Skip to main content

Home/ OPERAS resources/ Group items tagged impact

Rss Feed Group items tagged

1More

UKSCL - 0 views

shared by Pierre Mounier on 13 Feb 18 - Cached
  •  
    "The UK-SCL is an open access policy mechanism which ensures researchers can retain re-use rights in their own work, they retain copyright and they retain the freedom to publish in the journal of their choice (assigning copyright to the publisher if necessary) Re-use rights retention enables early public communication of research findings and use in research and teaching, including online courses. Increased visibility of research outputs greatly improves opportunities for increased impact and citations. A single deposit action under the model policy ensures eligibility for REF2021 and compliance with most funder deposit criteria. Researchers retain copyright and remain free to assign it to the publisher"
1More

Linking impact factor to 'open access' charges creates more inequality in academic publ... - 0 views

  •  
    "Simply adding an 'open access' option to the existing prestige-based journal system at ever increasing costs is not the fundamental change publishing needs, says Bianca Kramer and Jeroen Bosman "
1More

Is the tail wagging the dog? Perversity in academic rewards - 0 views

  •  
    "The academic reward structure focuses heavily on the publication of novel results in high impact journals. This talk considers the problems this narrow focus is creating in research and its dissemination and how these activities go against some of the basic tenets of science itself. It suggests that Open Research offers a way to improve the veracity of scientific claims and then looks at some of the recent examples of a move away from the status quo over the past 18 months."
1More

Digital Infrastructures for Research 2017 (30 November 2017 - 1 December 2017) - 0 views

  •  
    "The effective implementation of OpenScience calls for a scientific communication ecosystem capable of enabling the "Open Science publishing principles" of transparency and reproducibility. Such ecosystem should provide tools, policies, and trust needed by scientists for sharing/interlinking (for "discovery" and "transparent evaluation") and re-using (for "reproducibility") all research products produced during the scientific process, e.g. literature, research data, methods, software, workflows, protocols, etc. OpenAIRE fosters OpenScience by advocating its publishing principles across Europe and research communities and by offering technical services in support of OA monitoring, research impact monitoring, and Open Science publishing. Its aim is to provide Research Infrastructures (RIs) with the services required to bridge the research life-cycle they support - where scientists produce research products - with the scholarly communication infrastructure - where scientists publish research products - in such a way science is reusable, reproducible, and transparently assessable. OpenAIRE is fostering the establishment of reliable, trusted, and long lasting RIs by compensating the lack of OS publishing solutions and providing the support required by RIs to upgrade existing solutions to meet OpenScience publishing needs (e.g. technical guidelines, best practices, OA mandates). To this aim, OpenAIRE is working closely with existing RIs to extend its service portfolio by introducing two services implementing the concept of "Open Science as a Service" (OSaaS): The Research Community Dashboard. Thanks to its functionality, scientists of RIs can find tools for publishing all their research products, such as literature, datasets, software, research packages, etc. (provide metadata, get DOIs, and ensure preservation of files), interlink such products manually or by exploiting advanced mining techniques, and integrate their services to automatically publish
1More

Quel délai pour le libre accès des revues de sciences humaines et sociales en... - 0 views

  •  
    "Cette étude a pour objet d'évaluer le bien-fondé de la mise en œuvre d'un principe de libre accès aux recherches en sciences humaines et sociales (SHS) en France, à partir d'une étude de ses effets sur la consultation des articles. Il s'agit de savoir si une politique de libre accès améliore effectivement ou non la visibilité des recherches, et dans quelle mesure. L'étude apporte des éclairages indispensables à la prise de décision au sujet de la diffusion des résultats de la recherche et sur l'effet observé des restrictions d'accès sur l'accès des publics (chercheurs et grand public) à ces résultats. Les enjeux du débat sont le choix de la « barrière mobile », c'est-à-dire la durée après la publication pour la mise en libre accès par la revue elle-même, et la durée de « l'embargo », c'est-à-dire la durée minimale avant l'autorisation donnée par la revue à l'auto-archivage par le chercheur de ses articles. L'étude a consisté à quantifier l'impact de la durée de la barrière mobile sur l'audience de la revue et de la recherche. Les résultats obtenus indiquent que l'existence d'une barrière à la diffusion fait perdre de l'audience à la revue, et ce dès une durée d'un an. Dans la mesure où les coûts de marginaux de diffusion des articles sur les plateformes numériques sont très faibles, voire nuls, cette perte d'audience représente ce que l'on appelle une perte « de poids mort ». Nos résultats objectivent donc la mise en place d'une durée de barrière mobile relativement courte (moins d'un an) en comparaison aux durées évoquées dans le débat public pour les SHS (2 à 3 ans)."
1More

Impact of Social Sciences - Journal flipping or a public open access infrastructure? Wh... - 0 views

  •  
    "Open access (OA) is advocated by science funders, policymakers and researchers alike. It will most likely be the default way of publishing in the not-so-distant future. Nonetheless, the dominant approach to achieve OA at the moment - journal flipping - could have adverse long-term effects for science. To try to stir debate, we here present two dichotomic scenarios for open access in 20 years' time. Our approach is collaborative and open - we recognise that our position is not uncontroversial and welcome engagement from those who would advocate otherwise. What is missing in the scenarios presented below? Which scenario would be better? Which is most realistic?"
1 - 6 of 6
Showing 20 items per page