Taylor and Francis Open Access July 2014
In the first few months of 2014 Taylor & Francis carried out a worldwide survey, with the aim of exploring journal authors’ views on open access.
Having previously conducted a survey on open access in 2013, we have been able to see how authors’ opinions have developed, and whether the discussion and debate on open access has helped to inform and shape views.
With responses to both the 2013 and 2014 survey given side-by-side, you can easily see how attitudes have changed. Alongside this, the 2014 survey explores many new areas and gives a fascinating insight into authors’ current perceptions of open access.
View full-text report
New York Law Journal 12 May 2014
This column revisits a challenging topic that cuts across the spectrum of complex litigation—the reliance upon and use of unreliable hearsay literature by expert testifiers. Often these are technical or scientific articles published in some journal with a claim that the published work product has been “peer reviewed.”
See also ‘Unreliable’ Articles: More on Peer Review’s Frailties
The Guardian Tania Browne 29 April 2014
The scientific publishing world is dominated by journals produced by companies such as Elsevier, Nature Publishing Group and Wiley. Journals are the basic scientific currency, the way ideas are communicated. But they’re often only available by subscription, and most subscribers are academic institutions and libraries. Readers usually rely on being part of an organisation that subscribes to them because subscriptions cost a small fortune. In fact, the subscription price of journals has risen at nearly four times the rate of inflation since 1986, so it’s hard to keep up any other way. Even some institutions and libraries are now dropping subscriptions to journals – they can no longer afford it. And as neither the authors of published papers nor the experts who carry out peer review for the journals are paid for their work, such charges can seem perplexing.
Synapse: the ucsf student newspaper Alexandra Greer 27 March 2014
For scientists around the world, the open access movement has radically changed how journal articles are read and distributed by offering an alternative to the dominant subscription-based access model. Today, anyone can access at least some scientific articles on the web. In this three-part series, we examine the impact of open access journals on the scientific publishing industry.
The Conversation 13 December 2013
The publishing giant Elsevier owns much of the world’s academic knowledge, in the form of article copyright. In the past few weeks it has stepped up enforcement of its property rights, issuing “take-down notices” to Academia.edu, where many researchers post PDFs of their articles.
The articles in question were published in Elsevier-owned journals, and are legally available only by subscription, often at exorbitant prices.
Sydney Morning Herald Asa Wahlquist 21 November 2013
One Australian university is pushing the boundaries of unrestricted access to its scholarly research.
t is one of the greatest challenges so far to the claim that academics live in ivory towers. Peer-reviewed research from academics at the University of Technology, Sydney (UTS) will soon be available to the general public, free of charge, on iTunes, the so-called jukebox software used to download music, film and book files.
The Conversation James Bradley 4 November 2013
Open access has become the catch-cry of academic science, demanding all research be freely available to anyone. But it leaves open the question of how publishers are to make money.
Science, the widely respected magazine of the American Association for the Advancement of Science recently commissioned a sting operation aimed at revealing serious abuses within the world of open access publishing.
Predatory open-access publishing is discussed.
The Conversation 1 October 2013
“Publish or perish” is a well-known maxim within academia.
A paper published overnight by American researchers Heather Piwowar and Todd Vision in the open access journal PeerJ has finally reliably demonstrated what many data sharing advocates have been saying for a long time.
Far from hurting the ability to publish, sharing data in a public repository can actually lead to a tangible benefit to your publication record through increased citations.