OpenScienceMOOC/Module-6-Open-Access-to-Research-Papers

Learning Objectives:

LO6a: Understand the allowances for self-archiving in publishing contracts, including issues to do with copyright, licensing, article versions, availability, embargoes, and the types of outlets for self-archiving (knowledge).

LO6b: Gain an understanding of the history of scholarly publishing, and be able to articulate benefits of Open Access in terms of impact on society and our knowledge economy (knowledge).

LO6c: Develop a personal infrastructure for self-archiving (task).

Key components:

• Sharing research findings with international academic and non-academic communities without paywall and other usage restrictions.

• Personal academic impact and advantages of Open Access (e.g., increased citation counts, visibility, readership).

• Global, national, funder, and institutional policies and mandates.

• Pre-prints, post-prints, and versions of record (VOR).

• Different ‘types’ of Open Access: gold, green, diamond/platinum, black.

• The cost and economics of Open Access.

• Open Access platforms.

• Institutional and subject repositories .

• Scholarly Collaboration Networks (e.g., ResearchGate, Academia.edu).

• Open Access monographs and books.

• Pre-registration.

Who to involve:

• Individuals: Lauren Collister, Martin Paul Eve, Chris Chambers, Jessica Polka, Mark Patterson, Pablo Dorta-González, Ahmed Ogunlaja, Ricardo Hartley, Dasapta Erwin Irawan, Bjoern Brembs, Erin McKiernan, Anna Sharman, Naomi Penfold, Juan Pablo Alperin, Barbara Rivera, Roshan Karn.

• Organisations: DOAJ,, Open Library of Humanities, ASAPbio, Open Access advocacy groups, including local initiatives on the country and institute level.

• Other: SHERPA/RoMEO, Open Access Directory.

Key resources:

Tools

• Think, Check, Submit and Cofactor journal selector tool.

• SPARC Author Addendum and the Termination of Transfer tool, by Authors Alliance and Creative Commons.

• Open Access Journal Whitelist, QUEST Center. Contains biomedical open access journals that are listed on the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) and Pubmed Central.

• Unpaywall, Open Access Button.

• APCDOI, a program for determining how many DOIs are gold or hybrid Open Access and how much was spent on the article processing charge (APC) for these (Ryan Regier).

• Open Science Framework preprints and PrePubMed. Other repositories including:

  • SSRN (Social Sciences Research Network).

  • ChemRxiv (Chemistry).

  • ESSOAr (Earth Sciences).

  • Cogprints (Psychology, Neuroscience and Linguistics).

• ZeroDivZero Open conference paper platform for math, science, and engineering conferences.

• CORE, an aggregator of 125 million Open Access articles.

• Social Science Open Access Repository (SSOAR).

• LOADB, Listing of Open Access Databases.

• REDALYC, network of scientific journals of Latin America and the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal.

  • LA Referencia.

• Language-specific servers:

  • Aribixiv.

  • Frenxiv.

  • INA-Rxiv.

  • See also the Global Scholarly Publishing sources list.

• SHERPA/RoMEO - Publisher Copyright Policies and Self-Archiving.

  • DULCINEA (for Spanish journals).

  • Héloïse (for French journals).

• SHERPA Juliet - Research Funders’ Open Access policies.

• Wellcome Open Research and Gates Open Research.

• Open Access publishers:

  • MDPI, F1000, Hindawi, Cogent OA, Open Library of Humanities, BioMed Central, eLIFE, Frontiers, PLOS.

• Open Knowledge Maps.

• PASTEUR4OA, Open Access Policy Alignment Strategies for European Union Research.

• The Publishing Trap board game, to help researchers understand how money, intellectual property rights, and both open and closed publishing models affect the dissemination and impact of their work (UK Copyright Literacy).

• Mathoverflow and PhysicsOverflow.

• PubPub, collaborative community publishing.

• JSTOR, a portal for open content.

• Dimensions, for information on grants, publications, citations, clinical trials and patents.

• Preprint recommendation services:

  • preLights.

  • Peer Community in.

• Overlay journals:

  • Open Journals.

  • Discrete Analysis.

  • biOverlay.

Research Articles and Reports

• The Nine Flavours of Open Access Scholarly Publishing (Willinsky, 2003).

• The Development of Open Access Journal Publishing from 1993 to 2009 (Laakso et al., 2011).

• A Study of Open Access Journals Using Article Processing Charges (Solomon and Bjork, 2012).

• Open Access (the book) (Suber, 2012).

• Anatomy of Green Open Access (Bjork et al., 2013).

• The case for open preprints in biology (Desjardins-Proulx et al., 2013).

• arXiv e-prints and the journal of record: An analysis of roles and relationships (Larivière et al., 2013)

• Proportion of Open Access Papers Published in Peer-Reviewed Journals at the European and World Levels 1996-2013 (European Commission, 2014).

• Disrupting the subscription journals’ business model for the necessary large-scale transformation to open access (Schimmer et al., 2015).

• Hybrid open access—A longitudinal study (Laakso and Bjork, 2016).

• Point of View: How open science helps researchers succeed (McKiernan et al., 2016).

• Converting scholarly journals to Open Access: A review of approaches and experiences (Solomon et al., 2016).

• The academic, economic and societal impacts of Open Access: an evidence-based review (Tennant et al., 2016).

• Open Access policies and Science Europe: State of play (Crowfoot, 2017).

• Gold Open Access Publishing in Mega-Journals: Developing Countries Pay the Price of Western Premium Academic Output (Ellers et al., 2017).

• Looking into Pandora's Box: The Content of Sci-Hub and its Usage (Greshake, 2017).

• On the origin of nonequivalent states: How we can talk about preprints (Neylon et al., 2017).

• Open Access and OER in Latin America: A survey of the policy landscape in Chile, Colombia and Uruguay (Toledo, 2017).

• Africa's contribution to the global open access literature (Chirwa and Sife, 2018).

• Research: Sci-Hub provides access to nearly all scholarly literature (Himmelstein et al., 2018).

• Cultural, ideological and practical barriers to open access adoption within the UK Academy: an ethnographically framed examination (Johnson, 2018).

• Converting the Literature of a Scientific Field to Open Access Through Global Collaboration: the Experience of SCOAP3 in Particle Physics (Kohls and Mele, 2018).

• Open Access Initiatives and Networking in the Global South (Kuchma, 2018).

• Open access monitoring and business model in Latin America and Middle East: a comparative study based on DOAJ data and criteria (Lujano and Khalifa, 2018).

• The State of OA: A large-scale analysis of the prevalence and impact of Open Access articles (Piwowar et al., 2018).

• On the value of preprints: an early career researcher perspective [Sarabipour et al., 2018].

• Discipline-specific open access publishing practices and barriers to change: an evidence-based review (Severin et al., 2018).

• Authorial and institutional stratification in open access publishing: the case of global health research (Siler et al., 2018).

• The evolving preprint landscape: Introductory report for the Knowledge Exchange working group on preprints (Tennant et al., 2018).

• Who is pirating medical literature? A bibliometric review of 28 million Sci-Hub downloads (Till et al., 2018).

Key posts

• Good practices for university open-access policies, Harvard University, 2017.

• Why CC-BY?, OASPA.

• Open Access Policy concerning UNESCO publications, UNESCO.

• A genealogy of open access: negotiations between openness and access to research, Samuel Moore.

• Annoucing Direct2AAM: Helping authors find author accepted manuscripts, Open Access Button.

• Open access and development: Research findings, Elisa Liberatori Prati.

• DOAJ APC information as of Jan 31, 2018, Heather Morrison.

• Open access policies and mandates around the globe, Jayashree Rajagopalan.

• Getting Scientists Ready for Open Access: The Approaches of Forschungszentrum Julich, Thomas Arndt and Claudia Frick.

• Plan S and cOALition S.

• Sharing new educational resources on open licensing for preprints, Jessic Polka, Donna Okubo, Tim Vollmer.

Other

• OpenDOAR (Directory of Open Access Repositories) and the Registry of Open Access Repository Mandates and Policies (ROARMAP).

• UK Scholarly Communications Licence and model policy (UKSCL).

• Directory of Open Access Books (DOAB).

• Knowledge Unlatched.

• Compact on Open-Access Publishing Equity.

• Quality Open Access Market.

• Scientific Electronic Library Online, SciELO.

• SCOAP3 - Sponsoring Consortium for Open Access Publishing in Particle Physics.

• SPARC article and data sharing requirements by federal agency.

• Open APC initiative, information on fees paid for OA journal articles by universities and research institutions under an Open Database License.

• Free Journal Network.

• Information Note: Towards a Horizon 2020 platform for Open Access, European Commission.

• Declarations in Support of Open Access - the Open Access Directory.

  • The Budapest Open Access Initiative.

• HRCAK Repository of the Croatian OA journals.

• COPE preprints discussion document.

Tasks:

• Get an overview of the relevant journals and publishing outlets in your research discipline.

  • Which ones have Open Access options.

  • How much do they each charge for Open Access.

  • What funds are available to you to cover these (where relevant).

• Preferably, find out which diamond/platinum OA journals (i.e., those which do not charge APCs) with high-quality editorial policies exist in your field.

  • Check the description of the peer review process.

  • Check which other additional services are offered by the journal (e.g., XML conversion, publication of updated versions, text and data mining allowances).

  • Check journal ‘whitelists’ (e.g., The Norwegian Register for Scientific Journals, Series and Publishers).

• Draft a summary statement/report outlining the pros and cons of these outlets (e.g., editorial quality, OA policies).

  • What do your colleagues think about the credibility, advantages, and disadvantages of these outlets?

  • How does this compare to your views?

• Simple exercises on average "cost of a paper"; for example the average institute budget/publication output, or your last research grant/papers out compared to the average ‘gold Open Access’ cost in that discipline.

• Find out if you are eligible for funds to pay for article-processing charges APCs.

  • Is the policy from your funder or institute?

  • What are the conditions?

• Find a way to make all of your research papers legally freely available.

  • Use SHERPA/RoMEO to detangle the legalese in publishing contracts.

  • Check with Dissem.in which of your papers can be made Open Access via self-archiving.

  • Self-archive one paper (can be previously published) or share a pre-print to an archive.

  • Make sure to identify and include all relevant metadata (e.g. publisher requires citation with a URL to the final published version).

• Check ImpactStory to see the impact of your research outputs.

  • What can be improved?

  • What happens to your Open Access score when you self-archive your papers?

• Request an article using the OA Button.

  • Perhaps consider a Green OA advocacy volunteer effort for your discipline or a favorite journal in the spirit of the Library Pipeline Green OA Working Group.

• Look for a local OA journal at your university or in your region.

  • Is there a preprint server for your research discipline?