Upload
ariadnenetwork
View
286
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Presentation by Rachel Young, Maney Publishing EAA 2014 session: Open Access and Open Data in Archaeology Istanbul, Turkey 13 September 2013
Citation preview
Enormous increase in OA publishing
Source poeticeconomics.com
Why publish OA?
Ethics
• Research on public assets and/or community
cultural heritage/identity
• Research has an impact on public policy
• Research publicly funded
• Results of use to diverse, non-academic
audiences
Public understanding of archaeology
• Huge, committed avocational audience
• Many and diverse interest groups and local
societies globally
Funder mandates
• Acceptable embargo period
• Acceptable licence
• Funds for Gold OA?
• If so, any publication limits (within funded
period?)
Visibility to colleagues
• Research consensus
• HTML downloads increase, around 2 -2.5 times
• PDF downloads from the journal increase too, but
by a lesser factor
Increase citation
• But historically the evidence for Open Access
increasing citations has been mixed..
• Looking at key, frequently cited studies..
Nature Publishing Group and RIN (2014)
• 2008 articles in Nature Communications
• Launch in 2010 to 1st July 2013
• Biological sciences, chemistry, earth sciences, physics
• 38% of papers published open access, highest proportion biosci
• ‘Slightly’ higher citations in all disciplines except chemistry
• BUT median no. cites increased by 4 (medians ranged between
2-11)
• Launch/commissioning effect
• Quality differences between OA and non-OA papers?
Eysenbach PLoS Biology (2006)
• PNAS articles Jul-Dec 2004
• Study controlled for author profile,
circumstances, location and discipline
• OA articles twice more likely to be cited 4-10
months after publication.
Other literature observing an increase in
citations
• Walker Nature web focus (2004)
• Antelman College and Research Libraries
(2004)
• Harnad and Brody D-Lib 10 (2004)
• Norris et al. J Am Soc for Info. Sci. and
Techn. (2008)
Conversely..
Gaulé & Maystre (2011) Research Policy
• Looked at OA and non-OA articles published in PNAS
• Optional OA fee $1000
• Observed no significant increase in citations for OA articles
• BUT
• Very widely subscribed journal
• Green OA embargo only 6 months
Phil Davies, The FASEB Journal (2011)
• Large randomised study making some articles OA
• Jan 2007 – Feb 2008
• 20 science and 16 social sciences journals
• Variety of publishers but all on Highwire
• 3245 articles of which 712 made OA
• HTML downloads doubled in the first year of free access and
PDF downloads increased by 63%
• Increase in breadth of readership (unique IP addresses)
• No increase in citations or reduction of time to first citation
Why no research consensus?
• Most academic articles published for highly specialised
audience in well-defined niche
• Many studies could not check for self-selection of articles
• Academic social networking less well developed at time studies
were made
• Citation differences between STM and HSS not always taken
into consideration
• Studies conducted in early days of open access, when OA
channels were fewer and less diverse
Archaeology lends itself to OA
publishing
• Archaeology has unique breadth of discipline
• Employs theory and methods from many
different subjects
• Multiscalar
• Diverse audiences, including professional
and avocational audience who do not have
university library access
• Top archaeology journals stuffed with papers,
slowing down publishing times
• Some parts of the scientific archaeology
community have very different expectations of
publishing speed
• For molecular geneticists 6 weeks to publish from
acceptance is normal
So what can OA publishing bring you?
• Green and gold
• Visibility
• Breadth of audience
• Impact – if in right journal and promoted by you
• Compliance with your funders mandates
Gold OA funds – that’ll do nicely sir..
• Appropriate scope and quality
• A relatively high impact vehicle (REF etc.)
• Sophisticated online platforms with good search visibility
• Swift peer review, possibly innovative
• Developmental review and editing
• Rapid publication
• Automated repository deposition
• Article promotion
• Tools to self-promote
Relatively high impact publication..
Impact factors
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
4
4.5
5
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
PLOS One
Journal of Archaeological Science
American Antiquity
Antiquity
Impact factors
Data from Thomson Reuters JCR
Archaeology is a relatively low impact
subject
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Nature
Science
PLOS One
BMC Biology
PNAS
Journal of Archaeological Science
American Antiquity
Antiquity
Impact factors
Data from Thomson Reuters JCR
Plenty of space!
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Nature
Science
eLife
PLOS One
BMC Biology
PNAS
Journal of Archaeological Science
American Antiquity
Antiquity
No. citable articles published
Data from Thomson Reuters JCR
What will the future bring?
• Fees for incremental services
• Increase in academic ‘partner’ OA journals
• OA as a service to members