Étiquette : scientific communication

Catégories
EN

Dissertation to Book? A Snapshot of Dissertations Published As Books in 2014 and 2015, Available in Open Access Institutional Repositories

Authors : Anna Marie Johnson, Tyler Goldberg, Robert Detmering

INTRODUCTION

Graduate students sometimes express consternation about whether the presence of their dissertation in an open access institutional repository (IR) will harm their chances of being able to publish the manuscript as a book. Several studies have addressed the question from different perspectives, but the avenue of examining what had actually been published had not been explored.

METHODS

This study examines books published in 2014 and 2015 that were listed as dissertations in one large book vendor database. A list of books was downloaded and searched in both ProQuest’s Dissertations & Theses Global database and Google to identify a matching dissertation.

RESULTS

Only a small percentage of books published as dissertations were found in ProQuest and then subsequently in IRs. The number of libraries holding book titles with corresponding dissertations in IRs dropped between 2014 and 2015. The lists of publishers who published dissertations as books was very similar between 2014 and 2015 data and included large, commercial publishers.

DISCUSSION

Students should be aware that only a small percentage of the total number of dissertations produced in a year are subsequently published as books, that the time between dissertation and book publication is substantial, and that some subject areas are more likely to be published than others.

CONCLUSION

These findings provide nuance to the discussions of dissertations in open access repositories and a starting point to monitor trends in this area. They should also provide librarians who are providing supplementary guidance to graduate students with information about the publishing landscape.

URL : Dissertation to Book? A Snapshot of Dissertations Published As Books in 2014 and 2015, Available in Open Access Institutional Repositories

DOI : http://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.2177

Catégories
EN

Making the Mission Visible: Altmetrics and Nontraditional Publishing

Authors : Jennifer L. Bonnet, Marisa Méndez-Brady

Purpose

Whereas traditional book and journal publishing remain the gold standard for many post-secondary institutions, nontraditional publishing is just as prolific at the flagship university in Maine. The university has strong land and sea grant missions that drive a broad research agenda, with an emphasis on community outreach and engagement.

However, the impact of researchers’ contributions outside of academe is unlikely to be accurately reflected in promotion, tenure or review processes. Thus, the authors designed a series of altmetrics workshops aimed at seeding conversations around novel ways to track the impact of researchers’ diverse scholarly and creative outputs.

Design/methodology/approach

This paper presents a case study of the instructional approach taken at the University of Maine library to facilitate discussions of alternative impact assessments that reach beyond traditional publications.

Findings

Evaluations revealed an increased awareness of, and interest in, impact tracking tools that capture both traditional scholarship, like journal articles, and nontraditional scholarly and creative outputs, such as videos, podcasts and newsletters.

The authors learned that altmetrics provides an entry point into a broader conversation about scholarly impact, and was best received by those whose scholarly output is not always captured by traditional metrics.

Practical implications

Scholars are equipped with novel methods for describing the value of their work and discovering a broader audience for their research. Future initiatives will target the needs identified through initial conversations around altmetrics.

Originality/value

Altmetrics workshops provide spaces to explore the potential for new tools that capture a range of previously unconsidered measures of impact, and to discuss the implications of those measures.

URL : http://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/lib_staffpub/27/

 

Catégories
EN

Imagining the “open” university: Sharing scholarship to improve research and education

Author : Erin C. McKiernan

Open scholarship, such as the sharing of articles, code, data, and educational resources, has the potential to improve university research and education as well as increase the impact universities can have beyond their own walls.

To support this perspective, I present evidence from case studies, published literature, and personal experiences as a practicing open scholar. I describe some of the challenges inherent to practicing open scholarship and some of the tensions created by incompatibilities between institutional policies and personal practice.

To address this, I propose several concrete actions universities could take to support open scholarship and outline ways in which such initiatives could benefit the public as well as institutions. Importantly, I do not think most of these actions would require new funding but rather a redistribution of existing funds and a rewriting of internal policies to better align with university missions of knowledge dissemination and societal impact.

URL : Imagining the “open” university: Sharing scholarship to improve research and education

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002614 

Catégories
EN

Assessing the Openness of Anthropology Journals

Authors : Melody Dale, Nickoal Eichmann-Kalwara, Sheeji Kathuria, Mary Ann Jones

This study analyses the extent of gold open access (OA) publishing options in 377 anthropology journals by applying a six-level coding scheme (0=non-transparent publishing, 5=fully OA, i.e., free to read and publish without embargo).

This analysis is meant to simplify the process of identifying OA journal publishing options in the discipline of anthropology, in addition to sharing findings on some of the prominent issues in OA publishing as they relate to anthropology journals, including non-transparency among publishers and the prevalence and price of article processing charges (APCs).

We conclude that publishers should be more transparent about their OA publishing options and policies by providing conspicuous and straightforward information to potential authors. Further, we find that in the anthropology scholarly communication ecosystem,

APCs for hybrid journals are more expensive than those for fully gold OA journals, thus contradicting the assumption that gold OA is more costly to researchers.

URL : http://scholar.colorado.edu/libr_facpapers/92/

Catégories
EN

Does Peer Review Identify the Best Papers? A Simulation Study of Editors, Reviewers, and the Scientific Publication Process

Author : Justin Esarey

How does the structure of the peer review process, which can vary among journals, influence the quality of papers published in a journal? This article studies multiple systems of peer review using computational simulation. I find that, under any of the systems I study, a majority of accepted papers are evaluated by an average reader as not meeting the standards of the journal.

Moreover, all systems allow random chance to play a strong role in the acceptance decision. Heterogeneous reviewer and reader standards for scientific quality drive both results. A peer review system with an active editor—that is, one who uses desk rejection before review and does not rely strictly on reviewer votes to make decisions—can mitigate some of these effects.

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1017/S1049096517001081

Catégories
FR

Réseaux sociaux académiques et diffusion de la production scientifique des chercheurs en biologie/médecine L’exemple de ResearchGate

Auteurs/Authors : Christophe Boudry, Aline Bouchard

Les réseaux sociaux pour les chercheurs s’imposent au fil du temps auprès des communautés académiques, notamment grâce aux fonctionnalités de dépôt et de partage d’articles qu’ils proposent.

L’objet de cette étude est d’évaluer la proportion, la typologie (pre-print, version auteur non expertisée ; post-print auteur/éditeur, versions auteur et éditeur expertisées définitives) et la légalité des textes intégraux d’articles qui y sont déposés par les chercheurs, à partir d’un échantillon de 1 500 articles publiés entre 2013 et 2015 sélectionnés aléatoirement dans PubMed, en prenant pour exemple ResearchGate qui est très largement utilisé par la communauté médicale et biologique.

À titre de comparaison, l’accès au texte intégral des 1 500 articles via PubMed et PubMedCentral a également été évalué, mettant en évidence le rôle important que joue ResearchGate dans la fourniture de textes intégraux d’articles en biologie-médecine.

Cet article met également en perspective le positionnement des réseaux sociaux par rapport aux archives ouvertes et au libre accès.

URL : https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01582202

Catégories
EN

Make researchers revisit past publications to improve reproducibility

Authors : Clare Fiala, Eleftherios P. Diamandis

Scientific irreproducibility is a major issue that has recently increased attention from publishers, authors, funders and other players in the scientific arena. Published literature suggests that 50-80% of all science performed is irreproducible. While various solutions to this problem have been proposed, none of them are quick and/or cheap.

Here, we propose one way of reducing scientific irreproducibility by asking authors to revisit their previous publications and provide a commentary after five years. We believe that this measure will alert authors not to over sell their results and will help with better planning and execution of their experiments.

We invite scientific journals to adapt this proposal immediately as a prerequisite for publishing.

URL : Make researchers revisit past publications to improve reproducibility

DOI : http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.12715.1