Friday, October 26, 2012

Open Access Explained! < YouTube


>>> Duration = ~ 8:30 Minutes <<<

What is open access? Nick Shockey and Jonathan Eisen take us through the world of open access publishing and explain just what it's all about.

Thursday, October 25, 2012

Nature > Alternative Metrics


As the old 'publish or perish' adage is brought into question, additional research-impact indices, known as altmetrics, are offering new evaluation alternatives. But such metrics may need to adjust to the evolution of science publishing.

Today, a growing frustration among researchers is that the impact of their contribution to science is mostly assessed on the basis of out-of-date mechanisms including impact factor and citation measurements. This discontent occurs as we are reaching a turning point in science publishing history where the essence of the peer-review process has been called into question.

Indeed, the drive to find alternative metrics is a symptom of a community where research evaluation is not functioning well. A new movement called altmetrics — eloquently described through a manifesto1 published in 2010 and arguably a variation on the theme of what is referred to as webometrics or social media metrics — revisits the measurement of a scientist's worth. Rather than using peer-reviewed journal articles, alternative metrics range from other types of research output to a researchers' reputation made via their footprint on the social web.

[more]

Source and Full Text Available At

http://www.nature.com/nmat/journal/v11/n11/full/nmat3485.html

Monday, October 8, 2012

HowOpenIsIt? > Open Access Spectrum > Final Version Now Available

Not all Open Access is created equal. To move beyond the seemingly simple question of “Is it Open Access?” PLOS, SPARC and OASPA have collaborated to develop a resource called “HowOpenIsIt?” This resource identifies the core components of open access (OA) and how they are implemented across the spectrum between "Open Access" and "Closed Access". We recognize there are philosophical disagreements regarding OA and this resource will not resolve those differences. 

We are seeking input on the accuracy and completeness of how OA is defined in this guide. Download the above open review draft and provide feedback below in the comment form. In its final form, this guide will provide an easily understandable, comprehensive, and quantifiable resource to help authors make informed decisions on where to publish based on publisher policies. In addition, funders and other organizations will have a resource that indicates criteria for what level of OA is required for their policies and mandates.

This OA guide is aimed toward a wide audience of researchers, authors, and policy-makers. Your feedback will help us more precisely define OA across a number of categories. The goals of the guide are to:

• Move the conversation from “is it open access?” to “how open?” 

• Clarify the definition of OA  

• Standardize terminology 

• Illustrate a continuum of “more open” versus “less open” 

• Enable people to compare and contrast publications and policies 

• Broaden the understanding of OA to a wider audience 

In 2002, the Budapest Open Access Initiative articulated the basic tenets of OA for the first time. Since then, thousands of journals have adopted policies that embrace some or all of the open access core components related to: readership; reuse; copyright; posting; and machine readability.

Why now and why this resource?  

OA is gaining momentum and we are seeing a groundswell of support from authors and funders to colleges and governments. Despite this progress there is still confusion about OA. With this guide we aim to provide greater clarity regarding its definition and components. All suggestions will be considered and a final version will be released during Open Access Week (October 22 -28, 2012). 

Source 


Draft 


Unfortunately > The comment is now closed. 

Final Version Available Via (10-19-12)

[http://www.openaccessweek.org/profiles/blogs/open-access-spectrum-guide-released]