we Take Care!’ to test how this copyright amendment could be interpreted and implemented by institutions as a policy instrument to enhance green open access and “self-archiving”.

In 2020 steps were taken to scale up further implementation of the amendment. This article describes the outcomes of this pilot and shares best practices on implementation and awareness activities in the period following the pilot until early 2021, in which libraries have played an instrumental role in building trust and working on effective implementations on an institutional level.

It concludes with some possible next steps for alignment, for example on a European level.

URL : Sharing published short academic works in institutional repositories after six months : The implementation of the article 25fa (Taverne Amendment) in the Dutch Copyright Act

DOI : https://doi.org/10.53377/lq.10915

The Plan S Rights Retention Strategy is an administrative and legal burden, not a sustainable open access solution

Posted on 7 octobre 2021 by Hans Dillaerts

Author : Shaun Yon-Seng Khoo

The Plan S Rights Retention Strategy (RRS) requires authors who are submitting to subscription journals to inform publishers that the author accepted manuscript (AAM) will be made available under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) licence.

The laudable stated aim of the RRS is to achieve immediate open access to research outputs, while preserving journal choice for authors. However, proponents of the RRS overlook the significant administrative and legal burdens that the RRS places on authors and readers.

Even though compliance with existing green open access (self-archiving) policies is poor at best, the RRS is likely to rely on authors to successfully execute the CC licensing of their work in the face of publisher resistance.

The complexity of copyright law and CC licensing gives many reasons to doubt the legal validity of an RRS licence grant, which creates legal risk for authors and their institutions. The complexity of RRS CC BY licensing also creates legal risk for readers, who may not be able to fully rely on the reuse rights of a CC BY licence on the AAM.

However, cOAlition S has released no legal advice that explains why the RRS is valid and legally binding. Publishers of legacy subscription journals have already begun implementing strategies that ensure they can protect their revenue streams.

These actions may leave authors having to choose between paying publication fees and complying with their funding agreements. The result is that the RRS increases the complexity of the copyright and licensing landscape in academic publishing, creates legal risk and may not avoid author fees.

Unless increased complexity and conflict between authors and publishers drives open access, the RRS is not fit for its stated purpose as an open access strategy.

URL : The Plan S Rights Retention Strategy is an administrative and legal burden, not a sustainable open access solution

DOI : http://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.556

A Scientific Knowledge Graph with Community Detection and Routes of Search. Testing « GRAPHYP » as a Toolkit for Resilient Upgrade of Scholarly Content

Posted on 6 octobre 2021 by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Renaud Fabre, Otmane Azeroual, Patrice Bellot, Joachim Schöpfel, Daniel Egret

Unlimited change in scientific terminology challenges integrity in scientific knowledge graph (SKG) representation, while current data and modeling standards, mostly document oriented, hardly allow a resilient semantic upgrade of scholarly content.

Moreover, results of a « multimodal knowledge acquisition » are required for an efficient upgrade of search methods: « vital nodes » differ among users of the same keyword, due to distinct needs of scientific communities, rooted in their own interpretations and controversies.

Modeling and data are challenged to propose new outcomes, mixing automated information and human choices allowing dynamic community detection: to fulfill this program with GRAPHYP toolkit, we identify a workflow ensuring the objectives of integrity and completeness of search management activities.

It encompasses data standards for « routes » of search, modeling of community detection and navigation inside SK bipartite hypergraph, and a first test with extraction of characteristics of communities’ preferences from readings of scholarly content.

« Search is not Research » and therefore further work should explore the links between modeling and data recording research contents and « search and select » results in SKG data structure.

URL : A Scientific Knowledge Graph with Community Detection and Routes of Search. Testing « GRAPHYP » as a Toolkit for Resilient Upgrade of Scholarly Content

Original location : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03365118