How do we define, track, and measure trust in scholarly publishing?
Nicko Goncharoff presents an overview of the STM/CUJS China Symposium and offers key takeaways, including China’s increasing concern over APCs and Gold OA costs, divergent views on research integrity, and better routes to cooperation.
The Nelson Memo is being contested. Will the incumbents of the scholarly publishing world stand up for the Memo and fight for its funding?
“Researchers have only so many hours in a day; if they can spend one less hour on a research article because we have implemented improved workflows and better technology, that’s one more hour they can spend on research to try to save my life, and the lives of all ALS patients.” In today’s post, Bruce Rosenblum shares his experience as a clinical trial participant and how that contributed to scholarly publications.
Thoughts on open access (OA) from the perspectives of both the publisher and library communities at the Charleston Meeting.
What is the most likely scenario for implementation of the OSTP’s Nelson Memo? And what strategies will that offer for publishers?
What the public wants is better science, not open science. Plan S has put those two forces in conflict, and it is driving everybody crazy.
Are the APC levels set for high-end OA journals too low to be sustainable? Are there other ways that might help high-end OA journals pay their way?
Would a systemwide “flip” to open access by means of universal article-processing charges work? David Shulenberger argues that it would not, and he may be right — but not for the reasons he gives.
An interview with MacKenzie Smith and Ivy Anderson, discussing the recent Pay It Forward report on the economic impact of a shift to Gold open access for scholarly journals.
A new study from the University of California system confirms much of what we already knew about open access, particularly the increased financial burden it places on productive universities.
Open access publishing has gone through a number of stages. Though different people will classify these stages in diverse ways, one way to view this is to say that since the initial period of advocacy for open access, commercial interests have entered this market and are now prepared to augment their positions by leveraging their elite brands, using them, as it were, to draw manuscripts for a family of cascading products.
A report from Simba Information tallies the total value of the open access marketplace, putting OA at 2.3% of the total market for STM journals. It documents as well, without comment, that more and more OA activity is the business of for-profit companies.