Étiquette : scientific communication

Catégories
Non classé

One publisher’s journey through the public access debate…

One publisher’s journey through the public access debate :

« This paper presents the content of my closing address given at the Academic Publishing in Europe 2012 Conference. I share my perspective of the public access debate, as CEO of American Institute of Physics, a medium-size scientific publisher and my observations on our industry’s most important customers – the libraries. The origin of the often contentious public access debate can be traced back to a worthy goal shared by all stakeholders: the expansion of access to and broad use of scholarly publications. Starting with principles and recommendations set forth in the 2010 Scholarly Publishing Roundtable Report, I outline a productive and pragmatic path forward and identify appropriate and cost-effective options for expanding access. Furthermore, I review the major elements of public access policy development in the US since 2005, leading up to January 2012, a year after President Obama signed into public law the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010. This essay has been expanded to include additional information, covering the issue through September 2012 (submission date of this article), and addresses related government initiatives that appeared in the UK and the European Union. »

URL : http://iospress.metapress.com/content/9318j0n53511043p/fulltext.pdf

Catégories
Non classé

The Relationship between Ph D Students’ Excellence Scholarships…

The Relationship between Ph.D. Students’ Excellence Scholarships and their Research Productivity, Scientific Impact and Degree Completion :

« Drawing on three distinct sources of data (students, excellence scholarships and scientific publications) on the entire population of doctoral students in the province of Québec, this report presents evidence of a relationship between excellence scholarships and research productivity, scientific impact and degree completion. It shows that funded students publish more papers than their unfunded colleagues and that there is only a slight difference between funded and unfunded Ph.D. students in terms of scientific impact. Funded students are also more likely to graduate, and this effect is greater for students funded by the federal government. Finally, although funding is clearly linked to higher degree completion for students who did not publish, this relationship does not hold for those who manage to publish at least one paper during the course of their Ph.D. The paper concludes with a discussion of the implication of the findings for Canadian science policy. »

URL : http://2012.sticonference.org/Proceedings/vol2/Lariviere_Relationship_498.pdf

Catégories
Non classé

Scientific Publishing in West Africa A Comparison of…

Scientific Publishing in West Africa: A Comparison of Benin with Senegal and Ghana :

« We compared scientific indicators related to Benin, Senegal and Ghana. We collected data from Web of Science and used indicators like the yearly productivity, the language of publication, the type of publication, the citable documents, the publication fields, and the main international partners as well as the percentage of papers in collaboration. Results showed that Benin productivity is the lowest one; Ghana and Senegal competed over the period; depending on the type of documents under consideration, the positions of the three countries vary. Citable documents had an increasing trend for all the countries. There is less cooperation between African countries and Benin, Senegal and Ghana; colonial ties count much in their international partnership. Cooperation among the three countries is negligible. »

URL : http://2012.sticonference.org/Proceedings/vol2/Megnigbeto_Scientific_589.pdf

Catégories
EN Non classé

Beyond open access: an examination of Australian academic publication behaviour

This study explored the publication behaviour of academics from Australian universities and how this impacted on the adoption of open access models of scholarly publishing. Using grounded theory as its methodology, the study developed theoretical models that identified publication practice. The study also indicated how this practice had been influenced by ongoing changes in government policy associated with research recognition. While the government policies aimed to improve Australian research quality, studies such as this thesis assist in determining the impact that changes made to research evaluation policies may have on the research community and research dissemination.

The study examined data collected through three methods: focus groups held with Australian academics and publishers, an online survey of academics from Australian universities and interviews with Australian academics and university based e-press managers. In total, two hundred and eighty-one participants contributed to this study, including twenty-three in-depth interviewees and thirteen focus group participants. The survey participants represented a cross section of the Australian university community, whilst the focus groups and interviews represented academics from two universities, one from the Group of Eight and the other from the Australian Technology Network.

The outcome of this study was a number of theoretical models that suggested that the changing policies associated with research recognition have narrowed the publication behaviour of the Australian academic community and that this could be to the detriment of the adoption of alternative models of scholarly publishing. The publication behaviour, which had a focus on tiered journal listings, resulted in a dissemination pattern that was primarily directed to the academy. This was of concern for disciplines that had a practitioner-based research focus. Such disciplines would benefit from open access dissemination.

The study also examined engagement with institutional repositories and highlighted the importance of mediation in populating the content of repositories. The process of permission-based mandates was supported as a means to develop repository content. Permission-based mandates allow academics to enter a non-exclusive agreement with their university or institution so that the university can manage copyright and repository submission processes on behalf of the academic. Academics can then focus on the process of publication, while mediators can manage copyright and the repository submission processes.

URL : http://researchbank.rmit.edu.au/view/rmit:160184

Catégories
Non classé

Open access to scientific literature and research data…

Open access to scientific literature and research data: a window of opportunity for latin america :

« The advance that the international open access movement has had in the last decade may seem to suggest that we are witnessing an important change in the model of scientific communication. This paper introduces the fundamental concepts of this movement, and in turn tries to measure the impact it has had in Latin America based on the development of different strategies. »

URL : http://sedici.unlp.edu.ar/handle/10915/23865

Catégories
Non classé

Open evaluation a vision for entirely transparent post…

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

Catégories
Non classé

The Citation Merit of Scientific Publications We…

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