Open-access repositories worldwide, 2005-2012: Past growth, current characteristics and future possibilities

Statut

“This paper reviews the worldwide growth of open-access (OA) repositories, December 2005 to December 2012, using data collected by the OpenDOAR project. It shows that initial repository development was focused on North America, Western Europe and Australasia, particularly the USA, UK, Germany and Australia. Soon after, Japan increased its repository numbers. Since 2010, other geographical areas and countries have seen repository growth, including East Asia (especially Taiwan), South America (especially Brazil) and Eastern Europe (especially Poland). During the whole period, countries such as France, Italy and Spain have maintained steady growth, whereas countries such as China and Russia have experienced relatively low levels of growth. Globally, repositories are predominantly institutional, multidisciplinary and English-language-based. They typically use open-source OAI-compliant repository software but remain immature in terms of explicit licensing arrangements. Whilst the size of repositories is difficult to assess accurately, the available data indicate that a small number of large repositories and a large number of small repositories make up the repository landscape. These trends and characteristics are analyzed using Innovation Diffusion Theory (IDT) building on previous studies. IDT is shown to provide a useful explanatory framework for understanding repository adoption at various levels: global, national, organizational and individual. Major factors affecting both the initial development of repositories and their take up by users are identified, including IT infrastructure, language, cultural factors, policy initiatives, awareness-raising activity and usage mandates. It is argued that mandates in particular are likely to play a crucial role in determining future repository development.”

URL : http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/76839/

A survey of authors publishing in four megajournals

Statut

Aim. To determine the characteristics of megajournal authors, the nature of the manuscripts they are submitting to these journals, factors influencing their decision to publish in a megajournal, sources of funding for article processing charges (APCs) or other fees and their likelihood of submitting to a megajournal in the future.

Methods. Web-based survey of 2,128 authors who recently published in BMJ Open, PeerJ, PLOS ONE or SAGE Open.

Results. The response rate ranged from 26% for BMJ Open to 47% for SAGE Open. The authors were international, largely academics who had recently published in both subscription and Open Access (OA) journals. Across journals about 25% of the articles were preliminary findings and just under half were resubmissions of manuscripts rejected by other journals. Editors from other BMJ journals and perhaps to a lesser extent SAGE and PLOS journals appear to be encouraging authors to submit manuscripts that were rejected by the editor’s journals to a megajournal published by the same publisher. Quality of the journal and speed of the review process were important factors across all four journals. Impact factor was important for PLOS ONE authors but less so for BMJ Open authors, which also has an impact factor. The review criteria and the fact the journal was OA were other significant factors particularly important for PeerJ authors. The reputation of the publisher was an important factor for SAGE Open and BMJ Open. About half of PLOS ONE and around a third of BMJ Open and PeerJ authors used grant funding for publishing charges while only about 10% of SAGE Open used grant funding for publication charges. Around 60% of SAGE Open and 32% of PeerJ authors self-funded their publication fees however the fees are modest for these journals. The majority of authors from all 4 journals were pleased with their experience and indicated they were likely to submit to the same or similar journal in the future.

Conclusions. Megajournals are drawing an international group of authors who tend to be experienced academics. They are choosing to publish in megajournals for a variety of reasons but most seem to value the quality of the journal and the speed of the review/publication process. Having a broad scope was not a key factor for most authors though being OA was important for PeerJ and SAGE Open authors. Most authors appeared pleased with the experience and indicated they are likely to submit future manuscripts to the same or similar megajournal which seems to suggest these journals will continue to grow in popularity.”

URL : A survey of authors publishing in four megajournals
Alternative URL : https://peerj.com/articles/365/

Le développement de l’archive ouverte institutionnelle HAL UPS…

Statut

Le développement de l’archive ouverte institutionnelle HAL-UPS : Préconisations pour la mise en place d’un workflow pour la chaîne de traitement documentaire des publications scientifiques des laboratoires de recherche de l’Université Toulouse III – Paul Sabatier :

“État des lieux des politiques en matière d’archives ouvertes sur Toulouse et l’Université de Toulouse 3. Rappel historique sur la création de l’archive ouverte institutionnelle HAL-UPS. Tableaux récapitulatifs des pratiques en matière d’archives ouvertes par pôle disciplinaire sur l’Université Toulouse 3. Des préconisations sur les scénarios possibles de dépôts.”

URL : http://archivesic.ccsd.cnrs.fr/sic_00977548

Open access journals in Humanities and Social Science

This British Academy research project on the effects of current UK open access policies was funded by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) and was overseen by a Steering Committee set up by the Academy to manage the project. The project was led by Professor Chris Wickham, FBA (British Academy Vice-President, Publications), with support and co-writing from Dr Rebecca Darley and Dr Daniel Reynolds. It investigates some of the issues involved in open access publishing, seeking to examine various practical issues and difficulties that may arise, using the example of twelve disciplines across the Humanities and Social Sciences (HSS).

The key issues investigated were:

  • the degree to which non-UK journals are ‘compliant’ with current UK open-access policies, particularly ‘green’ open-access policies;
  • the differences between journal half-lives across the same disciplines;
  • library acquisition policies and the degree to which these are affected by embargoes before articles are openly available.

URL : Open access journals in humanities and social science

How research funders can finance APCs in full…

Statut

How research funders can finance APCs in full OA and hybrid journals :

“Open access (OA) publishing is steadily growing in both full OA journals and hybrid journals where authors can pay to open up individual articles. Funding for article processing charges (APCs) is still a strong barrier for many authors, particularly for subscription journals where the hybrid option is expensive and an added extra feature after an article is accepted for publication. Many research funders in Europe have started or are considering mechanisms for paying APCs with earmarked funding in order to increase the uptake of OA. At the same time they are well aware that their actions may influence the way the OA market will develop in the near future. This article discusses a number of scenarios for ways in which funders could cover the cost of APCs, while encouraging the development of a competitive and transparent market for APC-funded OA scholarly publishing. We provide evidence that the current APC-funded full OA market is sensitive to journal prestige/impact. We present a value-based cap funding scheme which could help maintain transparency, bringing hybrid market pricing in line with the full OA market. We also consider a scenario that addresses hybrid ‘double dipping’ while limiting the cost of transitioning to full OA for research-intensive universities as well as costsharing as a mechanism for providing authors with an incentive for considering cost as well as value in choosing where to publish.”

URL : http://dx.doi.org/10.1087/20140203

Access to Research: the experience of implementing a pilot in public libraries

The Access to Research project is a collaboration between scholarly publishers and librarians to provide free licensed access to research journals via terminals in public libraries. The project is an element of the ‘balanced package’ proposed by the Finch Working Group on how to expand access to published research in the UK, which reported its recommendations to the UK government in June 2012. We describe the setting up of the project and the findings from a three-month technical pilot prior to the launch of a two-year national pilot in February 2014.

The project has already attracted support from the major scholarly publishers, with about 8,400 journal titles now available. The access platform has been shown to be usable by public librarians and library patrons. We are now addressing the challenge of understanding how the public will make use of the system and exploring how best to provide training and education for librarians and users.

URL : http://dx.doi.org/10.1087/20140202

Evaluer la qualité des archives ouvertes le certificat DINI

Statut

Evaluer la qualité des archives ouvertes : le certificat DINI :

“L’article présente le certificat DINI, un référentiel pour la certification et l’audit des archives ouvertes, des archives institutionnelles et des plateformes de revues en libre accès, développé par l’Initiative Allemande pour l’Information en Réseau DINI. L’article décrit le contexte, l’objectif et l’historique de ce certificat avant d’exposer sa structure et son contenu. Parmi les huit sections du certificat figurent la visibilité du site, la sécurité de l’information et l’archivage pérenne. La discussion porte sur l’objet du référentiel, sur son influence et sur la nécessité d’une adaptation au contexte francophone. La traduction française du certificat a été publiée en 2012.”

“The article presents the DINI certificate, standard recommendations for the certification of document and publishing services, i.e. open archives, institutional repositories and platforms for open access journals, developed by the German Initiative for Networked Information DINI. The article describes the context, purpose and history of this certificate before exposing its structure and content. The eight areas include criteria for the visibility of the site, information security and long-term preservation. The article discusses the object of certification, its impact and the need to adapt some recommendations to the French-speaking context. The French translation of the certificate has been published in 2012.”

URL : Evaluer la qualité des archives ouvertes : le certificat DINI
Alternative URL : https://journal.lib.uoguelph.ca/index.php/perj/article/view/2733