Jsmith1037: Imported from Wikispaces

2018-05-20T01:48:06Z

Imported from Wikispaces

New page

Becoming “open”: is publishing in open access journals possible?[[home#_ftn1|[1]]]


What’s wrong?
* 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
* By being open, you may in fact get more exposure ([[http:''www.istl.org/10-winter/article2.html|Wagner 2010]], [[https:''peerj.com/articles/175/|Piwowar and Vision 2013]])

Myth 2: It would require publishing in low Impact Factor journals
* The scientific community has begun to find IFs have extended [[occamstypewriter.org/scurry/2012/08/13/sick-of-impact-factors|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 [[http://figshare.com/articles/Open_Access_Journals_2013_Impact_Factors/1206415|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
* [[http://www.sciencemag.org/content/342/6154/60.full|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 [[http:''www.biomedcentral.com|BioMed Central]], [[https://peerj.com/|PeerJ]], [[f1000research.com|F1000 Research]], and [[http://www.gigasciencejournal.com/|GigaScience]]. [And many others, such as the [[http:''www.jwsr.org/|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 [[http://www.facultysenate.vcu.edu/2010/11/17/vcu-faculty-senate-resolution-1/|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: [[nih.gov|National Institutes of Health]], [[http:''data.worldbank.org|The World Bank]], [[http://www.rcuk.ac.uk/funding/eligibilityforrcs/|Research Councils UK]], [[https://www.hhmi.org/|Howard Hughes Medical Institute]], and [[http:''www.wellcome.ac.uk/funding/|Wellcome Trust]].
* Alternatively, you can [[http:''www.sherpa.ac.uk/juliet/|search for funder policies]] or [[http:''www.dcc.ac.uk/resources/policy-and-legal/overview-funders-data-policies|make comparisons]] yourself.

Myth 5: OA publishing costs too much
* Many OA journals do not charge.
* Journals like [[https://peerj.com/|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 [[http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/About-us/Policy/Spotlight-issues/Open-access/Charity-open-access-fund/|charities to cover OA fees]].
* Self-archiving costs nothing and is a great way to be open. You have many options, such as through [[http:''figshare.com|figshare]], [[arXiv.org|arxiv]], [[http:''biorxiv.org|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]], [[http:''www.remeri.org.mx/portal/index.html|REMERI]], and [[http:''www.redalyc.org/home.oa|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 - [[doaj.org|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 [[https://impactstory.org|altmetrics]]
* Seek out [[http://opencon2014.org|support for student and early career researchers]]
* Learn about the [[http://creativecommons.org/about|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 [[http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1001779|Roche et al. 2014]])

Take-home messages
* 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.
* [[http://openaccess.commons.gc.cuny.edu/2014/03/07/you-know-what-you-write-but-do-you-know-your-rights/|Know your rights - don't sign them away]]
* In sum...don't lock up your research!

[[http://www.openaccesspledge.com/|Pledge to be open!]]
* 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.

----
[[home#_ftnref1|[1]]] Adapted from [[http://d-scholarship.pitt.edu/23441/|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)

Summary of McKiernan's slides with links - Revision history

Ephemeralwaves at 17:57, 3 June 2018

Jsmith1037: Imported from Wikispaces