"Open Humanities Press is an international, scholar-led open access publishing collective whose mission is to make leading works of contemporary critical thought available worldwide. OHP is a network of interlacing thematic scholarly communities whose various, predominantly autonomous, editorial activities make up the OHP collective.
OHP's Editorial Board is at the heart of all OHP activities. Members of this board participate in journal assessments, review and approve book series proposals, perform and manage peer review, and edit the OHP book series. Drawn from the wider Editorial Board on a rotating basis, the Editorial Oversight Group is responsible for OHP's journal assessments, meeting virtually every two years to consider journals that have approached OHP for inclusion in the collective. Read more about the journal assessment process. The Open Access Board provides advice on Open Access policy and practice.
Open Humanities Press is not-for-profit and is incorporated under the UK Companies Act 2006 as a Community Interest Company (Company No. 8481225). The registered office is in London, England."
"The success or failure of social media is highly dependent on the active participation of its users. In order to examine the influential factors that inspire dynamic and eager participation, this study investigates what motivates social media users to share their personal experiences, information, and social support with anonymous others. A variety of information-sharing activities in social media, including creating postings, photos, and videos in 5 different types of social media: Facebook, Twitter, Delicious, YouTube, and Flickr, were observed. Ten factors: enjoyment, self-efficacy, learning, personal gain, altruism, empathy, social engagement, community interest, reciprocity, and reputation, were tested to identify the motivations of social media users based on reviews of major motivation theories and models. Findings from this study indicate that all of the 10 motivations are influential in encouraging users' information sharing to some degree and strongly correlate with one another. At the same time, motivations differ across the 5 types of social media, given that they deliver different information content and serve different purposes. Understanding such differences in motivations could benefit social media developers and those organizations or institutes that would like to use social media to facilitate communication among their community members; appropriate types of social media could be chosen that would fit their own purposes and they could develop strategies that would encourage their members to contribute to their communities through social media."
"Microblogging is growing in popularity and significance. Although many researchers have attempted to explain why and how people use this new medium, previous studies have produced relatively inconclusive results. For instance, in most of these studies, microblogging has been considered a social networking activity; however, quantitative analyses of microblogging usage have shown that people use microblogging as an information-broadcasting platform. In this study, we identified the factors that drive microblogging and which of them lead to user satisfaction. We developed a theoretical framework and then empirically validated the factors and the emergent mechanisms (value evaluation processes). We empirically tested our research model using a sample of 230 microbloggers, and the results showed that content and technology gratifications are the two key factors that drive user satisfaction with microblogging. That is, it is the value of information dissemination rather than social networking that makes people feel satisfied with the use of microblogging. We believe that this study will generate interest among researchers in social media. The results also provide platform administrators with insights into how people use microblogging and why they are satisfied with the technology."
"LIBRARY AND INFORMATION SERVICES IN ASTRONOMY VII: OPEN SCIENCE AT THE FRONTIERS OF LIBRARIANSHIP."
"Celebrating the 350th anniversary of journal publishing Executive summary
Scholarly communication and STM publishing
1. STM publishing takes place within the broader system of scholarly communication, which includes both formal and informal elements. Scholarly communication plays different roles at different stages of the research cycle, and (like publishing) is undergoing technology-driven change. Categorising the modes of communication into one-to-one, one-to-many and many-to-many, and then into oral and written, provides a helpful framework for analysing the potential impacts of technology on scholarly communication (see page 12).
2. Journals form a core part of the process of scholarly communication and are an integral part of scientific research itself. Journals do not just disseminate information, they also provide a mechanism for the registration of the author’s precedence; maintain quality through peer review and provide a fixed archival version for future reference. They also provide an important way for scientists to navigate the ever-increasing volume of published material (page 16)."
"So what does my daily coffee run have to do with open access?
These robust price and product variations are typical of business to consumer (B2C) models. Prior to the ongoing revolution in scholarly publishing known as open access, business-to-business (B2B) was the predominant business paradigm. Publishers and societies sold print journal subscriptions – along with reprints and ad space – to corporations and academic libraries. There were of course situations where publishers interacted directly with consumers, such as with member subscriptions but, for the most part, revenues from institutional purchasers funded the publishing process.
With open access, authors now pay so-called Article Processing Charges (APCs). As a result, the publishers’ B2B paradigm morphs into one of B2C; the author’s role changes from being a supplier and user, as in the subscription model, to being the supplier, the user and, most critically, the buyer (or consumer). In other words, the author holds even more power than before and, most critically, holds the power of the purse.
As journal publishers develop business models for this increasingly B2C world, they can look not only at the actions of traditional competitors, but should also study consumer-oriented businesses like Starbucks, and even the man in the can. If they do, what might they learn?
There is no “one-and-only answer.”
In the debate over journals and open access, parties often take absolutist positions: “Open access is the inevitable end-point of all scholarly publishing,” “APCs of X dollars are too high and unsustainable,” “Y dollars is the correct price for all APCs,” and “unless a specific license is used, open access is not achieved.” "
"James Wilsdon is professor of science and democracy in the Science Policy Research Unit at the University of Sussex, and chair of the Independent Review of the Role of Metrics in Research Assessment. More information on the metrics review can be found here.
metricsImageCitations, journal impact factors, H-indices, even tweets and Facebook likes – there is no end of quantitative measures that can now be used to assess the quality and wider impacts of research. But how robust and reliable are such metrics, and what weight – if any –should we give them in the management of the UK’s research system?
These are some of the questions that are currently being examined by an Independent Review of the Role of Metrics in Research Assessment , which I am chairing, and which includes representatives of the Royal Society, British Academy, Research Councils UK and Wellcome Trust. The review was announced by David Willetts, then Minister for Universities and Science, in April 2014, and is being supported by HEFCE (Higher Education Funding Council for England).
Our work builds on an earlier pilot exercise in 2008-9, which tested the potential for using bibliometric indicators of research quality in the Research Excellence Framework (REF). At that time, it was concluded that citation information was insufficiently robust to be used formulaically or as a primary indicator of quality, but that there might be scope for it to enhance processes of expert review.
The current review is taking a broader look at this terrain, by exploring the use of metrics across different academic disciplines, and assessing their potential contribution to the development of research excellence and impact within higher education, and in processes of research assessment like the REF. It’s also looking at how universities themselves use metrics, at the rise of league tables and rankings, at the relationship between metrics and issues of equality and diversity, and at the potential for ‘gaming’ and other perverse consequences that can arise from the use of particularly indicators in the funding system.
Last summer, we issued a call for evidence and received a total of 153 responses from across the HE and research community. 57 per cent of these responses expressed overall scepticism about the further introduction of metrics into research assessment, a fifth supported their increased use and a quarter were ambivalent. We’ve also run a series of workshops, undertaken a detailed literature review, and carried out a quantitative correlation exercise, to see how the results of REF 2014 might have differed had the exercise relied purely on metrics, rather than on expert peer review.
Our final report, entitled ‘The Metric Tide’ will be published on 9 July 2015. But ahead of that, we’ve recently announced emerging findings, in respect of the future of the REF. Some see the greater use of metrics as a way of reducing the costs and administrative burden of the REF. Our view is that is it not currently feasible to assess the quality and impact of research outputs using quantitative indicators alone. Around the edges of the exercise, more use of quantitative data should be encouraged as a contribution to the peer review process. But no set of numbers, however broad, is likely to be able to capture the multifaceted and nuanced judgements on the UK’s research base that the REF currently provides.
So if you’ve been pimping and priming your H-Index in anticipation of a metrics-only REF, I’m afraid our review will be a disappointment. Metrics cannot and should not be used as a substitute for informed judgement. But in our final report, we will say a lot more about how quantitative data can be used intelligently and appropriately to support expert assessment, in the design and operation of our research system.
This post was also published on the Royal Society’s In Verba blog on 15 April 2015.
Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on email
Share on pinterest_share
More Sharing Services
Tags: #FSSC Impact factor Research Excellence Framework
About this blog
This blog shares items of interest to the scientific journal publishing community, including features with top scientists, developments at the Royal Society, and news and discussion pieces from across the world of scholarly communication.
Find out more about the Royal Society's journals
Subscribe to RSSSubscribe to RSS
Subscribe by emailSubscribe by email
Please follow our community guidelines.
Search our journals
"Applying a recently developed method for measuring the level of specialization over time for a selection of library and information science (LIS)-core journals seems to reveal that Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology (JASIST) is slowly transforming into a specialty journal. The transformation seems to originate from a growing interest in bibliometric topics. This is evident from a longitudinal study (1990–2012) of the bibliometric coupling strength between Scientometrics and other LIS-core journals (including JASIST). The cause of this gradual transformation is discussed, and possible explanations are analyzed."
"Scholarly peer review is a complex collaborative activity that is increasingly supported by web-based systems, yet little is known about how reviewers and authors interact in such environments, how criticisms are conveyed, or how the systems may affect the interactions and use of language of reviewers and authors. We looked at one aspect of the interactions between reviewers and authors, the use of politeness in reviewers' comments. Drawing on Brown and Levinson's (1987) politeness theory, we analyzed how politeness strategies were employed by reviewers to mitigate their criticisms in an open peer-review process of a special track of a human-computer interaction conference. We found evidence of frequent use of politeness strategies and that open peer-review processes hold unique challenges and opportunities for using politeness strategies. Our findings revealed that less experienced researchers tended to express unmitigated criticism more often than did experienced researchers, and that reviewers tended to use more positive politeness strategies (e.g., compliments) toward less experienced authors. Based on our findings, we discuss implications for research communities and the design of peer-reviewing processes and the information systems that support them."
"Although there are a number of social networking services that specifically target scholars, little has been published about the actual practices and the usage of these so-called academic social networking services (ASNSs). To fill this gap, we explore the populations of academics who engage in social activities using an ASNS; as an indicator of further engagement, we also determine their various motivations for joining a group in ASNSs. Using groups and their members in Mendeley as the platform for our case study, we obtained 146 participant responses from our online survey about users' common activities, usage habits, and motivations for joining groups. Our results show that 1) participants did not engage with social-based features as frequently and actively as they engaged with research-based features, and 2) users who joined more groups seemed to have a stronger motivation to increase their professional visibility and to contribute the research articles they had read to the group reading list. Our results generate interesting insights into Mendeley's user populations, their activities, and their motivations relative to the social features of Mendeley. We also argue that further design of ASNSs is needed to take greater account of disciplinary differences in scholarly communication and to establish incentive mechanisms for encouraging user participation. "
"ResearchGate is a social network site for academics to create their own profiles, list their publications and interact with each other. Like Academia.edu, it provides a new way for scholars to disseminate their publications and hence potentially changes the dynamics of informal scholarly communication. This article assesses whether ResearchGate usage and publication data broadly reflect existing academic hierarchies and whether individual countries are set to benefit or lose out from the site. The results show that rankings based on ResearchGate statistics correlate moderately well with other rankings of academic institutions, suggesting that ResearchGate use broadly reflects traditional academic capital. Moreover, while Brazil, India and some other countries seem to be disproportionately taking advantage of ResearchGate, academics in China, South Korea and Russia may be missing opportunities to use ResearchGate to maximise the academic impact of their publications. "
"(Phys.org) -Geneticists Richard Gordon of the Gulf Specimen Marine Laboratory in Florida and Alexei Sharov of the National Institute on Aging in Baltimore have proposed, in a paper uploaded to the preprint server arXiv, that if the evolution of life follows Moore's Law, then it predates the existence of planet Earth.
Moore's Law, of course, famously suggests that the complexity of computers grows at a rate of double the transistors per circuit every two years, resulting in exponential growth. Looking at the complexity of computers today and working Moore's Law backwards shows that the first microchips came about during the 1960s, which is when they were actually invented. In their paper, Gordon and Sharov take the same approach, only they apply it to biological complexity.
The two researchers acknowledge their ideas are more of a "thought exercise" than a theory proposal, but at the same time suggest their calculations ought to be taken seriously. They start with the idea of genetic complexity doubling every 376 million years-working backwards, they say, means that life first came about almost 10 billion years ago, which of course predates the creation of Earth itself. Most scientists agree the Earth formed just 4.5 billion years ago. Assuming that Moore's Law does apply to biological complexity, this would suggest that life began somewhere other than on Earth and migrated here."
"My course this past semester began like so many others: 14 students and I arrived every Tuesday and Thursday morning in an uninspiring space of concrete-block walls and fluorescent lighting, with few windows and fixed desks all facing forward, ill suited to the discussion-based, flipped format of the class. So, a couple of weeks into the semester, we decided to go nomadic.
We had pedagogical reasons for doing so. The course focused on how the built environment both reflects and affects our ideas about the world around us, looking at how philosophical concepts, cultural constructs, and social, economic, and environmental constraints help shape the spaces that human beings inhabit. Given that, it seemed appropriate to experience a variety of spaces and to reflect upon the relationship of each one to the content of the course.
We learned a lot. I offered to find the spaces in which we would meet, but my students jumped at the chance, with each volunteering to take a week, scoping out the possibilities and notifying the rest of us of the location via email as they crowdsourced our classroom. I realized in the process how much students want to take responsibility for where and how they learn, something that educational institutions have largely taken from them."
"The last year has seen plenty of concern about the state of the humanities. Once popular English departments worry about their declining numbers of majors. New data show that foreign language enrollments are shrinking. And politicians continue to question the value of the humanities.
"The State of the Humanities: Higher Education 2015," released today by the American Academy of Arts & Sciences, acknowledges many "troubling signs" for the humanities and notes a national narrative portraying the humanities as "beleaguered and declining."
But the annual report of the academy's Humanities Indicators Project notes that there are positive signs as well. A nuanced portrayal of the humanities, the report argues, would note signs of growth amid the angst.
The report is a compilation of data -- some gathered by the academy and some from other sources. Most of the statistics that will concern advocates for humanities education and research won't come as a surprise."
"LinkedIn has become a company to watch in higher education. This week the job networking site announced it would spend $1.5 billion to buy lynda.com, an online course portal.
The deal is the biggest so far for LinkedIn, which has roughly 300 million users. Last year the publicly traded company unveiled a college ranking system based on its members' career success, expanding with graduate school rankings last month. It also released a search tool that links college majors with jobs -- allowing users to peruse real profiles of people who work in specific fields and geographic locations."
"Matthew B. Crawford burst upon the scene in 2009 with a compact, powerful book, Shop Class as Soulcraft: An Inquiry Into the Value of Work (Penguin), a macho denunciation of the contemporary world of cubicle life and an ode to the joys of mechanical dexterity and productivity. Having grown up for a time in a California commune, and having filed off (some of) his rough edges while earning a Ph.D. in political philosophy at the University of Chicago, he found his deepest satisfactions in solving engine problems for motorcycle riders, those who took up what he called the "kingly sport that is like war made beautiful." He doesn’t sound like somebody who has much acquaintance with war, but no matter. When his customers rode off, he knew — and they knew — that the problem had been solved.
Now, in his new book, The World Beyond Your Head: On Becoming an Individual in an Age of Distraction (Farrar, Straus and Giroux), Crawford expands on his notion of knowing and problem-solving to offer a critique of contemporary manipulated attention and self-formation. Shop Class contrasted skill-based, craft-oriented knowledge and the satisfaction it brings with the kind of understanding he acquired studying physics as an undergraduate at the University of California at Santa Barbara or philosophy at Chicago. The certainties of physics might establish an intellectual foundation, and philosophical ambiguities may delight, but not much compares to the roar of a bike."
"ProQuest's investments in the discovery stage of research continued this week as the company acquired the Silicon Valley-based start-up SIPX."
"The conclusions of research articles generally depend on bodies of data that cannot be included in the articles themselves. The sharing of this data is important for reasons of both transparency and possible reuse. Science, Technology and Medicine journals have an obvious role in facilitating sharing, but how they might do that is not yet clear. The Journal Research Data (JoRD) Project was a JISC (Joint Information Systems Committee) funded feasibility study on the possible shape of a central service on journal research data policies. The objectives of the study included, amongst other considerations: to identify the current state of journal data sharing policies and to investigate the views and practices of stakeholders to data sharing. The project confirmed that a large percentage of journals do not have a policy on data sharing, and that there are inconsistencies between the traceable journal data sharing policies. Such a state leaves authors unsure of whether they should deposit data relating to articles and where and how to share that data. In the absence of a consolidated infrastructure for the easy sharing of data, a journal data sharing model policy was developed. The model policy was developed from comparing the quantitative information gathered from analysing existing journal data policies with qualitative data collected from the stakeholders concerned. This article summarises the information gathered, outlines the process by which the model was developed and presents the model journal data sharing policy in full."
"Contents - Introduction -- Making the case for digital preservation -- Understanding your requirements -- Models for implementing a digital preservation service -- Selecting and acquiring digital objects -- Accessioning and ingesting digital objects -- Describing digital objects -- Preserving digital objects -- Providing access to users -- Future trends -- Appendices: Creating a digital asset register ; Digital preservation maturity model ; Systems, tools and services.
"This very practical guide, offering a comprehensive overview of best practice, is aimed at the non-specialist, assuming only a basic understanding of IT and offering guidance as to how to implement strategies with minimal time and resources. Digital preservation has become a critical issue for institutions of all sizes but until recently has mostly been the preserve of national archives and libraries with the resources, time and specialist knowledge available to experiment. As the discipline matures and practical tools and information are increasingly available the barriers to entry are falling for smaller organizations which can realistically start to take active steps towards a preservation strategy. However, the sheer volume of technical information now available on the subject is becoming a significant obstacle and a straightforward guide is required to offer clear and practical solutions. Each chapter covers the essential building blocks of digital preservation strategy and implementation, leading the reader through the process. International case studies from organizations such as the Wellcome Library, Central Connecticut State University Library in the USA and Gloucestershire Archives in the UK illustrate how real organizations have approached the challenges of digital preservation."--Publisher description. "
"Abstract: Open access proponents argue that scholars are far more likely to make their articles freely available online if they are required to do so by their university or funding institution. Therefore, if the open access movement is to achieve anything close to its goal of seeing all scholarly articles freely available online, mandates will likely play a significant role. In 2008, the Harvard University Faculty of Arts and Sciences adopted a policy that purports not only to require scholars to deposit their works in open access repositories, but also to grant the university nonexclusive copyright licenses to archive and publicly distribute all faculty-produced scholarly articles. A number of other American universities have since adopted similar policies. The principal aim of this Article is to analyze the legal effect of these Harvard-style open access “permission” mandates.
By invoking copyright law terminology in permission mandates, schools might intend that they have the legal effect of transferring nonexclusive rights to the school, thereby clarifying and fortifying the school’s rights to reproduce and publicly disseminate faculty works. However, the legal effect of these mandates is uncertain for several reasons. First, it is unsettled whether scholars or their university employers are the authors and initial owners of scholarly articles under U.S. copyright law’s work-made-for-hire rules, which vest authorship and copyright ownership in the employer for works created by employees within the scope of employment. Second, the mandates are broad university policies that purport to grant the university nonexclusive copyright licenses in every scholarly article unless a faculty member affirmatively opts out on a per-article basis. Are the policies specific enough to provide the essential terms of the grant? Furthermore, can the mere adoption of a school policy, without some additional affirmative act by the author, effectuate such a grant without unduly encroaching upon the author’s autonomy interests? Lastly, even if the policies effectuate nonexclusive license grants, will the licenses survive after the author transfers copyright ownership to a journal publisher as per common practice? Section 205(e) of the Copyright Act provides that a prior nonexclusive license evidenced in a writing signed by the right holder prevails over a subsequent conflicting transfer of copyright ownership, so the answer appears to turn on whether permission mandates satisfy the requirements of § 205(e).
This Article argues that permission mandates can create legally enforceable, durable nonexclusive licenses. First, it argues that although there are important justifications, including academic freedom concerns, for recognizing the controversial “teacher exception” to the work for hire rules for scholarly articles, such an exception may be unnecessary because a strong argument also exists that much scholarship is produced outside the scope of employment for work for hire purposes. Second, it argues that permission mandates provide sufficient evidence of the grantor’s intent and the rights granted to create effective nonexclusive licenses. Third, permission mandates satisfy the requirements of § 205(e) and establish the license’s priority over the subsequent transfer of copyright ownership largely because they fulfill the underlying purposes of § 205(e) by providing sufficient evidence and notice of the license to potential copyright transferees (typically academic publishers). In reaching these conclusions, this Article emphasizes that Courts should consider the uniformity costs (social costs resulting from applying uniform rules and granting uniform entitlements across diverse conditions) that arise from applying to scholarly articles copyright rules developed to address proprietary models of information production. Applying the relevant copyright rules in a manner sensitive to the nonmarket nature of scholarly production is the most effective way to reduce these social costs, and reinforces the conclusion that mandate licenses are enforceable.
Lastly, the Article considers whether the opt-out nature of permission mandates offends notions of authorial autonomy in copyright. It compares permission mandates with another high profile opt-out licensing regime: the proposed Google Books settlement agreement, which the court rejected partly because of authorial autonomy concerns. Authorial autonomy is far less of a concern for scholarly articles than for the books at issue in the Google Books case, however, due to the nonmarket nature of scholarly article production coupled with academic community norms. Accordingly, it does not substantially interfere with authors’ autonomy interests to find that the opt-out structure of permission mandates creates valid nonexclusive licenses in universities."