Open evaluation a vision for entirely transparent post…

Statut

Open evaluation: a vision for entirely transparent post-publication peer review and rating for science :

“The two major functions of a scientific publishing system are to provide access to and evaluation of scientific papers. While open access (OA) is becoming a reality, open evaluation (OE), the other side of the coin, has received less attention. Evaluation steers the attention of the scientific community and thus the very course of science. It also influences the use of scientific findings in public policy. The current system of scientific publishing provides only journal prestige as an indication of the quality of new papers and relies on a non-transparent and noisy pre-publication peer-review process, which delays publication by many months on average. Here I propose an OE system, in which papers are evaluated post-publication in an ongoing fashion by means of open peer review and rating. Through signed ratings and reviews, scientists steer the attention of their field and build their reputation. Reviewers are motivated to be objective, because low-quality or self-serving signed evaluations will negatively impact their reputation. A core feature of this proposal is a division of powers between the accumulation of evaluative evidence and the analysis of this evidence by paper evaluation functions (PEFs). PEFs can be freely defined by individuals or groups (e.g., scientific societies) and provide a plurality of perspectives on the scientific literature. Simple PEFs will use averages of ratings, weighting reviewers (e.g., by H-index), and rating scales (e.g., by relevance to a decision process) in different ways. Complex PEFs will use advanced statistical techniques to infer the quality of a paper. Papers with initially promising ratings will be more deeply evaluated. The continual refinement of PEFs in response to attempts by individuals to influence evaluations in their own favor will make the system ungameable. OA and OE together have the power to revolutionize scientific publishing and usher in a new culture of transparency, constructive criticism, and collaboration.”

URL : http://www.frontiersin.org/Computational_Neuroscience/10.3389/fncom.2012.00079/full

The Citation Merit of Scientific Publications We…

Statut

The Citation Merit of Scientific Publications :

“We propose a new method to assess the merit of any set of scientific papers in a given field based on the citations they receive. Given a field and a citation impact indicator, such as the mean citation or the h-index, the merit of a given set of n articles is identified with the probability that a randomly drawn set of n articles from a given pool of articles in that field has a lower citation impact according to the indicator in question. The method allows for comparisons between sets of articles of different sizes and fields. Using a dataset acquired from Thomson Scientific that contains the articles published in the periodical literature in the period 1998–2007, we show that the novel approach yields rankings of research units different from those obtained by a direct application of the mean citation or the h-index.”

URL : http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0049156

Les mutations du paysage de l’information scientifique …

Statut

Les mutations du paysage de l’information scientifique :

“En quelques années, les nouvelles technologies de l’information et de la communication (NTIC) ont modifié le paysage de l’information scientifique et technique (IST) en profondeur. Toute la chaîne de valeur de la communication scientifique est concernée, depuis la production et la diffusion de l’information jusqu’à l’acquisition et la consommation des produits et services. Cette modification a fait l’objet d’un grand nombre d’études et de publications. Notre chapitre tente de dégager les grandes lignes de l’évolution en cours pour donner aux professionnels de l’information les moyens de mieux comprendre les enjeux et répondre aux besoins des jeunes chercheurs. Nous dressons ici un panorama : l’objectif n’est pas de fournir de nouvelles informations mais de proposer une structure et aussi, une perspective, c’est-à-dire une certaine manière de voir, une approche.”

URL : http://archivesic.ccsd.cnrs.fr/sic_00744828

Scientists who engage with society perform better academically…

Statut

Scientists who engage with society perform better academically :

“Most scientific institutions acknowledge the importance of opening the so-called ‘ivory tower’ of academic research through popularization, industrial collaboration or teaching. However, little is known about the actual openness of scientific institutions and how their proclaimed priorities translate into concrete measures. This paper gives an idea of some actual practices by studying three key points: the proportion of researchers who are active in wider dissemination, the academic productivity of these scientists, and the institutional recognition of their wider dissemination activities in terms of their careers. We analyze extensive data about the academic production, career recognition and teaching or public/industrial outreach of several thousand of scientists, from many disciplines, from France’s Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique. We find that, contrary to what is often suggested, scientists active in wider dissemination are also more active academically. However, their dissemination activities have almost no impact (positive or negative) on their careers.”

URL : http://arxiv.org/abs/0810.4672

Infrastructure Development for Strengthening the Capacity of International…

Statut

Infrastructure Development for Strengthening the Capacity of International Scholarly Communication :

“Japan has achieved social and economic growth through its strengths in science and technology. However, in the face of globalisation, various factors, including the continued appreciation of the yen, the emerging economic powers, and a declining birth rate combined with an aging population have weakened Japan’s competitiveness in the world and resulted in a prevalent sense of stagnation in society.

Intellectual assets are among such important resources for Japan, which is a country with limited material resources, that greater efforts on the promotion of science and technology, and the promotion of creative and forward-looking scientific research, in particular, have to be taken than ever in order to enhance Japan’s international competitiveness.

To promote scientific research, it is essential that timely and wide access to information be guaranteed to those who need it. At the same time, it is important to promptly publish and distribute outstanding research results domestically and internationally, and to make use of them in society. Doing so will increase Japan’s intellectual presence and attract excellent researchers from around the world, leading to further development of science in Japan and stimulation of society as a whole.”

URL : http://www.mext.go.jp/component/b_menu/shingi/toushin/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2012/10/25/1323890_4_2.pdf

Anatomy of open access publishing a study of…

Statut

Anatomy of open access publishing: a study of longitudinal development and internal structure :

Background : Open access (OA) is a revolutionary way of providing access to the scholarly journal literature made possible by the Internet. The primary aim of this study was to measure the volume of scientific articles published in full immediate OA journals from 2000 to 2011, while observing longitudinal internal shifts in the structure of OA publishing concerning revenue models, publisher types and relative distribution among scientific disciplines. The secondary aim was to measure the share of OA articles of all journal articles, including articles made OA by publishers with a delay and individual author-paid OA articles in subscription journals (hybrid OA), as these subsets of OA publishing have mostly been ignored in previous studies.

Methods : Stratified random sampling of journals in the Directory of Open Access Journals (n = 787) was performed. The annual publication volumes spanning 2000 to 2011 were retrieved from major publication indexes and through manual data collection.

Results : An estimated 340,000 articles were published by 6,713 full immediate OA journals during 2011. OA journals requiring article-processing charges have become increasingly common, publishing 166,700 articles in 2011 (49% of all OA articles). This growth is related to the growth of commercial publishers, who, despite only a marginal presence a decade ago, have grown to become key actors on the OA scene, responsible for 120,000 of the articles published in 2011. Publication volume has grown within all major scientific disciplines, however, biomedicine has seen a particularly rapid 16-fold growth between 2000 (7,400 articles) and 2011 (120,900 articles). Over the past decade, OA journal publishing has steadily increased its relative share of all scholarly journal articles by about 1% annually. Approximately 17% of the 1.66 million articles published during 2011 and indexed in the most comprehensive article-level index of scholarly articles (Scopus) are available OA through journal publishers, most articles immediately (12%) but some within 12 months of publication (5%).

Conclusions : OA journal publishing is disrupting the dominant subscription-based model of scientific publishing, having rapidly grown in relative annual share of published journal articles during the last decade.”

URL : http://www.biomedcentral.com/1741-7015/10/124

The Role of the Academic Journal Publisher and…

Statut

The Role of the Academic Journal Publisher and Open Access Publishing Models :

“This article explores the role and value of the academic journal publisher as paradigms of Open Access gain momentum and challenge the standards of paid subscription models. To recover the costs of publication services (which include everything from printing copies to online hosting and protection of intellectual property rights), publishers have traditionally employed a model in which subscribing individuals or institutions pay for access to content. The two main versions of Open Access publishing currently at large—Gold (in which a funding body or person pays the publisher to make the content freely available) and Green (in which there are no payments made for publication and articles are archived in free public repositories)—pose a challenge to the user-pays models that have served as a foundation of the business since its inception. However, these changes do not portend an undermining of the importance or viability of the academic journal publisher.”

The academic journal-publishing industry was born in 1665, when the Royal Society in London launched the world’s first peer-reviewed journal, Philosophical Transactions. In the years since, the industry has evolved a great deal, but the role of the academic journal publisher has remained largely unchanged. We continue to perform the functions that the Royal Society envisioned so long ago: registering and date stamping new research findings across the disciplines; ensuring the highest quality through a rigorous system of peer review; disseminating material as broadly as possible so that those who require it may access it; and creating a permanent archive as a legacy for future generations. Publishers of academic journals have long played a vital role in the research process, and we believe our work will continue to be valued highly by researchers, students, practitioners, and librarians for many years to come.

Today, about 2,000 publishers—including learned societies, other not-for-profit organizations, and commercial enterprises—produce more than 25,000 journals across the disciplines (Ware and Mabe 2009). The journal-publishing enterprise is a complex one that requires significant expertise and resources. For each of the 1.5 million journal articles which appear each year, publishers manage a complex process of peer review, including the appointing and relationship management of editorial boards; the licensing of editorial office workflow systems; strategic development and branding; the copyediting and formatting of papers for both print and electronic production; print manufacture, mailing, and warehousing; enhanced electronic features such as linking and citation metrics; the facilitation of discovery and access, involving highly sophisticated and expensive online platforms; and a range of other activities which ensure quality, consistency, authority, stewardship, and the protection of the author’s and the publisher’s intellectual property rights. Much of this work requires specialized training and/or education, and our industry employs about 110,000 people globally in a range of roles (Ware and Mabe 2009). Publishers also invest heavily in supporting the editorial process and in developing new systems and technologies which aid in preparing and disseminating research material. Collectively, we have invested more than $3.5 billion in online publishing technology alone since the year 2000 (Taylor, Russell and Mabe 2010).

For many decades, journal publishers recovered costs via a subscription model, in which libraries and/or individuals purchased access (originally print copies and increasingly a combination of print and online access) to the journals. The Internet and the new communication tools which have resulted from it have allowed us to experiment with and develop a range of new models for getting the content we publish into the hands of people who wish to have it. Over the past 15–20 years, the combination of investments in technology (by publishers as well as others), and the formation of library purchasing consortia around the world (assisted by publishers, in many cases), has significantly and cost-effectively accelerated and broadened access to, and usage of, journal articles (see, for example, RIN (2009a), which shows that, in the UK, full-text article downloads more than doubled between the academic years 2003–04 and 2006–07, with a compound annual growth rate of 21.7% and with the cost of access falling to about 80 pence per article). Publishers and philanthropic organizations have also formed partnerships which have allowed for free or very low-cost access to academic journals in the developing world, meaning that more researchers and practitioners in these areas now have access to the most current research findings (see www.research4life.org/about.html). A key feature of the subscription model which has existed for so many years is that it has provided publishers with a reliable way to recover costs and earn a profit (or, for not-for-profit publishers, a surplus) that can be reinvested in the business.”

URL : http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1528-3585.2012.00495.x/full