219 research outputs found
Open Access Monograph Video Case Study - Stephen Pinfield
No full textVideo case study in which Professor Stephen Pinfield (Professor of Information Services Management, Information School) discusses the experience of publishing an open access monograph.</p
Climbing the scholarly publishing mountain with SHERPA
No full textJohn MacColl and Stephen Pinfield look at the background to the SHERPA project and discuss some of the challenges ahead.Publisher PD
Making Open Access work: Clustering analysis of academic discourse suggests OA is still grappling with controversy.
No full textOpen Access Week starts this Monday 19th October. In the run-up, Stephen Pinfield provides an overview of eighteen propositions on open access identified through an extensive analysis of the discourse. Key elements remain controversial. Particularly in relation to quality, researchers continue to view open access publishing with disinterest, suspicion and scepticism. It is clear that whilst OA has come a long way in the last five years, there is still a lot still to do in making open access work
Enabling authors to pay for open access: the gold open access market and the role of an institutional central fund
No full textHaving tracked and analysed the usage data of one university’s central open access fund over an eight year period, Stephen Pinfield shares findings from a detailed case study of the paid-for Gold Open Access market. Mandates, particularly if accompanied by funding, have played a very important role in encouraging uptake of Gold OA. Communication was a crucial factor in making potential users of the fund aware of its existence and in helping to change perceptions of OA in general
Adoption of open access is rising - but so too are its costs
No full textOptions available to authors to make their work open access are on the rise. Adoption of open access itself is also rising, and usage of open-access materials is similarly increasing. However, alongside rising access levels another, less positive rise can also be observed: the costs of open access are increasing and at a rate considerably above inflation. Stephen Pinfield and Rob Johnson outline some of the key findings of the recent Monitoring the Transition to Open Access report, offer their own personal reflection on some of the policy challenges it presents, and suggest some possible ways forward for policymakers looking to control costs without dampening growth of OA
RoMEO Studies 4: An analysis of Journal publishers' Copyright Agreements
No full textThis article is the fourth in a series of six emanating from the UK JISC-funded RoMEO Project (Rights Metadata for Open archiving). It describes an analysis of 80 scholarly journal publishers’ copyright agreements with a particular view to their effect on author self-archiving. 90% of agreements asked for copyright transfer and 69% asked for it prior to refereeing the paper. 75% asked authors to warrant that their work had not been previously published although only two explicitly stated that they viewed self-archiving as prior publication. 28.5% of agreements provided authors with no usage rights over their own paper. Although 42.5% allowed self-archiving in some format, there was no consensus on the conditions under which self-archiving could take place. The article concludes that author-publisher copyright agreements should be reconsidered by a working party representing the needs of both partie
There are four schools of thought on reforming peer review – can they co-exist?
No full textOutlining their recent research into the different interests and commitments of groups looking to reform and improve scientific peer review, Ludo Waltman, Wolfgang Kaltenbrunner, Stephen Pinfield, and Helen Buckley Woods identify four schools of thought on the subject. Discussing their different aims and objectives, they highlight commonalities between them and also key areas in which they diverge. They suggest that in understanding these positions, it opens space for the purposeful inclusion of more varied forms of peer review for research
Can AI be used ethically to assist peer review?
No full textAs the rate and volume of academic publications has risen, so too has the pressure on journal editors to quickly find reviewers to assess the quality of academic work. In this context the potential of Artificial Intelligence (AI) to boost productivity and reduce workload has received significant attention. Drawing on evidence from an experiment utilising AI to learn and assess peer review outcomes, Alessandro Checco, Lorenzo Bracciale, Pierpaolo Loreti, Stephen Pinfield, and Giuseppe Bianchi, discuss the prospects for AI for assisting peer review and the potential ethical dilemmas its application might produce
Journals and repositories: an evolving relationship?
No full textIt is now widely accepted that there are two routes to open access (OA): OA repositories and OA journals. It is often assumed these are distinct alternative parallel tracks. However, it has recently become clear that there is potential for repositories and journals to interact with each other on an ongoing basis and between them to form a coherent OA scholarly communication system. This paper puts forward three possible models of interaction between repositories and journals; services such as arXiv and PubMed Central, and the work carried out by the RIOJA project, are working exemplars and pilot implementations of these models. The key issues associated with the widespread adoption of these models include repository infrastructure
development; changing ideas of the ‘journal’, ‘article’, and ‘publication’; version management; quality assurance; business and funding models; developing value-added features; content preservation; policy frameworks; and changing roles and cultures within the research community
RoMEO Studies 5: IPR issues for OAI Data and Service Providers
No full textThis paper is the fifth in a series of studies emanating from the UK JISC-funded RoMEO Project (Rights Metadata for Open-archiving). It reports the results of two surveys of OAI Data Providers (DPs) and Service Providers (SPs) with regards to the rights issues they face. It finds that very few DPs have rights agreements with depositing authors and that there is no standard approach to the creation of rights metadata. The paper considers the rights protection afforded individual and collections of metadata records under UK Law and contrasts this with DP and SP’s views on the rights status of metadata and how they wish to protect it. The majority of DP and SPs believe that a standard way of describing both the rights status of documents and of metadata would be usefu
- …
