Open Science; Scholarly communication; Institutional repositories; Green road; Gold road; OA; APC; Open peer reviewing; predatory publisher
[en] • Purpose
This article aims at describing the evolution of scientific communication, largely represented by the publication process. It notes the disappearance of the traditional publication on paper and its progressive replacement by electronic publishing, a new paradigm implying radical changes in the whole mechanism. It aims also at warning the scientific community about the dangers of some new avenues and why, rather than subcontracting an essential part of its work, it must take back a full control of its production.
The article reviews the emerging concepts in scholarly publication and aims to answer frequently asked questions concerning free access to scientific literature as well as to data, science and knowledge in general.
The article provides new observations concerning the level of compliance to institutional open access mandates and the poor relevance of journal prestige for quality evaluation of research and researchers. The results of introducing an open access policy at the University of Liège are noted.
• Social implications
Open access is, for the first time in human history, an opportunity to provide free access to knowledge universally, regardless of either the wealth or the social status of the potentially interested readers. It is an essential breakthrough for developing countries.
Open access and Open Science in general must be considered as common values that should be shared freely. Free access to publicly generated knowledge should be explicitly included in universal human rights. There are still a number of obstacles hampering this goal, mostly the greed of intermediaries who persuade researchers to give their work for free, in exchange for prestige. The worldwide cause of Open Knowledge is thus a major universal issue for the 21st Century.
Library & information sciences
Author, co-author :
Rentier, Bernard ; Université de Liège > Département des sciences de la vie > Département des sciences de la vie
Brembs, B., Button, K., Munafò, M., Deep impact: unintended consequences of journal rank (2013) Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7. , http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00291, (accessed, 5 June 2016
Fang, F.C., Casadevall, A., Morrison, R.P., Retracted science and the retraction index (2011) Infection and Immunity, 79 (10), pp. 3855-3859. , http://iai.asm.org/content/79/10/3855.full, (accessed, 5 June 2016
Harnad, S., The green road to open access: a leveraged transition (2007) The Culture of Periodicals from the Perspective of the Electronic Age, pp. 99-106. , http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/265753/, Gacs, A (Eds), (accessed, 5 June 2016, L’Harmattan
Harnad, S., Open access: what, where, when, how and why (2015) Ethics, Science, Technology, and Engineering: An International Resource, , http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/361704/1/ESTEarticle-OA-Harnad.pdf, Holbrook, J.B. and Mitcham, C (Eds), (accessed, 5 June 2016, 2nd ed., Encyclopedia of Science, Technology, and Ethics, MacMillan Reference, Farmington Hills MI
Harnad, S., Brody, T., Vallieres, F., Carr, L., Hitchcock, S., Gingras, Y., Oppenheim, C., Hilf, E., The access/impact problem and the green and gold roads to open access (2004) Serials Review, 30 (4). , www.nature.com/nature/focus/accessdebate/21.html, (accessed, 5 June 2016
Hitchcock, S., (2013) The effect of open access and downloads (‘hits’) on citation impact: a bibliography of studies, , http://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.html, (accessed, 5 June 2016, Open Citation Project
Lehky, S., (2011) Peer evaluation and selection systems. adaptation and maladaptation of individuals and groups through peer review, , https://books.google.be/books?id=SW_6Q_I5R-cC&printsec=frontcover&dq=inauthor:%22Serge+Lehky%22&hl=fr&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi4xpeI973LAhWBkQ8KHSqPD8UQ6AEICjAA#v=onepage&q&f=false, (accessed, 5 June 2016, Google Books
Link, A., US and non-US submissions: an analysis of reviewer bias (1998) JAMA, 280 (3), pp. 246-247. , http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=187751, (accessed, 5 June 2016
Matosin, N., Franck, E., Newell, K.A., Negativity towards negative results: a discussion of the disconnect between scientific worth and scientific culture (2014) Disease Models & Mechanisms, 7 (2), pp. 171-173. , www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3917235/#__ffn_sectitle.html, accessed, 5 June 2016
Neuberger, J., Counsell, C., Impact factors: uses and abuses (2002) European Journal of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, 14 (3), pp. 209-211. , www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11953682, (accessed, 5 June 2016
Pinfield, S., Salter, J., Bath, P.A., The ‘total cost of publication’ in a hybrid open-access environment: institutional approaches to funding journal article-processing charges in combination with subscriptions (2015) Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, , http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/83525/, accessed, 5 June 2016
Piwowar, H.A., Day, R.S., Fridsma, D.B., Sharing detailed research data is associated with increased citation rate (2007) PLOS One, 2 (3), p. 308. , http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0000308, p. (accessed, 5 June 2016
The impact factor game (2006) PLOS Medicine, 3 (6), p. 291. , http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0030291, p. (accessed, 5 June 2016
Pontika, N., Knoth, P., Cancellieri, M., Pearce, S., (2015) Fostering Open Science to research using a taxonomy and an eLearning portal, , https://doc-00-20-docs.googleusercontent.com/docs/securesc/ha0ro937gcuc7l7deffksulhg5h7mbp1/sq1ounatsavblpihi1q2k079l07vgcgk/1459152000000/08925338233553404531/*/0ByewXV9UyaMtVnFVd3FWNklBNTA?e=download, (accessed, 5 June 2016, I-Know ‘15 - Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Knowledge Technologies and Data-driven Business, ACM, New York, NY
Seglen, P.O., Why the impact factor of journals should not be used for evaluating research (1997) British Medical Journal, 314 (7079), pp. 498-502. , www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2126010/pdf/9056804.pdf, (accessed, 5 June 2016, :
Suber, P., Open access (2012) The Book, , http://bit.ly/oa-book, (accessed, 5 June 2016, Essential knowledge Series, MIT Press
Swan, A., (2012) Policy Guidelines for the Development and Promotion of Open Access, p. 76. , http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0021/002158/215863e.pdf, p. (accessed, 5 June 2016, UNESCO, Paris
Van Noorden, R., Sluggish data sharing hampers reproducibility effort (2015) Nature, 483, pp. 531-533. , www.nature.com/news/sluggish-data-sharing-hampers-reproducibility-effort-1.17694, accessed, 5 June 2016
Wennerås, C., Wold, A., Nepotism and sexism in peer-review (1997) Nature, 387, pp. 341-343. , www.cs.utexas.edu/users/mckinley/notes/ww-nature-1997.pdf, accessed, 5 June 2016, availableat:
Whyte, A., Tedds, J., (2011) Making the case for research data management, , www.dcc.ac.uk/resources/briefing-papers, (accessed, 5 June 2016, DCC Briefing Papers, Digital Curation Centre, Edinburgh
Matthews, D., High rejection rates by journals ‘pointless’. Analysis suggests higher selectivity fails to increase journals’ impact factors (2016) Times Higher Education, , www.timeshighereducation.com/news/high-rejection-rates-by-journals-pointless, (accessed, 5 June 2016
Renaville, F., (2013) A mandate for open access: the university of Liège (ULg) and ULg Library, , http://initiatives.exlibrisgroup.com/2013/05/a-mandate-for-open-access-university-of.html, (accessed, 5 June 2016, Ex Libris Initiatives Blog
Swan, A., (2010) The Open Access Citation Advantage: Studies and Results to Date, , http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/268516/, (accessed, 5 June 2016, University of Southampton
Wagner, B., Open access citation advantage: an annotated bibliography (2010) Issues in Science and Technology Librarianship, , www.istl.org/10-winter/article2.html, (accessed, 5 June 2016