Summary of McKiernan's slides with links
- Many academics/institutions don't have access to literature they need
- The cost of closed journals is often prohibitively high
- This lack of access is a global problem, especially in developing countries
- Closed journals may not be in the interest of the best research
- Researchers may lose rights to and control over their own work
Yet, the alternative of Open Access publishing holds many concerns, especially for early-career researchers, including:
- I will be hiding my work away in less visible (low prestige) journals.
- I must relegate my work to low impact (low IF) journals.
- Peer review will be of low quality.
- I will not get a job/grant/tenure.
- It will cost too much.
Myth 1: Open Access provides less visibility
Myth 2: It would require publishing in low Impact Factor journals
- The scientific community has begun to find IFs have extended well past their original intention, and can often hide more than they reveal about the quality of the research.
- But decide for yourself, and seek out journals with impacts you desire.
Myth 3: Peer review at OA journals is poor quality
- Retraction rate is highest in high IF subscription journals
- No controlled study comparing peer review in subscription vs. OA journals
- Bohannon `sting' did not look at peer review in subscription journals
- Bohannon `sting' found reputable OA publishers rejected spoof paper
- Peer review can be very transparent in OA journals. E.g. you may be able to read the entire peer review history (all reviews and changes)
- OA journals offering open peer review include BioMed Central, PeerJ, F1000 Research, and GigaScience. [And many others, such as the Journal of World-Systems Research]
Myth 4: I won't get a job, grants, or tenure
- Over 500 organizations and 12,000 individuals have signed the American Society for Cell Biology's [[am.ascb.org/dora|Declaration on Research Assessment]], pledging:
- Not to consider journal-based metrics (JIF) in hiring, promotion, or funding decisions
- The content of a paper will be weighed more heavily in evaluations than the journal in which it was published
- To consider the value and impact of all research outputs
- Faculty in U.S universities are taking the issue up as well, for instance at the Virginia Commonwealth University and the [[openaccess.unt.edu/denton-declaration|University of North Texas]].
- Many funders now have open access or public access mandates, including: National Institutes of Health, The World Bank, Research Councils UK, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, and Wellcome Trust.
- Alternatively, you can search for funder policies or make comparisons yourself.
Myth 5: OA publishing costs too much
- Many OA journals do not charge.
- Journals like PeerJ have one-time, low-cost membership fees.
- Many journals have waivers.
- Many institutions have OA publisher memberships.
- Many institutions have OA publishing funds.
- Some funders have started charities to cover OA fees.
- Self-archiving costs nothing and is a great way to be open. You have many options, such as through figshare, arxiv, bioRxiv , institutional repositories, and personal websites.
- There are increasingly more institutional repositories for open data across the globe, including [[lareferencia.redclara.net/rfr|LA Referencia]], REMERI, and Redalyc. These repositories also allow you to generate bibliometric and usage data for evaluation at no cost.
What it really means to publish openly
- Researchers in developing countries can see your work
- More exposure for your work
- Practitioners can apply your findings
- Higher citation rates
- Can influence policy
- The broader public can access your work
- Compliant with grant rules
- Taxpayers get value for money
Advice to Early Career Researchers (ECRs)
- Make a list of OA journals in your field - know your options.
- Discuss open access, preprints, self-archiving upfront with collaborators
- Blog about your science - write so those outside your field can understand
- Be active on social media to increase visibility
- Document your altmetrics
- Seek out support for student and early career researchers
- Learn about the creative commons
Discussing OA with your mentor
- Ask your mentor for a meeting to discuss publishing options
- Put together concise (15 mins max) presentation on benefits of OA
- Include data (lack of access worldwide, advancements made through open science, citation advantage)
- Explain how your work and the lab could benefit from being open
- Create a list of OA options and share this list with your mentor
- If your mentor insists on a toll access journal, discuss submitting an author addendum
- Start these discussions EARLY!!
- From interview with [[arcscon.tumblr.com/post/84942060277/advocating-for-openness|ARCSCon ]]
How to support ECRs in being open
- LISTEN! LISTEN! LISTEN!
- Lead by example - be open and others will see benefits
- Be receptive - answer emails, tweets, questions from ECRs about OA
- Say yes to giving tutorials, guest lectures, talks at meetings
- Do not consider where people publish in making hiring, grant, or tenure decisions
- Write open access publishing funds into your grants
- Create incentives for being open
How do we encourage sharing?
- Educate researchers
- Have clear policies on citation of primary data
- Recognize data sharing in tenure and promotion
- Provide financial support for data preparation
- Develop infrastructure for data deposit and storage (see Roche et al. 2014)
- There does not have to be a conflict between being open and being successful.
- Being open does not have to hurt your career - it can help it!
- At any stage of your career, you have the right to stand up for your beliefs.
- If you believe in openness, stand up for it. Make it happen.
- Opening up academia starts with you and the choices you make.
- Know your rights - don't sign them away
- In sum...don't lock up your research!
- I will not edit, review, or work for closed access journals.
- I will blog my work and post preprints, when possible.
- I will publish only in open access journals.
- I will not publish in Cell, Nature, or Science.
- I will pull my name off a paper if coauthors refuse to be open.
- If I am going to 'make it' in science, it has to be on terms I can live with.
 Adapted from McKiernan, Erin C. (2014). Culture change in academia: Making sharing the new norm. In: University of Pittsburgh Open Access Week 2014, 22 Oct 2014, Pittsburgh, USA. (Unpublished)