21 September 2016

Kathryn Rudy's new book published, and it's open access!


© Universiteitsbibliotheek van Amsterdam, CC BY 4.0.
Kathryn Rudy, senior lecturer in the School of Art History, has just published her latest book with Open Book Publishers. The book is licensed under a creative commons CC BY licence, and so is freely available for download from the publisher and our repository. The ebook has also been added to our library catalogue by Elizabeth Cuthill, who has been mentioned before on this blog for her work creating high quality MARC records for this publisher, you can see the catalogue record here: http://library.st-andrews.ac.uk/record=b2429660~S5. This work isn't just for the benefit of St Andrews, it also benefits the library community at large, as these records are fed back to Open Book Publishers for distribution to other parties.

Here is a snippet from the book's abstract to whet your appetite:

Medieval manuscripts resisted obsolescence[...]Rather than discard them when they were superseded, book owners found ways to update, amend and upcycle books or book parts.
Rudy considers ways in which book owners adjusted the contents of their books from the simplest (add a marginal note, sew in a curtain) to the most complex (take the book apart, embellish the components with painted decoration, add more quires of parchment). By making sometimes extreme adjustments, book owners kept their books fashionable and emotionally relevant. This study explores the intersection of codicology and human desire.
Rudy shows how increased modularisation of book making led to more standardisation but also to more opportunities for personalisation. She asks: What properties did parchment manuscripts have that printed books lacked? What are the interrelationships among technology, efficiency, skill loss and standardisation?
© Uppsala Universitetsbiblioteket, CC BY 4.0.


A previous blog post about Open Book Publishers can be read here. In the post we highlighted the cataloguing team's work to create MARC records for all the books on the OBP catalogue (no small feat!). We also looked at some of the interesting and novel ways that OBP are trying to escape the bonds of print, by incorporating alternative media into the electronic versions of their books.




Kathryn M. Rudy, Piety in Pieces: How Medieval Readers Customized their Manuscripts. Cambridge, UK: Open Book Publishers, 2016. http://dx.doi.org/10.11647/OBP.0094

8 September 2016

St Andrews supports new publisher requirements set by Wellcome Trust

Wellcome Trust has had an Open Access policy for its research publications since 2005, and now leads the Charity Open Access Fund (COAF). Robert Kiley, Head of Digital Services at Wellcome, has announced that from 1 April 2017 any papers submitted that acknowledge Wellcome funding must meet the new, additional requirements. Publishers must indicate that they can meet the service standards by 15 December 2016 to be included in a list that Wellcome will make public. Outputs will be audited to check that listed publishers continue to meet services standards.

Summary

Existing

  • Available from the Europe PMC repository 
  • Made available under a Creative Commons attribution licence 
  • Deposited as the final published version

Additional

  • Publisher invoices must include digital object identifier (DOI), authors, funders and licence 
  • Publisher must have a publicly available reimbursement policy 
  • Publisher must update deposited articles with post-publication material changes

Aims

It is hoped that these changes will:
  • improve article processing charge (APC) processes and minimise post-publication licence corrections; 
  • help authors, funders and institutions determine whether an APC can be reimbursed from COAF; 
  • increase the integrity of funder-designated repositories and the scholarly record by ensuring that the most up-to-date, accurate publication is available.
Although the requirements might seem onerous several major publishers such as Wiley and Springer Nature have already confirmed their ability to comply. Many publishers that already systematically deposit into Europe PubMed Central as part of their Gold publication service already update articles with corrections, retractions and expressions of concern (CREs).

There is widespread community support amongst charities and sector bodies (Jisc, SCONUL, UKCoRR, and Research Libraries UK). The Open Access Support team agrees that the new publisher requirements will help everyone concerned to better understand what is needed for compliance, their obligations, and improve the accuracy and availability of research outputs for re-use. Wellcome has established a reputation as an Open Access leader and many funders including government shadow its initiatives. We hope this initiative might positively encourage publishers to deliver their advertised services and help reduce non-compliance with other funder mandates too.

COAF funded research organisations

26 August 2016

BMC Ecology image competition: results

Well, it's that time of year when we get to post lots of nice pictures courtesy of the open access journal BMC Ecology. Each year BMC Ecology runs a photographic image competition to celebrate biodiversity and the beauty of the natural environment, and this year it coincides with St Andrews Photography Festival which is a nice coincidence! The theme of this year's competition was the interaction between nature and human activity and technology.

Overall winner: “The striking landscape of the Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park during sunrise. This south African park is characterized by vast arid landscapes with red dunes, sparse vegetation and camel thorn trees.” Attribution: Davide Gaglio. CC BY
Winner, Community, Population, and Macroecology: “I was snorkeling in a remote lagoon in the Sudanese Red Sea when I was suddenly surrounded by hundreds of spinner dolphins. The school stayed around for hours, visibly enjoying the interaction with snorkelers in the water. The school was clearly subdivided into dozens of smaller groups of either females with their offspring or adult males.” Attribution: Julia Spät. CC BY
“This photo of a herd of waterbuck in the morning mist was taken by a motion-detecting trail camera in the Gorongosa National Park in Mozambique. A network of fifty trail cameras were set up by Paola Bouley, a researcher who is studying how the lion population is rebounding in Gorongosa after decades of war devastated wildlife populations. Hundreds of thousands of photos that she and her team have collected are available for citizen scientists to help her identify on the website WildCam Gorongosa. Waterbuck are a common sight in Gorongosa as their population has exploded to over 34,000 individuals up from only a few hundred after the war. Scientists are studying the waterbuck population to learn why they are experiencing such rapid growth.” Attribution: Chuck Schultz (Science Education Department, Howard Hughes Medical Institute). CC BY

This is just a small selection of the images published this year, in total there were 26 images, all licensed under a CC BY attribution licence, so they are free to reuse, copy and distribute.

The Editorial complete with all images can be found here: 10.1186/s12898-016-0090-z

“This image was taken in Adelaide Botanic garden [in 2016]. Rainbow lorikeets are such colorful parrots that it is hard to mistake them for other species. The related Scaly-breasted lorikeet is similar in size and shape, but can be distinguished by its all-green head and body.” Attribution: Abd Al-Bar Al-Farha (University of Adelaide, Australia). CC BY

10 August 2016

Flipping journals to Open Access: an extensive Harvard University literature review

Harvard University last week released an extensive 224 page literature review on subscription journals flipping to Open Access. The review's principal aim is to "disentangle different options", in order to "help publishers deliberate intelligently about their options". In total the authors find 15 options available to journals wanting to flip to OA, and interestingly 5 of these do not involve levying charges (most commonly referred to as Article Processing Charges).

The inclusion of so many non-APC reliant flipping pathways is very illuminating and certainly will be news to some people.
"Truncating or oversimplifying the range of options causes harm. For example, as noted, many stakeholders believe that there’s only one business model for OA journals, namely, charging APCs. This assumption has never been true and has never even been close. Every measurement for more than a decade has shown that roughly three-quarters of OA journals charge no author-side fees at all, and in fact, that roughly three-quarters of subscription journals charge author-side fees on top of their reader-side fees. The false assumption that all OA journals charge APCs stultifies the debate by limiting discussion to the one best-known option. It also stultifies the deliberations of publishers who believe, perhaps correctly, that the best-known option won’t work for them, and therefore conclude, prematurely, that no model will work for them." (Converting Scholarly Journals to Open Access: A Review of Approaches and Experiences. p. 4)
In the introduction Peter Suber, Director of the Harvard Office for Scholarly Communication and editor of the review, mentions the value of the review in offering a resource for libraries struggling with rising subscription prices. He suggests that the rising cost of subscriptions could be a catalyst to stimulate talks about flipping to OA, given that another possible outcome is losing subscriptions entirely which benefits neither side.
"Academic Librarians are in a good position to make the case that converting to OA is better than cancellation, for everyone, and that new evidence shows that converting to OA can preserve or enhance readership, submissions, quality, and financial sustainability." (Converting Scholarly Journals to Open Access: A Review of Approaches and Experiences. p. 5)
Solomon, David, J. Mikael Laakso, and Bo-Christer Björk (authors). Peter Suber (editor). 2016. Converting Scholarly Journals to Open Access: A Review of Approaches and Experiences. http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:27803834. CC-BY

28 July 2016

We've now reached 8000 items in our repository!

Last week the St Andrews Research Repository reached a new milestone: 8000 items!

The last major content milestone we celebrated was when we reached 5000 items, this was back in February 2015. The blog post we wrote in recognition of this mentioned that the upsurge in activity was largely down to research funders and HEFCE (the folks behind the Research Excellence Framework) requiring authors to self-archive their publications. 17 months on and this trend is continuing.

In April 2016 the Research Excellence Framework open access policy came into effect (to find out more read our previous blog post). This means that to ensure compliance with the policy authors must deposit their accepted manuscripts for journal articles and conference proceedings into the University's research information system (Pure). To ensure all St Andrews researchers are aware of the policy we have been working hard to deliver the message: 'Act on acceptance: deposit in Pure'. This slogan, which is emblazoned on posters around the University, is just one part of a tapestry of approaches to increase author self-archiving rates across the University. Currently the REF compliance rate for the whole University is very high at around 85%.

We are also still continuing our support for Gold Open Access. Gold OA usually requires a payment, called an APC or Article Processing Charge, and providing all the conditions are met the Library will cover this charge. The charges average out at around £1500, but can be anywhere from a few hundred pounds to more than £4000. The 8000th item was published Gold Open Access, by the publisher BioMed Central. It is freely available (with a Creative Commons attribution licence) either from the publisher or from our repository.

8000th article:
Title: Changes in selective pressures associated with human population expansion may explain metabolic and immune related pathways enriched for signatures of positive selection
Journal: BMC Genomics



6 July 2016

Wellcome Open Research: a new publication initiative

Wellcome Open Research is a new initiative which allows researchers to publish their results faster and more transparently. The service is powered by F1000Research which is an innovative publishing platform that uses post-publication peer-review to eradicate publication delays. By using this platform Wellcome research will be published immediately on submission (presumably with the status 'awaiting peer-review' if it follows closely the F1000 processes), this is then followed by formal peer-review. Wellcome also say that peer-review will be transparent and open, with referees' reports and names published alongside the paper. This is said to encourage more constructive feedback, as well as allowing reports to be cited.

Besides publication speed, another advantage of using WOR (or F1000 for that matter) is that there is wider scope for the sorts of material that can be published. As well as standard narrative articles researchers can also publish negative results and datasets, as well as incremental findings.

Using WOR to publish results is fully compliant with the Trust's open access policy and also complies with the requirements for data sharing. APCs for Wellcome funded research will also be funded centrally by Wellcome Trust.

Is it important to point out that Wellcome is not requiring any grant recipients to use this new service. But they hope authors will look at the service and recognise the benefits it offers in terms of transparency, the types of content that can be included, and the speed of publication. Robert Kiley, Head of Digital Services at Wellcome also comments that “One of the long-term aims of this approach is to start a shift in research and researcher assessment away from journal-based measures and towards direct assessment of the output itself, whether it be an article, or in another form such as a dataset or software tool.” http://f1000.com/resources/160706_WellcomeOpenResearchFINAL.pdf

Wellcome Open Research is due to launch in autumn 2016, so watch this space.

31 May 2016

Open Access Week 2016: "Open in Action"

http://www.openaccessweek.org CC BY 4.0

The theme of Open Access Week 2016 will be "Open in Action". Open Access Week is an international initiative designed to raise the profile of Open Access and push towards publishing 'open by default'.

Open Access Weeks have always encouraged action as well as words. But this year's OAW takes this a step further, encouraging all stakeholders to take positive concrete steps to make their research openly available and to encourage others to follow suit. "Open in action" is about highlighting the actual concrete examples of how Open Access is being promoted by researchers, librarians, and students alike, whether through depositing accepted manuscripts, running open access journals, providing training and guidance, etc...

“As Open Access becomes a more and more familiar concept, we must focus on the small steps everyone can take to make openness in research a reality,” said Heather Joseph, Executive Director of SPARC. “This year’s theme will help showcase these actions, the individuals who are leading by example, and the ways this openness advances science and scholarship.” (www.sparcopen.org CC BY 4.0)

Open Access Week is celebrated by individuals, publishers, and institutions all over the world. If you want to find out more or get involved visit the website: www.openaccessweek.org. If you have any ideas about events in St Andrews please get in touch with us, email us at openaccess@st-andrews.ac.uk.

Open Access Week 2016 will be held between 24-30 October.