1,721,170 research outputs found
Open Access - Stevan Harnad im Interview
Full text linkInterview with Stevan Harnad, advocate of Open Access
Open Access: Stevan Harnad im Interview
No full textMitteilungen der VÖB 65 (2012) Nr. 2 interview of Stevan Harnad about Open Access
Open Access: Stevan Harnad im Interview
Full text linkMitteilungen der VÖB 65 (2012) Nr. 2 interview of Stevan Harnad about Open Access
Entrevista: Stevan Harnad
No full textProfessor Stevan Harnad*, filho de Hernád István e Hesslein István, húngaro, nasceu em Budapest, nasceu cientista na área cognitiva. Ele fez seus trabalhos de prégraduação na Universidade McGill e graduou-se pela Universidade de Princeton University. Atualmente, ele ocupa a cátedra de pesquisa em Ciência Cognitiva na Universidade de Quebec, em Montreal – Canadá (UQAM) e é professor de Ciências Cognitivas na Universidade de Southampton. Participa, como membro externo, da Academia de Ciência Húngara. Sua pesquisa está concentrada nas áreas de categorização, comunicação e cognição
Open Access 2012: achievements, further steps, and obstacles. An interview with Stevan Harnad
No full textOn the occasion of Open Access Week (22-28 October) I had a talk with Stevan Harnad, a pioneer and one of the world’s best-known Open Access advocates, author of the Subversive proposal (1994-1995) which triggered the whole movement. Professor Harnad highlights achievements, further steps, and obstacles ten years after the Open Access manifesto of the Budapest Open Access Initiative
Open Access 2012: achievements, further steps, and obstacles. An interview with Stevan Harnad
Full text linkn the occasion of Open Access Week (22-28 October) I had a talk with Stevan Harnad, a pioneer and one of the world’s best-known Open Access advocates, author of the Subversive proposal (1994-1995) which triggered the whole movement. Professor Harnad highlights achievements, further steps, and obstacles ten years after the Open Access manifesto of the Budapest Open Access Initiative
Citebase Search: Autonomous Citation Database for e-Print Archives
No full textCitebase is a culmination of the Opcit Project and the Open Archives Initiative. The Opcit Project's aim to citation-link arXiv.org was coupled with the interoperability of the OAI to develop a cross-archive search engine with the ability to harvest, parse, and link research paper bibliographies. These citation links create a classic citation database which is used to generate citation analysis and navigation over the e-print literature. Citebase is now linked from arXiv.org, alongside SLAC/SPIRES, and is integrated with e-Prints.org repositories using Paracite
No-Fault Peer Review Charges: The Price of Selectivity Need Not Be Access Denied or Delayed
No full textPlans by universities and research funders to pay the costs of Open Access Publishing ("Gold OA") are premature. Funds are short; 80% of journals (including virtually all the top journals) are still subscription-based, tying up the potential funds to pay for Gold OA; the asking price for Gold OA is still high; and there is concern that paying to publish may inflate acceptance rates and lower quality standards. What is needed now is for universities and funders to mandate OA self-archiving (of authors' final peer-reviewed drafts, immediately upon acceptance for publication) ("Green OA"). That will provide immediate OA; and if and when universal Green OA should go on to make subscriptions unsustainable (because users are satisfied with just the Green OA versions) that will in turn induce journals to cut costs (print edition, online edition, access-provision, archiving), downsize to just providing the service of peer review, and convert to the Gold OA cost-recovery model; meanwhile, the subscription cancellations will have released the funds to pay these residual service costs. The natural way to charge for the service of peer review then will be on a "no-fault basis," with the author's institution or funder paying for each round of refereeing, regardless of outcome (acceptance, revision/re-refereeing, or rejection). This will minimize cost while protecting against inflated acceptance rates and decline in quality standards
Worldwide open access: UK leadership?
No full textThe web is destined to become humankind's cognitive commons, where digital knowledge is jointly created and freely shared. The UK has been a leader in the global movement toward open access (OA) to research but recently its leadership has been derailed by the joint influence of the publishing industry lobby from without and well-intentioned but premature and unhelpful over-reaching from within the OA movement itself. The result has been the extremely counterproductive ‘Finch Report’ followed by a new draft of the Research Councils UK (RCUK) OA mandate, downgrading the role of cost-free OA self-archiving of research publications (‘green OA’) in favor of paying subscription publishers over and above subscriptions, out of scarce research funds, in exchange for making single articles OA (‘hybrid gold OA’). The motivation of the new policy is to reform publication and to gain certain re-use rights (CC-BY), but the likely effect would be researcher resistance, very little OA and a waste of research funds. There is still time to fix the RCUK mandate and restore the UK's leadership by taking a few very specific steps to clarify and strengthen the green component by adding a mechanism for monitoring and verifying compliance, with consequences for non-compliance, along lines also being adopted in the EC and the US
OA advocate Stevan Harnad withdraws support for RCUK policy
Full text linkWhen on July 16th Research Councils UK (RCUK) published its updated Policy on Access to Research Outputs the Open Access (OA) movement greeted the news with enthusiasm. This was hardly surprising: unlike the recommendations in the controversial Finch Report (published a month earlier), RCUK stressed that it continues to view both gold OA publishing and green OA self-archiving as equal partners in any OA policy. One of the first to applaud the new policy was long-standing OA advocate, and self-styled archivangelist, Stevan Harnad. The minute the report was published a relieved Harnad began flooding mailing lists with messages congratulating RCUK on coming up with a policy that not only defied Finch, but was stronger than its current OA policy. But as Harnad set about talking up the policy, and seeking to win over sceptics and doubters, he himself began to have doubts. And eventually he was driven to the conclusion that he had no option but to withdraw his support for the RCUK policy — which he now characterises as “autistic”, and a “foolish, wasteful and counterproductive step backwards”. How has what at first sight seemed so desirable rapidly become something terrible? Curious to find out, I contacted Harnad. Below I publish the email interview that emerged from our conversation
- …
