EN

The time for action is now: Equity and sustainability for diamond publishing in Aotearoa New Zealand

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Luqman Hayes, Craig Murdoch

Diamond open access journals make a significant contribution to scholarship globally while enduring a precarious existence due to a lack of funding. The purpose of this study was to identify the necessary characteristics of a shared service that would deliver improved sustainability for diamond journals in Aotearoa New Zealand.

We conducted semi-structured interviews with several of the editors of journals hosted by Tuwhera, Auckland University of Technology’s diamond hosting service. We sought to understand their experiences, both positive and negative, via thematic analysis of the interview transcripts. These themes indicate that our diamond journal editors face significant burdens due to lack of funding, which threaten the unique contribution they make as journals of and from Aotearoa.

We conclude that a shared open infrastructure is the most appropriate way to ensure the sustainability of diamond journals in Aotearoa, but that it must be accompanied by shared services that address the administrative and journal production load currently experienced by editors.

We propose that such an endeavor should be funded by shifting a small percentage of existing library subscription expenditure from profit-making publishers to diamond journals.

URL : The time for action is now: Equity and sustainability for diamond publishing in Aotearoa New Zealand

DOI : https://doi.org/10.31274/jlsc.18311

EN

From Fees to Free: Comparing APC-Based and Diamond Open Access Journals in Engineering

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Luís Eduardo Pilatti, Luiz Alberto Pilatti, Gustavo Dambiski Gomes de Carvalho, Luis Mauricio Martins de Resende

This study analyzes the impact of different Open Access (OA) publication models in engineering, comparing journals that charge Article Processing Charges (APCs) with those operating under the Diamond OA model.

A total of 757 engineering OA journals, comprising 504 APC-based and 253 Diamond OA journals, were examined using bibliometric data from 2020 to 2023. The analysis focused on four key metrics: CiteScore, total citations, number of published articles, and the percentage of cited articles. The results indicate that APC-based journals dominate the upper quartiles (Q1 and Q2) regarding absolute citation counts, primarily driven by high-volume mega-journals such as IEEE Access.

However, Diamond OA journals exhibit a higher proportion of cited articles (88.8% compared to 83.4% in APC-based journals) within the top 10% category. Despite their benefits in providing cost-free dissemination, Diamond OA journals account for only 8.4% of the 3012 active engineering journals indexed in Scopus, highlighting sustainability and visibility challenges.

The findings suggest that, while APC-based journals achieve higher absolute citation counts, editorial reputation and visibility strategies significantly influence citation performance.

This study contributes to the ongoing discussion on the financial sustainability and equity of OA publishing in engineering.

URL : From Fees to Free: Comparing APC-Based and Diamond Open Access Journals in Engineering

DOI : https://doi.org/10.3390/publications13020016

EN

Tailoring Scientific Knowledge: How Generative AI Personalizes Academic Reading Experiences

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Author : Anna Małgorzata Kamińska

The scientific literature is expanding at an unprecedented pace, making it increasingly difficult for researchers, students, and professionals to extract relevant insights efficiently.

Traditional academic publishing offers static, one-size-fits-all content that does not cater to the diverse backgrounds, expertise levels, and interests of readers. This paper explores how generative AI can dynamically personalize scholarly content by tailoring summaries and key takeaways to individual user profiles.

Nine scientific articles from a single journal issue were used to create the dataset, and prompt engineering was applied to generate tailored insights for exemplary personas: a digital humanities and open science researcher, and a mining and raw materials industry specialist. The effectiveness of AI-generated content modifications in enhancing readability, comprehension, and relevance was evaluated.

The results indicate that generative AI can successfully emphasize different aspects of an article, making it more accessible and engaging to specific audiences. However, challenges such as content oversimplification, potential biases, and ethical considerations remain.

The implications of AI-powered personalization in scholarly communication are discussed, and future research directions are proposed to refine and optimize AI-driven adaptive reading experiences.

URL : Tailoring Scientific Knowledge: How Generative AI Personalizes Academic Reading Experiences

DOI : https://doi.org/10.3390/publications13020018

FR

Le chantier de la bibliothèque comme dispositif d’accompagnement du changement : Une documentation connivente pour interroger le rapport au temps et à l’espace

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Autrices : Isabelle Fabre, Susan Kovacs

En considérant la dimension symbolique et sociale des temps et des espaces éphémères, nous souhaitons interroger une manière de faire dialoguer diverses formes de documents liés à la médiation de chantiers de rénovation des lieux de culture et de savoir.

Notre approche anthropologique met l’accent sur la bibliothèque en tant que lieu de vie pour expérimenter la puissance heuristique de la documentation comme accompagnement du changement.

URL : Le chantier de la bibliothèque comme dispositif d’accompagnement du changement : Une documentation connivente pour interroger le rapport au temps et à l’espace

DOI : https://doi.org/10.5206/cjils-rcsib.v48i1.22257

EN

The Open Book Environment (OBE) Dashboard: A Tool for Increasing Publisher Transparency for Authors, Librarians, and the Scholarly Community

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Holly Limbert, Dan DeSanto

Introduction: The Open Book Environment (OBE) Dashboard is introduced as a pioneering tool aimed at fostering transparency and clarity in the realm of open access book publishing. In response to the growing need for accessible information for authors, librarians, and stakeholders, this dashboard aggregates data from a multitude of publishers into a centralized platform.

Description of Program/Service: Employing a comprehensive set of criteria, including pricing for book processing charges (BPCs), licensing options, editorial quality statements, and self-archiving policies, the Dashboard evaluates publisher transparency. Through a color-coded system, it visually represents the degree of openness exhibited by each publisher, empowering authors to make informed decisions about where to publish their work.

Next Steps: Looking ahead, the Dashboard’s dynamic nature allows for continuous updates, facilitating its role as an agent for positive change within the scholarly publishing community. As a versatile resource, the OBE Dashboard holds promise in enhancing efficiency, transparency, and accountability in open access book publishing.

Open Book Environment (OBE) Dashboard: https://bit.ly/OBEdashboard
OBE Additions and Edits Form: https://bit.ly/OBEdashboardform
Zenodo Link: https://zenodo.org/records/13366056

URL : The Open Book Environment (OBE) Dashboard: A Tool for Increasing Publisher Transparency for Authors, Librarians, and the Scholarly Community

DOI : https://doi.org/10.31274/jlsc.18112

EN

Open and impactful academic publishing

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Rosaria Ciriminna, Giovanna Li Petri, Giuseppe Angellotti, Rafael Luque, Mario Pagliaro

Introduction

The advantages of self-archiving research articles on institutional repositories or personal academic websites are numerous and relevant for society and individual researchers. Yet, self-archiving has been adopted by a small minority of active scholars.

Methods

Aiming to further inform educational work on open and impactful academic publishing in the digital era, we posed selected questions to Stevan Harnad 30 years after his « subversive proposal » to maximize research impact by self-archiving scholarly articles in university-hosted or disciplinary online repositories to make published articles openly available.

Results and discussion

Self-archiving is even more needed today than it was when Professor Harnad called for it when the World Wide Web was in its infancy; OA academic publishing is a necessary but not sufficient condition for impactful research; self-archiving on a personal academic website is often more effective than in institutional repositories.

URL : Open and impactful academic publishing

DOI : https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2025.1544965

EN

Evaluating the predictive capacity of ChatGPT for academic peer review outcomes across multiple platforms

Posted on by Hans Dillaerts

Authors : Mike Thelwall, Abdallah Yaghi

Academic peer review is at the heart of scientific quality control, yet the process is slow and time-consuming. Technology that can predict peer review outcomes may help with this, for example by fast-tracking desk rejection decisions. While previous studies have demonstrated that Large Language Models (LLMs) can predict peer review outcomes to some extent, this paper introduces two new contexts and employs a more robust method—averaging multiple ChatGPT scores.

Averaging 30 ChatGPT predictions, based on reviewer guidelines and using only the submitted titles and abstracts failed to predict peer review outcomes for F1000Research (Spearman’s rho = 0.00). However, it produced mostly weak positive correlations with the quality dimensions of SciPost Physics (rho = 0.25 for validity, rho = 0.25 for originality, rho = 0.20 for significance, and rho = 0.08 for clarity) and a moderate positive correlation for papers from the International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR) (rho = 0.38). Including article full texts increased the correlation for ICLR (rho = 0.46) and slightly improved it for F1000Research (rho = 0.09), with variable effects on the four quality dimension correlations for SciPost LaTeX files.

The use of simple chain-of-thought system prompts slightly increased the correlation for F1000Research (rho = 0.10), marginally reduced it for ICLR (rho = 0.37), and further decreased it for SciPost Physics (rho = 0.16 for validity, rho = 0.18 for originality, rho = 0.18 for significance, and rho = 0.05 for clarity). Overall, the results suggest that in some contexts, ChatGPT can produce weak pre-publication quality predictions.

However, their effectiveness and the optimal strategies for employing them vary considerably between platforms, journals, and conferences. Finally, the most suitable inputs for ChatGPT appear to differ depending on the platform.

URL : Evaluating the predictive capacity of ChatGPT for academic peer review outcomes across multiple platforms

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-025-05287-1