Follow the scientists? How beliefs about the practice of science shaped COVID-19 views

Authors : Thomas G. Safford, Emily H. Whitmore, Lawrence C. Hamilton

“Follow the science” became the mantra for responding to COVID-19 pandemic. However, for the public this also meant “follow the scientists”, and this led to uneasiness as some viewed scientists as not credible.

We investigate how beliefs about the way scientists develop their findings affect pandemic-related views. Our analysis shows that beliefs about scientists’ objectivity predict views regrading coronavirus-related risks, behavioral changes, and policy priorities.

While political party identity also predicts views about COVID-19-related concerns, these vary by political leaders whose approaches embraced versus dismissed science-based strategies, highlighting the importance of perceptions of scientists in shaping pandemic-related attitudes and beliefs.

URL: Follow the scientists? How beliefs about the practice of science shaped COVID-19 views

DOI : https://doi.org/10.22323/2.20070203

Not open for all: accessibility of open textbooks

Authors : Elena Azadbakht, Teresa Schultz, Jennifer Arellano

In order for open educational resources (OERs) to be truly open to all, they must be accessible to learners with disabilities, including those with visual, auditory, physical and cognitive disabilities.

This study sought to determine the accessibility of a randomly selected sample of 355 open textbooks using a custom rubric based upon the World Wide Web Consortium’s (W3C’s) Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG), version 2.1, primarily at the Levels A and AA. Included books fell into one of four format types: HTML files/websites, PDFs, Microsoft Word documents and EPUBs.

The average number of ‘fails’ – instances in which they ran afoul of a rubric category – across the whole sample was 5.93 and the median was 6, out of a total of 14 or 15 categories, depending on the format type.

Overall, most of the books did not meet basic accessibility requirements, such as including alternative text for any images, properly coding/tagging any tables and following a logical heading order structure.

URL : Not open for all: accessibility of open textbooks

DOI : http://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.557

Le numérique facilite-t-il l’accès ouvert aux communs scientifiques ?

Auteur/Author : Nicolas Jullien

L’économie de la science et des revues scientifiques est complexe. Pour mieux comprendre les trajectoires de basculement vers les publications ouvertes, cet article propose de décrire leur « modèle économique » et ce qu’Internet a changé.

Après un rapide rappel des questions soulevées par l’accès ouvert, nous proposons d’étudier la revue scientifique comme un « commun de connaissance ». Cela nous fournit un cadre afin de structurer les enjeux pour chaque acteur de la revue, et ainsi de décrire les différents types de revues scientifiques existantes, autour de l’adéquation format-lectorat d’une part et système de validation scientifique d’autre part.

Selon les modèles, le format d’accès ouvert peut varier, mais l’enjeu global est plus au niveau de l’accès aux bases de données d’articles (comme données ouvertes), que sur l’évolution du fonctionnement des revues scientifiques.

DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/terminal.8058

Austrian Transition to Open Access: a collaborative approach

Authors : Rita Pinhasi, Lothar Hölbling, Brigitte Kromp

This article presents a collaborative project, the ‘Austrian Transition to Open Access’ (AT2OA), initially running from 2017 to 2020, which had the overarching goal of enabling the large-scale transformation of publishing outputs from closed to open access (OA) in Austria.

The initiative, which has recently secured funding for a second four-year cycle from the Austrian Federal Ministry of Education, Science and Research, brings together all key players: universities, research institutes, the national library consortium and a cOAlition S funding member, the Austrian Science Fund.

The project outcomes include a transition feasibility study that builds on the methodology of the 2015 Schimmer et al. article, the seeds of a national OA monitoring data hub and transformative agreements with major publishers.

In addition, the project helped launch institutional OA Publishing Funds across the country and explored alternative publishing models. Furthermore, it saw the emergence of a nationwide network of OA experts. The authors also share their thoughts on lessons learned.

URL: Austrian Transition to Open Access: a collaborative approach

DOI : http://doi.org/10.1629/uksg.561

Intelligibilité multimodale de l’hypertexte érudit : le rôle du documentaliste. Une nécessaire collaboration pour la documentarisation sérielle dans la chaîne éditoriale scientifique

Auteur/Author : Gérald Kembellec

Cet article montre la porosité des frontières entre les métiers de l’édition et de la publication en ligne et que le nécessaire renouvellement des métiers de l’info-documentation trouverait une place naturelle face à l’évolution du Web.

Nous pensons en particulier à l’accompagnement de la délicate mise en oeuvre de la documentarisation sérielle des hypertextes érudits, spécifiquement en contextes scientifique ou culturel.

La vocation de cet article est de démontrer que la valorisation hypertexte d’un document de qualité au sein des ramifications du Web ne peut se faire qu’à travers une bonne intelligence entre auteur(s), éditeur et diffuseur, pour à terme rencontrer son public.

Il sera également démontré que chaque acteur de cette chaîne auctorio-éditoriale serait gagnant dans le cadre d’un travail de formalisation qualitatif qui aurait une portée diffusionelle forte.

Enfin, nous pointerons que ce travail d’intermédiation doit être piloté par un acteur de l’info-communication, pour rendre le texte intelligible aux humains comme aux machines. Cet acte médiateur est ici désigné sous le terme de documentarisation sérielle.

URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03419892

Editors between Support and Control by the Digital Infrastructure — Tracing the Peer Review Process with Data from an Editorial Management System

Authors : Judith Hartstein, Clemens Blüme

Many journals now rely on editorial management systems, which are supposed to support the administration and decision making of editors, while aiming at making the process of communication faster and more transparent to both reviewers and authors. Yet, little is known about how these infrastructures support, stabilize, transform or change existing editorial practices.

Research suggests that editorial management systems as digital infrastructures are adapted to the local needs at scholarly journals and reflect main realms of activities. Recently, it has been established that in a minimal case, the peer review process is comprised of postulation, consultation, decision and administration.

By exploring process generated data from a publisher’s editorial management system, we investigate the ways by which the digital infrastructure is used and how it represents the different realms of the process of peer review. How does the infrastructure support, strengthen or restrain editorial agency for administrating the process?

In our study, we investigate editorial processes and practices with their data traces captured by an editorial management system. We do so by making use of the internal representation of manuscript life cycles from submission to decision for 14,000 manuscripts submitted to a biomedical publisher.

Reconstructing the processes applying social network analysis, we found that the individual steps in the process have no strict order, other than could be expected with regard to the software patent. However, patterns can be observed, as to which stages manuscripts are most likely to go through in an ordered fashion.

We also found the different realms of the peer review process represented in the system, some events, however, indicate that the infrastructure offers more control and observation of the peer review process, thereby strengthening the editorial role in the governance of peer review while at the same time the infrastructure oversees the editors’ performance.

URL : Editors between Support and Control by the Digital Infrastructure — Tracing the Peer Review Process with Data from an Editorial Management System

DOI : https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2021.747562