Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Talk by Ramy K. Aziz in the second TWAS/BioVisionAlexandria.NXT in Alexandria- Egypt (10-11 April 2010) about "Open Acess and The Next Revolution in Scholarly Publishing". The slides are also contributed by Mark Patterson, Björn Brembs, and Peter Binfield.
Citation preview
www.plos.org
Ramy Karam Aziz
TWAS/NXT Workshop. April 10, 2010
Open Access and The Next Revolution in Scholarly Publishing
The PLoS Experience
www.plos.org
Acknowledgments
The following people contributed significantly to this presentation:
• Mark Patterson, Director of Publishing, PLoS
• Björn Brembs, Freie Universität Berlin• Peter Binfield, Managing Editor, PLoS ONE
www.plos.org
Outline
• Prologue: Why do we publish?
• Part I: The current paradigm and its shortcomings/anomalies
• Part II: Alternative paradigm– II.A. How Open Access addresses the current
anomalies
– II.B. How PLoS, in particular, addresses these anomalies
• Epilogue: Paradigm shift Publishing utopia?
www.plos.org
Prologue
Why do we publish scientific papers?
www.plos.org
Audience opinion
Why do you (want to) publish in scholarly journals?– Name the single most important reason
www.plos.org
The current paradigm
Publishor perish
=Survival for the most
published
www.plos.org
SURVIVOR!Let me start by telling you a story…
slightly modified from my PhD seminar, Dec 2004
www.plos.org
CoursesExams Prelim
Project
Life surprises
PhD Defense Not the endof the story
Scientists under selection pressure
www.plos.org
RealWorld
And (s)he lived happilyever after
$$
Threshold
Opportunity
trap
Scientists under selection pressure
www.plos.org
Test yourself…
• Are you ready to just put your laboratory data or research results online to share them with the scientific community (open science)?
• If you have the choice to put your scientific product in ONLY ONE venue, what will be your choice, and why?– CNN– Your local newspaper– Nature/Science magazines– Your website– Other sources…
www.plos.org
Test yourself…
• What is the primary reason for choosing a journal to publish your work?– Journal’s topic/ specialty– Journal’s impact factor– Journal’s prestige– Open-access journal– Least accessible journals (to hide some weak work?)
• If you have a limited amount of money, would you rather:– Pay to read a paper– Pay to publish a paper
www.plos.org
Reminder…
Theoretically, at least:• We do research to fill gaps in
knowledge, to improve human life and health, to satisfy our curiosity
• We publish to share knowledge with peers, students, and the community
• Publishing is a means to an end. Yes, really!
www.plos.org
Problem: anomalies in the current publishing paradigm
Credits: Several slides in this part are contributed by Björn Brembs
www.plos.org
Publishing yesterday…
1665: One journal: Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London (Henry Oldenburg)
www.plos.org
• 24,000 scholarly journals
• 1.5 million publications/year
• 3% annual growth
• 1 million authors
• 10-15 million readers at >10,000 institutions
• 1.5 billion downloads/year
Source: Mabe MA (2009): Scholarly Publishing. European Review 17(1): 3-22
Publishing today
www.plos.org
SURVIVOR!Let me tell you the rest of the story…
Part II: Post-survival syndrome!
www.plos.org
Finally, someone appreciates our great work!
Publishing these days
I see you have done some great work. I can publish it for you!
Publishing enterprise We, the scientists
www.plos.org
!! Can’t we just put it on our website?
Publishing these days
I will need your help though. Please format it EXACTLY as follows: 1… 2… 3… 15…
www.plos.org
Credi… what? Credit?
Huh! I thought Internet nowadays has the widest readership….
Publishing these days
Oh, no! We give you credibility and guarantee you wide readership?
www.plos.org
OK… X &Y are my friends. Please exclude Z!
Publishing these days
Please also tell me who among your peers can review it, of course according to MY conditions and criteria
www.plos.org
Publishing these days
The anonymous reviewers liked your work, but recommended 15 more experiments to confirm the results of your 3 experiments.
Is that what they would have done? Can they even do these experiments?
5 months
later…
www.plos.org
Publishing these days
Congratulations.After thorough peer review (using someone else’s time and effort), we agree to publish YOUR revised work but you have to give us the permission to OWN and redistribute YOUR work
6 months
later…
www.plos.org
Publishing these days
All you need to pay is $500 for two color figures. We send you a free copy of the journal and a PDF of the article
How generous!
6 months
later…
www.plos.org
Publishing these days
Well… Sorry you cannot access YOUR full-text article online. Your institution needs to pay $10,000 a year. Unless you’re willing to pay only $200 annual personal subscription
3 months
later…
The paper looks great. Can we access the final online full-text version?
www.plos.org
Publishing these days
3 months
later…
You have to be grateful that WE accepted to publish YOUR article. We proudly reject 90% of submitted articles. We are that good and wanted!
"then the best journal would by logical extension be the one that accepted nothing at all!" www.clinchem.org/cgi/issue_pdf/backmatter_pdf/27/4.pdf
www.plos.org
Publishing these days
Yes sure. But… With this crumbling economy, prices are now up. You’ll have to pay more to publish. You’ll have to pay more to read!
3 months
later…
Oh Please.. Can we publish another one?
www.plos.org
Publishing these days
We, scientists, editors, and publishers, are so addicted to a broken, old system that the more we’re aware of its limitations, the more we seem willing to “game” the system!
Together forever
$$€€
$$€€
grantsawards
promotion
www.plos.org
Current Problems
• We have to use least three different search tools to be sure we have not missed any relevant literature.
www.plos.org
Current Problems
• When/If we finally find the literature, we often have to ask friends with rich libraries to send it to us?
www.plos.org
Current Problems
• During the lengthy, painful process of submitting a paper (remember: to share exciting data with the community), we have to re-format our manuscripts every time an editor tells us to submit to another journal that (s)he thinks is more relevant for OUR work.
www.plos.org
Current Problems
• With submissions and resubmission, the data become old; the findings become less exciting; even worse, time and money is wasted as dozens of peers are asked to review and (often) re-review the same manuscript in different journals.
www.plos.org
Current Problems
• We have to pay ridiculously high amounts of money just to find out who cited us, instead of having that list directly on our papers.– Note that every homepage has had an access
counter since 1993; but we usually have no way know how often our paper has been downloaded.
www.plos.org
Current Problems
• A one-dimensional, over-interpreted journal ranking and evaluation system
The Journal Impact Factor: Introduced in 1960’s by Eugene Garfield: ISI
IF=5 means that articles published in 06/07 were cited an average of 5 times in 08.
2008
citations
2006 and 2007
articles
www.plos.org
Solutions?How does PLoS address these anomalies?
Credits: Most slides in this part are contributed by Mark Patterson and Peter
Binfield
www.plos.org
PLoS Founding Board of Directors
Harold VarmusPLoS Co-founder and Chairman of the BoardPresident and CEO of Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center
Patrick O. BrownPLoS Co-founder and Board MemberHoward Hughes Medical Institute & Stanford University School of Medicine
Michael B. EisenPLoS Co-founder and Board MemberLawrence Berkeley National Laboratory & University of California at Berkeley
www.plos.org
PLoS core principles
1. Open Access2. Excellence3. Scientific integrity4. Breadth (expansion of scope)5. Cooperation6. Financial fairness7. Community engagement8. Internationalism9. Science as a public resource
Source: http://www.plos.org/about/principles.php
www.plos.org
PLoS core principles
1. Open Access2. Excellence3. Scientific integrity4. Breadth (expansion of scope)5. Cooperation6. Financial fairness7. Community engagement8. Internationalism9. Science as a public resource
Source: http://www.plos.org/about/principles.php
www.plos.org
PLoS publishing strategy
• Establish high quality journals– put PLoS and Open Access on the map
• Build a more extensive OA publishing operation– an Open Access home for every paper
– achieve sustainability
• Make the literature more useful – to scientists and the public
www.plos.org
PLoS BiologyOctober, 2003
PLoS MedicineOctober, 2004
PLoS Community JournalsJune-September, 2005 October, 2007
PLoS ONEDecember,2006
www.plos.org
Growth in submissions and publications
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
PublicationsSubmissions
www.plos.org
Financial growth
% Operating expense covered by operating revenue
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
www.plos.org
1. PLoS and Open Access
• Open Access ≠ free of charge• Open Access ≠ open science• Open Access means:
– Immediate access on publication– The reader pays no charges.– In most cases, unrestricted use and reuse
• Open Access is being color-coded:– Gold– Green
www.plos.org
Creative Commons Attribution License
Copyright: © 2004 xxxx et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Goal: overcome access barriers and encourage creative uses.
http://www.creativecommons.org
www.plos.org
No permissionrequired
for any reuse
Translation
Redistribution
Photocopying
Coursepacks
Reproductionof figures
Deposit indatabases
Downloadingdata
Text mining
www.plos.org
Benefits of Open Access
• Public enrichment: taxpayers can see the results of what their investment in science.
• Improved education: teachers and students rarely have access to subscription journals/ Unrestricted reuse helps educators prepare lectures and students deepen their assignments.
• Accelerated discovery
Source: PLoS Progress report- June 2009, Freely available at:http://www.plos.org/downloads/progress_report.pdf
www.plos.org
Do developing countries get a waiver?
• Author pays but, in PLoS journals, no author will EVER be denied publication if she or he cannot afford the fees (whether from a rich or richer country). And this message is coming from the PLoS CEO.
www.plos.org
Arguments against Open Access
• Sustainability of the author-pay model• Vanity publishing• Are we going to end with as many
journals as authors?• Isn’t “green OA” enough?
www.plos.org
2. PLoS ONE and an innovative view of peer review
In PLoS ONE, peer review is split into two phases:
• Pre-publication peer review: objectively focuses on scientific rigor, but not on subjective criteria such as importance and newsworthiness.
• Post publication peer review: continuous, multi-dimensional assessment of the importance, value, and impact of the paper– Web 2.0 tools for evaluation– Coverage in classical media, blogosphere, and social
networks
www.plos.org
www.plos.org
PLoS ONE’s Key Innovation – The editorial process
• Editorial criteria– Scientifically rigorous– Ethical– Properly reported– Conclusions supported by the data
• Editors and reviewers do not ask– How important is the work?– Which is the relevant audience?
• Use online tools to sort and filter scholarly content after publication, not before
www.plos.org
What else is different?
• Inclusive scope– all science and medicine
• Encouraging discussion and debate– at PLoS ONE: commenting, rating and annotation– elsewhere: Editorial Board discussion forum;
EveryONE blog; Twitter; FriendFeed; Facebook
• Streamlined production– publication on every weekday
www.plos.org
Year Submissions Publications % of annual PubMed
2006* 473 138 0.02%2007 2497 1231 0.16%2008 4401 2723 0.34%2009 6819 4404 0.52%
* Started publishing Dec 20th, 2006
Community acceptance– third largest peer-reviewed journal– 50,000 authors– 1000 Academic Editors
PLoS ONE – statistics
www.plos.org
www.plos.org
3. Article-level metrics
• In the 21st century, the published unit is/should be (?) the article not the journal (the song not the album, the show not the TV station, etc.)
• Let the community, not just an editor and 2-4 reviewers, decide what is important and what is not
www.plos.org
Who cares about
measuring researchimpact?
InstitutionsResearchers (authors and
readers)
Publishers
Funders
The public
Librarians
www.plos.org
How do we measure ‘impact’?
The worth of a paper tends to be judged on the basis of the impact
factor of the journal in which it was published.
Recommended reading:Adler, R., Ewing, J. Taylor, P. Citation statistics. A report from the International Mathematical Union. http://www.mathunion.org/publications/report/citationstatistics/
www.plos.org
How could we measure ‘impact’?
• Citations• Web usage• Expert Ratings• Social bookmarking• Community rating• Media/blog coverage• Commenting activity• and more…
Current technology now makes it possible to add these metrics automatically
At the ARTICLE LEVEL, we could track:
www.plos.org
Article-Level Metrics at PLoS
• A range of additional measures which provide insight into ‘impact’ - not just citations and usage
• Metrics/indicators at the article-level, for all journals
• Not just for scholarly evaluation – also a way to filter and discover content
• The idea is not new, but PLoS is the first publisher to provide this range of data transparently and immediately.
Michael Jensen, The New Metrics of Scholarly Authority, Chronicle of Higher Education, June 15, 2007
www.plos.org(http://tiny.cc/ALM1)
www.plos.org
www.plos.org
www.plos.org
www.plos.org
www.plos.org
www.plos.org
www.plos.org
www.plos.org
Next steps for article-level metrics
• More sources for each data type– Citations, blog coverage
• New data sources– F1000, Mendeley
• Expert analysis and tools
• Broader adoption– By publishers
– By tenure committees, funders etc
• Develop and adhere to standards
www.plos.org
Next steps for article-level metrics
Metrics are good
BUT
NO ALTERNATIVE FOR
READING
www.plos.org
4. PLoS and internationalism
• 2010, PLoS International Advisory Group– http://www.plos.org/about/intladvisors.php
• Internationalism involves: – authors– institutions– reviewers– editors– topics (PLoS NTD, PLoS Medicine)
www.plos.org
4. PLoS and internationalism
• PLoS ONE articles (Jan 1 2010)
www.plos.org
4. PLoS and internationalism
• PLoS ONE editors (Jan 1 2010)
www.plos.org
Do authors from developing countries get a waiver?
• In PLoS journals, no author will EVER be denied publication if she or he cannot afford the fees (whether from a rich or richer country), and you can hold me to my words.
www.plos.org
Epilogue
Shaking the boatShifting the paradigm
www.plos.org
Summary… PLoS and the next revolution
Anomalies in the current paradigm
How PLoS addresses these anomalies
Access, Accessibility Open Access, CC Attribution License
Literature mining, creative reuse
Open Access, CC Attribution License
Peer review (slow, subjective, etc.)
PLoS ONE, Post-publication peer review
Articles are static: Papers, PDF files
Dynamic “papers”: html-based, Web 2.0 tools, comments and notes
One-dimensional, distorted metrics
Article-level, multidimensional metrics
High costs, financial viability PLoS ONE, Non-profit, PLoS Currents (?)
www.plos.org
The current paradigm
Publishor perish
=Survival for the most
published
www.plos.org
Let’s shift (reset?) the paradigm
Do good science Publish or perish
=Survival for the most
published fittest
www.plos.org
Declaration of “scholarly rights”
• All human beings are born equal and are entitled to the following rights whether they can or cannot afford journal-subscription or article-processing fees
Everyone has the right to:• access scientific knowledge freely and
promptly• perform scientific research and publish its
results, regardless of his/her affiliation or lack thereof
• to reuse scientific data to benefit humanity, Earth, and the universe
www.plos.org
Thank you
• Thank you for your time and attention. I would like to get your feedback and questions.
• contact: [email protected]• azizrk on Twitter
