Open Access, der entgeltfreie Zugang zu wissenschaftlichen Informationen, kann auf zwei Arten erreicht werden. Zum einen kommt das Self-Publishing in Frage, bei dem Wissenschaftler ihre Publikationen etwa in kostenfrei nutzbaren Journalen oder als kostenfrei nutzbare Monographien veröffentlichen. Das Self-Publishing wird in der Regel von einer Qualitätskontrolle durch Herausgeber oder unabhängige Gutachter (der so genannten Peer Review) begleitet. Alternativ kommt das Self-Archiving in Frage: Hier werden bereits anderweitig publizierte Werke, beispielsweise Artikel aus einem Journal oder Buchbeiträge, in einer Art Zweitverwertung auf Open-Access-Servern, den so genannten Repositories, Lesern entgeltfrei zugänglich gemacht.
Anders als beim Self-Publishing findet beim Self-Archiving in aller Regel keine eigene Qualitätskontrolle der Inhalte statt.
TP: Vernetzung tut not - 0 views
Science 2.0 -- Is Open Access Science the Future? - Scientific American - 0 views
-
Ironically, though, the Web provides better protection than the traditional journal system, Bradley maintains. Every change on a wiki gets a time stamp, “so if someone actually did try to scoop you, it would be very easy to prove your priority—and to embarrass them. I think that’s really what is going to drive open science: the fear factor. If you wait for the journals, your work won’t appear for another six to nine months. But with open science, your claim to priority is out there right away.”
-
Science could be next. A small but growing number of researchers (and not just the younger ones) have begun to carry out their work via the wide-open tools of Web 2.0. And although their efforts are still too scattered to be called a movement—yet—their experiences to date suggest that this kind of Web-based “Science 2.0” is not only more collegial than traditional science but considerably more productive.
-
Of course, many scientists remain wary of such openness—especially in the hypercompetitive biomedical fields, where patents, promotion and tenure can hinge on being the first to publish a new discovery. For these practitioners, Science 2.0 seems dangerous: putting your serious work out on blogs and social networks feels like an open invitation to have your lab notebooks vandalized—or, worse, your best ideas stolen and published by a rival. To advocates, however, an atmosphere of openness makes science more productive. “When you do your work online, out in the open,” Hooker says, “you quickly find that you’re not competing with other scientists anymore but cooperating with them.”
- ...4 more annotations...
MIT faculty open access to their scholarly articles - 0 views
-
In a move aimed at broadening access to MIT's research and scholarship, faculty at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology have voted to make their scholarly articles available to the public for free and open access on the Web.
-
"The vote is a signal to the world that we speak in a unified voice; that what we value is the free flow of ideas," said Bish Sinyal, chair of the MIT Faculty
-
Under the new policy, faculty authors give MIT nonexclusive permission to disseminate their journal articles for open access through DSpace, an open-source software platform
- ...5 more annotations...
1 - 4 of 4
Showing 20▼ items per page