Authorial and institutional stratification in open access publishing: the case of global health research

Authors: Kyle Siler, Stefanie Haustein, Elise Smith, Vincent Larivière, Juan Pablo Alperin

Abstract: Using a database of recent articles published in the field of Global Health research, we examine institutional sources of stratification in publishing access outcomes. Traditionally, the focus on inequality in scientific publishing has focused on prestige hierarchies in established print journals. This project examines stratification in contemporary publishing with a particular focus on subscription vs. various Open Access (OA) publishing options. Findings show that authors working at lower-ranked universities are more likely to publish in closed/paywalled outlets, and less likely to choose outlets that involve some sort of Article Processing Charge (APCs; gold or hybrid OA). We also analyze institutional differences and stratification in the APC costs paid in various journals. Authors affiliated with higher-ranked institutions, as well as hospitals and non-profit organizations pay relatively higher APCs for gold and hybrid OA publications. Results suggest that authors affiliated with high-ranked universities and well-funded institutions tend to have more resources to choose pay options with publishing. Our research suggests new professional hierarchies developing in contemporary publishing, where various OA publishing options are becoming increasingly prominent. Just as there is stratification in institutional representation between different types of publishing access, there is also inequality within access types.

Citation: Siler K, Haustein S, Smith E, Larivière V, Alperin JP. (2018) Authorial and institutional stratification in open access publishing: the case of global health research. PeerJ 6:e4269 https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.4269

View

An Evidence-Based Review of Academic Web Search Engines, 2014-2016: Implications for Librarians’ Practice and Research Agenda

Author: Fagan, Jody Condit

Abstract: Academic web search engines have become central to scholarly research. While the fitness of Google Scholar for research purposes has been examined repeatedly, Microsoft Academic and Google Books have not received much attention. Recent studies have much to tell us about the coverage and utility of Google Scholar, its coverage of the sciences, and its utility for evaluating researcher impact. But other aspects have been woefully understudied, such as coverage of the arts and humanities, books, and non-Western, non-English publications. User research has also tapered off. A small number of articles hint at the opportunity for librarians to become expert advisors concerning opportunities of scholarly communication made possible or enhanced by these platforms. This article seeks to summarize research concerning Google Scholar, Google Books, and Microsoft Academic from the past three years with a mind to informing practice and setting a research agenda. Selected literature from earlier time periods is included to illuminate key findings and to help shape the proposed research agenda, especially in understudied areas.

Citation: Fagan, Jody Condit. “An Evidence-Based Review of Academic Web Search Engines, 2014-2016: Implications for Librarians’ Practice and Research Agenda.” Information Technology and Libraries 36(2), 2017. DOI: 10.6017/ital.v36i2.9718

View

Source: An Evidence-Based Review of Academic Web Search Engines, 2014-2016: Implications for Librarians’ Practice and Research Agenda

Community Aligned Service Providers – ALA Midwinter 2018 ACRL/SPARC Forum

Author: Chealsye Bowley

Abstract: Panel presentation on community aligned service providers for the ACRL/SPARC Forum session at ALA Midwinter 2018. Session description: “Shaping the Landscape of Open Access Publishing: Individually, Locally, Collectively.” With the acquisition and creation of scholarly communication platforms/infrastructure by major commercial entities, the balance of influence continues to shift. This forum will bring together library stakeholders for a conversation about how the library community can reassert its influence to shape the open access publishing landscape. This session is designed to reach a broad range of librarians and other information professionals. Panelists will focus on: 1) individual action: ‘what can one person do?’; 2) local coordinated action: ‘how can one group or institution effect change?’; and, 3) collective action: ‘how can libraries work together to provide sustainable alternatives?’

Citation:Community Aligned Service Providers – ALA Midwinter 2018 ACRL/SPARC Forum Bowley, C. (2018, February 10). . Retrieved from osf.io/preprints/lissa/8wn5p

View

From Wikidata to Scholia: creating structured linked data to generate scholarly profiles

Authors: Mairelys Lemus-Rojas, Jere Odell

Abstract: Wikidata, the newest project of the Wikimedia Foundation, has been increasingly attracting contributors from all over the world. Wikidata is a free knowledge base that stores multilingual structured linked data. At the IUPUI University Library, we are working on a project where our goal is to provide a presence in Wikidata for our faculty members. As we will demonstrate, adding data about our faculty will enable us to generate scholarly profiles for them. For the pilot project, we selected 18 faculty members from the IU Lilly Family School of Philanthropy. The School of Philanthropy, located in the IUPUI campus, is the first school dedicated solely to philanthropy education and research. The school and its faculty also provide many widely used works of scholarship. We approached this project by using Wikidata as the repository for all the data associated with the faculty members. We created entries (namely Items in Wikidata) for the selected group of faculty, their co-authors, and all their published articles with DOIs. To create entries for the articles, we used a tool that allows users to enter either a DOI, PMID or PMCID and generates the Items directly in Wikidata. We then used Scholia, an open source application, to generate the scholarly profiles. Scholia queries Wikidata and presents the user with aggregated and graphically-displayed information. It also enables us, for example, to learn more about our faculty members’ collaborators and scholarly interests. In addition to demonstrating our methods for contributing content to a structured linked data knowledge base, this presentation will share the potential benefits and challenges for libraries to consider. Libraries have both the expertise and data sources to take a leading role in contributing to and promoting open knowledge projects for their communities.

Citation: Lemus-Rojas, M., & Odell, J. (2018, February 16). From Wikidata to Scholia: creating structured linked data to generate scholarly profiles. http://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/GXQ8D

View

A landscape study on open access and monographs: Policies, funding and publishing in eight European countries

Author: Eelco Ferwerda, Frances Pinter, and Niels Stern

Abstract: Knowledge Exchange is continously active in promoting Open Access by bringing together Open Access experts from all six KE-countries. This study was initiated by Knowledge Exchange and financed by Knowledge ExchangeFWFCRIStin and Couperin, and together with the skilled expertise of Eelco Ferwerda, Frances Pinter and Niels Stern, we can now publish the biggest landscape study on the conditions and potentials for Open Access books yet.

The field of OA monographs is still in its early evolution and therefore 73 in-depth conversations were conducted to understand the different developments among three stakeholder groups: Publishers, funders and libraries. The importance of author attitudes, scholarly reward and incentive systems is also raised throughout the study by numerous interviewees.

Our study shows that although the main OA policies do not include monographs, conversations about OA and monographs are surfacing and are expected to be accelerating over the next few years.

The general explanation for monographs not being included in policies is the global focus on journal publishing and the perception that monographs are more complex to deal with than journals. Some also point to a lack of demand yet from authors.

In general, OA book publishers will comply with gold OA policies from funders and institutions. This is not the case for green OA. It appears that the current self archiving policies from publishers for books are largely restricted to book chapters.

The report also points towards the fact that funding schemes for books are lagging behind schemes for articles and their availability to fund the publishing process is somewhat ad hoc across the countries we’ve surveyed. Nevertheless the authors are ‘cautiously optimistic’ about the prospects for OA and monographs.

The report creates an overview of both the OA monographs policies, funding streams and publishing models for all eight countries for the first time. This is used to point towards areas of future efforts.

Citation: Eelco Ferwerda, Frances Pinter, and Niels Stern. (2017). A landscape study on open access and monographs: Policies, funding and publishing in eight European countries.  Knowledge Exchange. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.815932.

View

Changing publishing ecologies: A landscape study of new university presses and academic-led publishing

Authors: Janneke Adema and Graham Stone, with an introduction by Chris Keene

Abstract: In this report, we have captured the current landscape of new university presses (NUPs) and academic-led presses (ALPs) emerging within the UK. Taking different approaches for these two types of press we have captured the take-up, reasoning and characteristics of these initiatives, as well as future plans. The report concludes with a series of recommendations to help support and foster new developments in this space, to share best practice and collaboration and to identify the tools and services that will facilitate further innovation.

Citation: Janneke Adema and Graham Stone. “Changing publishing ecologies: A landscape study of new university presses and academic-led publishing.” JISC.

View

More than a House of Cards: Developing a Firm Foundation for Streaming Media and Consumer-Licensed Content in the Library

Author: William Cross

Abstract: This article will introduce traditional library practice for licensing multimedia content and discuss the way that consumer-licensing and streaming services disrupt that practice. Sections II and III describe the statutory copyright regime designed by Congress to facilitate the socially-valuable work done by libraries and the impact of the move from ownership to licensed content. Collecting multimedia materials has always presented special legal challenges for libraries, particularly as licensed content has replaced the traditional practice of purchasing and circulation based on the first sale doctrine. These issues have grown even more complex as streaming services like Netflix and Amazon and video game downloads through services like Steam have come to dominate the landscape. Section IV will describe the way that consumer-licensed materials, which not only remove the ownership that undergirds library practice, but also the ability to negotiate for library use, imperil the congressionally-designed balance. Section V will present a path forward for libraries to develop robust, cutting-edge collections that reflect a sophisticated understanding of the contractual and copyright issues at play.

Citation: Cross, W. (2016). More than a House of Cards: Developing a Firm Foundation for Streaming Media and Consumer-Licensed Content in the Library. Journal of Copyright in Education and Librarianship, 1(1), 1-24. DOI: 10.17161/jcel.v1i1.5919

View

Expanding Perspectives on Open Science: Communities, Cultures and Diversity in Concepts and Practices

Editors:

Abstract: Twenty-one years ago, the term ‘electronic publishing’ promised all manner of potential that the Web and network technologies could bring to scholarly communication, scientific research and technical innovation. Over the last two decades, tremendous developments have indeed taken place across all of these domains. One of the most important of these has been Open Science; perhaps the most widely discussed topic in research communications today.

This book presents the proceedings of Elpub 2017, the 21st edition of the International Conference on Electronic Publishing, held in Limassol, Cyprus, in June 2017. Continuing the tradition of bringing together academics, publishers, lecturers, librarians, developers, entrepreneurs, users and all other stakeholders interested in the issues surrounding electronic publishing, this edition of the conference focuses on Open Science, and the 27 research and practitioner papers and 1 poster included here reflect the results and ideas of researchers and practitioners with diverse backgrounds from all around the world with regard to this important subject.

Intended to generate discussion and debate on the potential and limitations of openness, the book addresses the current challenges and opportunities in the ecosystem of Open Science, and explores how to move forward in developing an inclusive system that will work for a much broader range of participants. It will be of interest to all those concerned with electronic publishing, and Open Science in particular.

Citation: Chan L & Loizides F. (2017). Expanding Perspectives on Open Science: Communities, Cultures and Diversity in Concepts and Practices. Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Electronic Publishing. IOS Press Ebooks. ISBN 978-1-61499-769-6 (online)

View

Opening Up Communication: Assessing Open Access Practices in the Communication Studies Discipline

Author: Teresa Auch Schultz

Abstract: INTRODUCTION Open access (OA) citation effect studies have looked at a number of disciplines but not yet the field of communication studies. This study researched how communication studies fare with the open access citation effect, as well as whether researchers follow their journal deposit policies. METHOD The study tracked 920 articles published in 2011 and 2012 from 10 journals and then searched for citations and an OA version using the program Publish or Perish. Deposit policies of each of the journals were gathered from SHERPA/RoMEO and used to evaluate OA versions. RESULTS From the sample, 42 percent had OA versions available. Of those OA articles, 363 appeared to violate publisher deposit policies by depositing the version of record, but the study failed to identify post-print versions for 87 percent of the total sample for the journals that allowed it. All articles with an OA version had a median of 17 citations, compared to only nine citations for non-OA articles. DISCUSSION & CONCLUSION The citation averages, which are statistically significant, show a positive correlation between OA and the number of citations. The study also shows communication studies researchers are taking part in open access but perhaps without the full understanding of their publisher’s policies.

Citation: Schultz, T.A., (2017). Opening Up Communication: Assessing Open Access Practices in the Communication Studies Discipline. Journal of Librarianship and Scholarly Communication. 5(1). DOI: http://doi.org/10.7710/2162-3309.2131

View

Altmetrics and Archives

Author: Elizabeth Joan Kelly

Abstract: Altmetrics are an alternative to traditional measurement of the impact of published resources. While altmetrics are primarily used by researchers and institutions to measure the impact of scholarly publications online, they can also be used by archives to measure the impact of their diverse online holdings, including digitized and born-digital collections, digital exhibits, repository websites, and online finding aids. Furthermore, altmetrics may fill a need for user engagement assessments for cultural heritage organizations. This article introduces the concept of altmetrics for archives and discusses barriers to adoption, best practices for collection, and potential further areas of study.

Citation: Kelly, Elizabeth Joan (2017) “Altmetrics and Archives,” Journal of Contemporary Archival Studies: Vol. 4 , Article 1. Available at: http://elischolar.library.yale.edu/jcas/vol4/iss1/1

View