Authors : Lisa Federer, Sarah Clarke, Maryam Zaringhalam
URL : Developing the Librarian Workforce for Data Science and Open Science
How Many Papers Should Scientists Be Reviewing? An Analysis Using Verified Peer Review Reports
Authors : Vincent Raoult
The current peer review system is under stress from ever increasing numbers of publications, the proliferation of open-access journals and an apparent difficulty in obtaining high-quality reviews in due time. At its core, this issue may be caused by scientists insufficiently prioritising reviewing.
Perhaps this low prioritisation is due to a lack of understanding on how many reviews need to be conducted by researchers to balance the peer review process. I obtained verified peer review data from 142 journals across 12 research fields, for a total of over 300,000 reviews and over 100,000 publications, to determine an estimate of the numbers of reviews required per publication per field.
I then used this value in relation to the mean numbers of authors per publication per field to highlight a ‘review ratio’: the expected minimum number of publications an author in their field should review to balance their input (publications) into the peer review process.
On average, 3.49 ± 1.45 (SD) reviews were required for each scientific publication, and the estimated review ratio across all fields was 0.74 ± 0.46 (SD) reviews per paper published per author. Since these are conservative estimates, I recommend scientists aim to conduct at least one review per publication they produce. This should ensure that the peer review system continues to function as intended.
URL : How Many Papers Should Scientists Be Reviewing? An Analysis Using Verified Peer Review Reports
Formalizing Privacy Laws for License Generation and Data Repository Decision Automation
Authors : Micah Altman, Stephen Chong, Alexandra Wood
In this paper, we summarize work-in-progress on expert system support to automate some data deposit and release decisions within a data repository, and to generate custom license agreements for those data transfers.
Our approach formalizes via a logic programming language the privacy-relevant aspects of laws, regulations, and best practices, supported by legal analysis documented in legal memoranda.
This formalization enables automated reasoning about the conditions under which a repository can transfer data, through interrogation of users, and the application of formal rules to the facts obtained from users.
The proposed system takes the specific conditions for a given data release and produces a custom data use agreement that accurately captures the relevant restrictions on data use.
This enables appropriate decisions and accurate licenses, while removing the bottleneck of lawyer effort per data transfer.
The operation of the system aims to be transparent, in the sense that administrators, lawyers, institutional review boards, and other interested parties can evaluate the legal reasoning and interpretation embodied in the formalization, and the specific rationale for a decision to accept or release a particular dataset.
Open or Ajar? Openness within the Neoliberal Academy
Authors : Kevin Sanders, Simon Bowie
The terms ‘open’ and ‘openness’ are widely used across the current higher education environment particularly in the areas of repository services and scholarly communications.
Open-access licensing and open-source licensing are two prevalent manifestations of open culture within higher education research environments. As theoretical ideals, open-licensing models aim at openness and academic freedom.
But operating as they do within the context of global neoliberalism, to what extent are these models constructed by, sustained by, and co-opted by neoliberalism?
In this paper, we interrogate the use of open-licensing within scholarly communications and within the larger societal context of neoliberalism. Through synthesis of various sources, we will examine how open access licensing models have been constrained by neoliberal or otherwise corporate agendas, how open access and open scholarship have been reframed within discourses of compliance, how open-source software models and software are co-opted by politico-economic forces, and how the language of ‘openness’ is widely misused in higher education and repository services circles to drive agendas that run counter to actually increasing openness.
We will finish by suggesting ways to resist this trend and use open-licensing models to resist neoliberal agendas in open scholarship.
URL : Open or Ajar? Openness within the Neoliberal Academy
Original location : https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202001.0240/v1
Ouverture des données de la recherche : de la vision politique aux pratiques des chercheurs
Auteur/Author : Violaine Rebouillat
Cette thèse s’intéresse aux données de la recherche, dans un contexte d’incitation croissante à leur ouverture. Les données de la recherche sont des informations collectées par les scientifiques dans la perspective d’être utilisées comme preuves d’une théorie scientifique.
Il s’agit d’une notion complexe à définir, car contextuelle. Depuis les années 2000, le libre accès aux données occupe une place de plus en plus stratégique dans les politiques de recherche. Ces enjeux ont été relayés par des professions intermédiaires, qui ont développé des services dédiés, destinés à accompagner les chercheurs dans l’application des recommandations de gestion et d’ouverture.
La thèse interroge le lien entre idéologie de l’ouverture et pratiques de recherche. Quelles formes de gestion et de partage des données existent dans les communautés de recherche et par quoi sont-elles motivées ? Quelle place les chercheurs accordent-ils à l’offre de services issue des politiques de gestion et d’ouverture des données ?
Pour tenter d’y répondre, 57 entretiens ont été réalisés avec des chercheurs de l’Université de Strasbourg dans différentes disciplines. L’enquête révèle une très grande variété de pratiques de gestion et de partage de données. Un des points mis en évidence est que, dans la logique scientifique, le partage des données répond un besoin.
Il fait partie intégrante de la stratégie du chercheur, dont l’objectif est avant tout de préserver ses intérêts professionnels. Les données s’inscrivent donc dans un cycle de crédibilité, qui leur confère à la fois une valeur d’usage (pour la production de nouvelles publications) et une valeur d’échange (en tant que monnaie d’échange dans le cadre de collaborations avec des partenaires).
L’enquête montre également que les services développés dans un contexte d’ouverture des données correspondent pour une faible partie à ceux qu’utilisent les chercheurs.
L’une des hypothèses émises est que l’offre de services arrive trop tôt pour rencontrer les besoins des chercheurs. L’évaluation et la reconnaissance des activités scientifiques étant principalement fondées sur la publication d’articles et d’ouvrages, la gestion et l’ouverture des données ne sont pas considérées comme prioritaires par les chercheurs.
La seconde hypothèse avancée est que les services d’ouverture des données sont proposés par des acteurs relativement éloignés des communautés de recherche. Les chercheurs sont davantage influencés par des réseaux spécifiques à leurs champs de recherche (revues, infrastructures…).
Ces résultats invitent finalement à reconsidérer la question de la médiation dans l’ouverture des données scientifiques.
Identifying and Implementing Relevant Research Data Management Services for the Library at the University of Dodoma, Tanzania
Authors : Gilbert Exaud Mushi, Heila Pienaar, Martie van Deventer
Research Data Management (RDM) services are increasingly becoming a subject of interest for academic and research libraries globally – this is also the case in developing countries.
The interest is motivated by a need to support research activities through data sharing and collaboration both locally and internationally. Many institutions, especially in the developed countries, have implemented RDM services to accelerate research and innovation through e-Research but extensive RDM is not so common in developing countries.
In reality many African universities and research institutions are yet to implement the most basic of data management services. We believe that the absence of political will and national government mandates on data management often hold back the development and implementation of RDM services. Similarly, research funding agencies are not yet applying sufficient pressure to ensure that Africa complies with the requirement to deposit research data in trusted repositories.
While the context was acknowledged the University of Dodoma library staff realized that it is urgent to prepare for the inevitable – the time when RDM will be a requirement for research funding support.
This paper presents the results of research conducted at the University of Dodoma, Tanzania. The purpose of the research was to identify and report on relevant RDM services that need to be implemented so that researchers and university management could collaborate and make our research data accessible to the international community.
This paper presents findings on important issues for consideration when planning to develop and implement RDM services at a developing country academic institution. The paper also mentions the requirements for the sustainability of these initiatives.
How society publishers can accelerate their transition to open access and align with Plan S
Authors : Alicia Wise, Lorraine Estelle
Wellcome, UK Research and Innovation, and the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers commissioned Information Power Ltd. to undertake a project to support society publishers to accelerate their transition to open access (OA) in alignment with Plan S and the wider move to accelerate immediate OA.
This project is part of a range of activities that cOAlition S partners are taking forward to support the implementation of Plan S principles. The objective of this project was to explore with learned societies a range of potential strategies and business models through which they could adapt and thrive under Plan S.
We consulted with society publishers through interviews, surveys, and workshops about the 27 business models and strategies identified during the project.
We also surveyed library consortia about their willingness to support society publishers to make the transition to OA. Our key finding is that transformative agreements emerge as the most promising model because they offer a predictable, steady funding stream.
We also facilitated pilot transformative agreement negotiations between several society publishers and library consortia. These pilots and a workshop of consortium representatives and society publishers informed the development of an OA transformative agreement toolkit.
Our conclusion is that society publishers should consider all the business models this project has developed and should not automatically equate OA with article publication charges.
URL : How society publishers can accelerate their transition to open access and align with Plan S