The Open Access movement gains momentum – should young scientists care?

7,089 views
7,052 views

Published on

This presentation acommodated a talk I held at the 14th PhD retreat of the two Berlin life science institutes MDC and FMP. Other participants included Zena Werb (UCSF), Helmut Kettenmann (MDC), Paul Schultze-Motel (Helmholtz OA Office) and Angelika Lex (Elsevier).

The main introductory points have bee adressed by a moderator before, so I don't introduce definitions of green and gold open access. The talk is focused on open access journals (what is commonly perceived as "the" open access) and the PhD's students view on it, but also mentions the possibility of deposition of "unfree" publications in publicly accessable repositories ("green OA") as an alternative.

The goal of the discussion and the presentation was to raise awareness for the journal crisis, the possibility of funding and fee waivers in OA journals, and scientist's vs. publisher's interests.

Published in: Education, Technology, Business
2 Comments
8 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • @YimeiZhu Thank you for your comment. This presentation is not complete by any means, but merely a starting point for the panel discussion. So there is still plenty to say for sure. Repositories have been mentioned in the presentation and have been covered more extensively later in the discussion.
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
  • Surely young scientists should care. But do they know the difference between Gold OA & green OA? Your presentation is mainly about gold OA, when there are lots of money involved, it is hard to practice gold OA. but green OA is free for young scientists to practise. how many of them can be bothered to deposit their paper? time, effort? More importantly, how many of them know what green OA is and what a repository is? (ignorant or no knowledge at all) I'm looking to find out that in my research!
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
No Downloads
Views
Total views
7,089
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
6
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
36
Comments
2
Likes
8
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • Noone asks to eleminate costs, but to reduce them\n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • \n
  • The Open Access movement gains momentum – should young scientists care?

    1. 1. The Open Access movement gains momentumWhy should young scientists care? Martin Ballaschk panel discussion @ joint MDC/FMP retreat ’12
    2. 2. Open Access is said to be a solution for ... The serials crisis 400• library / budget problems Subscription prices Inflation• access / paywall problems 300 Journals purchased• copyright / permission problems 200•… 100 0 -100 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 20 20 20 20 20 Modified from ARL: http://www.arl.org/bm~doc/arlstats06.pdf, http://www.arl.org/bm~doc/arlstats08.pdf graph via Björn Brembs
    3. 3. Open Access is said to be a solution for ... Adjusted operating margin serials crisis The (%) ELSEVIER 50.0• library / budget problems• access / paywall40.0 problems 400 300 Subscription prices Inflation Journals purchased 35.7 37.3• copyright / permission problems 33.4 30.0 31.7 200 34.9•… 20.0 100 10.0 0 0 -100 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08 19 19 19 19 19 19 19 20 20 20 20 20 source: Reed Annual Report 2011 Modified from ARL: http://www.arl.org/bm~doc/arlstats06.pdf, http://www.arl.org/bm~doc/arlstats08.pdf graph via Björn Brembs
    4. 4. 2012 Janet Finch & the British government Neelie Kroes & the EU commissioninitiated by mathematician Timothy Gowers
    5. 5. Does Open Access have any disadvantages for scientists?
    6. 6. „““There are traditional currents in academia thatlook down upon use of open access, regarding itas less scholarly than peer-reviewed journals you must pay the earth for.” PhD student (Social sciences) “Researchers of Tomorrow” study by JISC & British Library
    7. 7. „““If your funding is patchy or non-existent how can you compete? Is it even going to be possible to be an independent researcher in any meaningful sense?” Mark Carrigan, sociologist from Warwick University on his blog at http://markcarrigan.net/
    8. 8. „““Why should the business model of a journal influence my publishing choice?” “How would the publishing industry be able to survive and innovate without the profits from subscriptions?” (FMP Students)
    9. 9. Lets address these doubts one by one
    10. 10. “OA is less scholarly” “OA is not high- impact”
    11. 11. „“ “There is growing evidence […] that journals converting to OA see a rise in their submission and citation impact.” “[I]n each of the broad subject areas studied Peter Suber, “Open Access” there was at least one OA title that ranked at or near the top of its field.” Thomson Scientific (2004), “Open Access Journals in the ISI Citation Databases: Analysis of Impact Factors and Citation Patterns”“OA is not high- impact”
    12. 12. „“ “There is growing evidence […] that journals converting to OA see a rise in their submission and citation impact.” “[I]n each of the broad subject areas studied Peter Suber, “Open Access” there was at least one OA title that ranked at or near the top of its field.” Thomson Scientific (2004), “Open Access Journals in the ISI Citation Databases: Analysis of Impact Factors and Citation Patterns”“OA is not high- impact”
    13. 13. “Why should the businessmodel of a journal influence “OA is too expensive my publishing choice?” for authors” PLOS Biology US$2900 PLOS Medicine US$2900 PLOS Computational Biology US$2250 PLOS Genetics US$2250 PLOS Pathogens US$2250 PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases US$2250 PLOS ONE US$1350
    14. 14. „“ “We offer a complete or partial fee waiver for authors who do not have funds to cover publication fees.” Public Library of Science, Publication Fees“OA is too expensive 70% of OA journals are free; for authors” 75% of traditional journals charge fees for color images, additional pages, etc. GREEN Open Access deposit “unfree” papers in repositories, they go online after a publisher-set embargo (usually ~6-12 months)
    15. 15. „“ “We offer a complete or partial fee waiver for authors who do not have funds to cover publication fees.” Public Library of Science, Publication Fees“OA is too expensive 70% of OA journals are free; for authors” 75% of traditional journals charge fees for color images, additional pages, etc. GREEN Open Access deposit “unfree” papers in repositories, they go online after a publisher-set embargo (usually ~6-12 months)
    16. 16. „“ “We offer a complete or partial fee waiver for authors who do not have funds to cover publication fees.” Public Library of Science, Publication Fees“OA is too expensive 70% of OA journals are free; for authors” 75% of traditional journals charge fees for color images, additional pages, etc. A: Gr een O by Els evier: op pose d ’12 GREEN Open Access ct, until Feb rch Wo rks A r Resea papers in repositories, ort fo “unfree” lawmakers p deposit sup they go ng’ oafter S publisher-set embargo online f U a ‘sp onsori (usually ~6-12resspeople) cong months) .0 00 to 31 (2 011: $30
    17. 17. “OA is not sustainable” “Publishers add“Publishers need profits significant value”for costly investments” “Peer review and innovation costs”
    18. 18. „“ “OA is not sustainable”“BioMed Central has a very healthy margin, more than double digits. It is not marginally profitable but a very sound business.” Derk Haank, CEO of Springer largest OA publisher, for-profit
    19. 19. „“ “OA is not sustainable”“BioMed Central has a very healthy margin, more than double digits. It is not marginally profitable but a very sound business.” Derk Haank, CEO of Springer largest OA publisher, for-profit
    20. 20. “Publishers have costs: peer review organisation & technological innovation” 8x € 8300 / article >> ~ € 1000 / article~ € 2 billion subscription revenue ~240000 Articles / a
    21. 21. “Publishers have costs: peer review organisation & technological innovation” 8x True, but: € 8300 / article ~ € 2 billion subscription revenue >> ~ € 1000 / articlewhat do w ~240000 Articles / a e get for t he money?
    22. 22. “Publishers add significant value” most work & the most important work in science publishing is done for free by scientists© jorge cham, phdcomics.com
    23. 23. „“ naturescienceandcell [ney·cher·sahy·uhns·uhnd·sel] -noun: 1. General science journals that cause researchers to temporarily lose their sanity. Matt Hodgkinson, a science journal editor © jorge cham, phdcomics.com “Publishers add journal impact factor is not asignificant value” predictor for quality
    24. 24. „“ Impact Factor as a predictor of journal unreliability naturescienceandcell [ney·cher·sahy·uhns·uhnd·sel] -noun: 1. General science journals that cause researchers to temporarily lose their sanity. Matt Hodgkinson, a science journal editor © jorge cham, phdcomics.com “Publishers add journal impact factor is not asignificant value” predictor for quality http://bjoern.brembs.net/comment-n811.html
    25. 25. technological innovation no format diversityno global search n o statistics no linked references no networking feature very little supplemental information ... it’s like the web in 1995!
    26. 26. Why you should supportaccess everyone benefits, even publishers visibility impact research is useless if its not shared
    27. 27. Thank you for your attention
    28. 28. AbstractThe Open Access movement gains momentum – why should young scientists care?ABOUTMartin Ballaschk graduated 2009 in Biology at the Postdam University and is now a PhD Studentin the FMPs Solution NMR group. He got interested in the discussion about Open Access afterseveral thousands of scientists declared to boycott Elsevier, because the publishers businesspractice is said to be detrimental to the progress of science.ABSTRACTOpen Access (OA) seems to be the publishing model of the future: european funding bodiesrecently reinforced their commitment to Open Access publishing, thousands of scientists signed apetition against the business practice of Elsevier and innovative publishing platform like eLife andPeerJ emerge. But research by the British Library and JISC suggests that myths andmisunderstandings about OA are prevalent.After all, why should PhD students care? Isnt it all just about reducing costs for libraries, whilestudents and postdocs are required to compete even for publishing funding? Why should thebusiness model of a journal influence the choice where to publish? Do young scientists have a freechoice? What about those who cant pay for gold OA? Or will OAs broad and enhancedaccessibility outweigh these caveats, maybe even enhance impact and let benefit everyone but thepublishing industry?

    ×