Open access in chemistry: from ACS Spring Meeting 2011


Published on

Open access in chemistry: information wants to be free. A presentation given at the Internet and Chemistry session at the ACS Spring National Meeting 2011.

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Open access in chemistry: from ACS Spring Meeting 2011

  1. 1. Open access in chemistry:information wants to be free?<br />Jan Kuras, Deborah Kahn, Bryan Vickery<br />Chemistry Central<br />London, UK<br />American Chemical Society National Meeting, March 27-31, 2011<br />Technical session: Internet and Chemistry<br />
  2. 2. Information wants to be free? <br />Free of access restrictions? <br />Free of charge? <br />Free of standards and organization?<br />
  3. 3. Objective:“An honest and philosophical assessment of open access in chemistry”<br />A good time to review...<br />20 years of more widespread interest in OA...<br />Over 10 years since BioMed Central, PubMed Central, PLoS started...<br />(10 years since Internet Journal of Chemistry launched...)<br />About 5 years since PubChem, Chemistry Central, ChemSpider, eMolecules started...<br />A major Study of Open Access Publishing (SOAP) undertaken in 2010 <br />No scientific concepts were harmed in the making of this presentation<br />
  4. 4. What Open Access is<br />Free & permanent unrestricted online access<br />Authors retain copyright<br />Data can be redistributed and reused freely<br />What Open Access isn’t<br /><ul><li>Self publishing
  5. 5. A means to bypass peer review</li></li></ul><li>What motivated open access?<br />Serials crisis: rising subscription prices, decreasing library budgets<br />Online publishing opportunities & technologies, and subsequent data linking, integration, reuse and mining<br />The “Open” movement: open data, open source, open standards, open access<br />Unrestricted access to publicly funded research to maximize impact<br />
  6. 6. Significant timelines in the open access movement 1991-2011<br />PubChem<br />OASPA<br />SPARC<br />eMolecules<br />Chemistry<br />initiatives<br />Bethesda<br />Statement<br />ChemSpider<br />Open<br />Archives <br />Initiative<br />Budapest<br />Initiative<br />Chemistry<br />Central<br />ChEMBL<br />arXiv<br />2010<br />2004<br />2002<br />1998<br />2000<br />2008<br />2006<br />1991<br />NCBI/<br />GenBank<br />Berlin <br />Declaration<br />BioMed<br />Central<br />PLoS<br />PubMed<br />NIH OA <br />mandate<br />Wellcome <br />OA mandate<br />ICSA<br />US Federal Research<br />Public Access Act<br />PubMed<br />Central<br />Biomedicine<br />initiatives<br />
  7. 7. Chemistry publishing: current position<br />Number of chemistry journals? Well, CAS indexes over 1,500 core journals<br />No chemistry-specific server for peer-reviewed papers cf. PubMed Central<br />No pre-print culture cf. arXiv for physics<br />No funder mandates such as Wellcome Trust, NIH<br />University/Research institute mandates frequently not implemented by chemists<br />
  8. 8. Open access in chemistry: current position<br />Directory of Open Access Journals: approx. 130 chemistry journals (amongst approx. 6,000 total OA journals)<br />Publishers include: Chemistry Central; Beilstein; Hindawi; Bentham; MDPI<br />Lots of Society, University and Independent journals<br />IUCr Acta Crystallographica Section E: Structure Reports Online<br />Business model: article-processing charge (APC)<br />Either passed on to author or covered by publisher<br />Major publishers allow authors to make papers OA through additional payment<br />ACS; RSC; Wiley-Blackwell; Springer ; Elsevier <br />Some publishers allow self-archiving<br />RSC; Elsevier; Springer; Nature<br />
  9. 9. Journals listed in<br />Chemistry<br />journals<br />~130 OA chemistry journals<br />
  10. 10. Recent studies & reports on OA<br />The value of new scientific communication <br />models for chemistry (Velden, Lagoze: 2009)<br />Open access to the scientific journal literature: <br />situation 2009 (Björk et al: 2010)<br />Study of Open Access Publishing <br />(SOAP 2010)<br />
  11. 11. Open Access to the Scientific Journal Literature: Situation 2009<br />OA prevalence on an article basis accessible through Google search<br />Random sample of 1,837 science journals<br />Sources: Web of Science; Scopus; DOAJ, Ulrich’s Periodicals Directory<br />9.7% Chemistry journals<br />Study year was 2008; time of study was Sept-Oct 2009 to ensure capture of “embargoed” and delayed OA articles<br />Overall, 20.4% papers were freely available <br />8.5% in OA journals (“Gold”); 11.9% in repositories (“Green”)<br />At 13%, chemistry has the lowest share of OA papers<br />5.5% in OA journals (“Gold”); 7.4% in repositories (“Green”)<br />Earth sciences (33%); Physics (23.5%); Medicine (22%); Biological sciences (19%)<br />
  12. 12. Value of new scientific communication models for chemistry<br />Failure of new communication models in chemistry<br />Compare GenBank, PubMed Central, arXiv<br />Barriers not technical: chemists embracing open initiatives & technologies<br />CML, InChI, open source tools, open notebook science, OA journals and repositories<br />Issue of latency: delayed in comparison with other disciplines?<br />Complex socio-technical issues: IP and secrecy about research details?<br />Influence of societies and society publishing <br />with commercial interests and proven journal business models<br />Influence of journal prestige, impact factors, citation advantage, etc.<br />The “reward system” is coupled to the communication system by relying on IFs and citations, which makes chemists risk-averse in trying new models<br />
  13. 13. Study of Open Access Publishing (SOAP)<br />Multidisciplinary study including physical, life and social sciences, financed by the European Commission<br />Coordinated by CERN with Springer, SAGE & BioMed Central; Max Planck Digital Library; and UK Science & Technology Facilities Council<br />To “describe and compare the offering and demand for open access publishing in peer-reviewed journals”<br />Assessment by large scale multidiscipline international survey<br />Reached over 1.5 million recipients with over 54,000 respondents<br />42,000 Responses analyzed, including over 2,300 chemists<br />Caveat: “self-selection” bias in favour of scientists with an interest in OA<br />
  14. 14. Demographics: chemists’ experience and affiliation<br />n=2338<br />
  15. 15. Number of OA articles published by respondents in last 5 years<br />By subject areas<br />
  16. 16. Would OA journals be beneficial in chemistry?<br />Smallest “Yes”<br />in survey<br />n=2308<br />
  17. 17. Percentage of researchers who say OA journals would be beneficial<br />By subject area<br />
  18. 18. Percentage of chemists who say that OA journals would be beneficial<br />By research experience<br />“Emerging” <br />chemists?<br />
  19. 19. Less<br />Society<br />influence?<br />
  20. 20. Why are OA journals beneficial in chemistry?<br />n=967<br />
  21. 21. Why aren’t OA journals beneficial in chemistry?<br />n=192<br />
  22. 22. What are the reasons not to publish in OA journals?<br />Same across all sciences<br />n=503<br />
  23. 23. Publication fee charged for last OA article?<br />n=1058<br />
  24. 24. How was the publication fee covered?<br />n=381<br />
  25. 25. How easy was it to obtain funds for publication?<br />n=330<br />
  26. 26. The prevalence of Impact Factors in OA journals<br />Compared to<br />
  27. 27. Finally, responses from chemists on positive, neutral and negative statements about open access<br />
  28. 28. n=2139<br />n=2131<br />n=2140<br />
  29. 29. n=2137<br />n=2124<br />n=2144<br />
  30. 30. n=2133<br />n=2123<br />n=2140<br />
  31. 31. Analysis and Conclusions<br />Chemistry has the lowest share of OA journals and papers amongst the physical and life sciences<br />Chemists have similar concerns around quality and funding as exist(ed) in other sciences<br />Plus there are further habitual and cultural issues in chemistry, e.g. society influence, the reward system<br />There are positive indications of support for open access in chemistry<br />Is OA in chemistry approx. 5 years behind life sciences?<br />
  32. 32. Positive signs from SOAP<br />Almost 80% of chemists agree that OA journals are beneficial <br />Equally spread across experience levels and types of research institute<br />Compares favourably with biology and medicine at 90%<br />Major reasons why OA is considered beneficial<br />Benefit to the scientific community, author and public<br />Financial considerations<br />Over 50% of chemists have published 1 or more papers in OA journals<br />Contributions from biochemists, medicinal chemists, cheminformaticians, crystallographers<br />Compares unfavourably with over 80% of biologists<br />
  33. 33. The obstacles<br />Major reasons for not publishing in OA journals for chemists:<br />Lack of funding , presence of publication fees (44%)<br />Perception of journal quality (38%)<br />Publication fee charged:<br />Almost 60% were not charged<br />For remainder: fee included in research funds (30%) or unassigned research funds used (30%)<br />Over 50% of chemists state it is difficult to obtain funds<br />Fewer than 50% of chemists in universities and research institutes are likely to publish in OA journals<br />
  34. 34. Changes for OA to grow in chemistry<br />Change in habits, culture and the conservatism amongst chemists<br />Satisfaction with current model – no appetite for change<br />Support for university/research institute OA mandates<br />Attitudes of societies, influence of society publishing <br />with commercial interests and proven journal business models<br />Perceptions of journal prestige, and influence of impact factors, citation advantage, etc.<br />The “reward system” is coupled to the communication system by relying on IFs and citations, making chemists risk-averse in trying new models<br />Availability and provision of publication funds<br />From funding bodies and universities/research institutes <br />OA Mandates from funding agencies and universities/research institutes<br />
  35. 35. Factors to accelerate progress<br />Advocacy amongst key opinion leaders in chemistry<br />OA chemistry journals obtaining Impact Factors<br />Transfer of high quality journals to OA model<br />More chemists supporting open initiatives and technologies<br />In outliers e.g. cheminformatics, crystallography<br />Embracing mainstream chemistry<br />The growth of the “Open” movement: <br />Open data, open source, open access, open notebooks<br />
  36. 36. Our prediction.....<br />“Over the next 5 years, open access in chemistry will continue to grow steadily in support and in publication volumes. This will be primarily driven by chemists in outlying subject areas wanting to enhance the visibility, verifiability and reproducibility of their data, and to a lesser extent by mainstream researchers. Important ‘tipping points’ will be increased availability of funds, OA mandates from funders and universities/research institutes, and journals obtaining and improving their impact factors.”<br />
  37. 37. Thank you for your attention<br />Jan Kuras<br /><br /><br /><br />twitter @Chem_Central<br />...come talk to me...<br />