Open access and social media
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Open access and social media

  • 2,688 views
Uploaded on

Abstract: The push for open access publishing gained significant momentum in 2012. The shift to open access is not only justified and necessary, but as a bonus also seems to enhance the impact of......

Abstract: The push for open access publishing gained significant momentum in 2012. The shift to open access is not only justified and necessary, but as a bonus also seems to enhance the impact of published research. This has big implications not only for individual researchers, but also journals and research universities via pre-existing ranking systems.

Another recent development is the increasing popularity of social media. It's adept use is becoming an integral part of science outreach. In addition, it seems that such activity can directly influence the number of article downloads and citations, although more studies are needed to ascertain this effect.

Presenter: Toma Susi received his doctorate in nanomaterials research from Aalto SCI in June 2011. He has spent the past year actively building a social media presence and advocating for open access.

http://mostlyphysics.wordpress.com

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
2,688
On Slideshare
1,131
From Embeds
1,557
Number of Embeds
7

Actions

Shares
Downloads
7
Comments
0
Likes
3

Embeds 1,557

http://mostlyphysics.wordpress.com 1,346
http://arilab.wordpress.com 184
http://bluesyemre.com 12
https://mostlyphysics.wordpress.com 12
https://www.facebook.com 1
http://www.facebook.com 1
http://translate.googleusercontent.com 1

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. ands o cial media –the future of research?Service goes Accessible symposiumJanuary 10, 2013 @ Otaniemi, FinlandDr. Toma Susi(Department of Applied Physics / Aalto SCI)
  • 2. Open access to research– the tide has turned
  • 3. (A very brief) history of academic publishing • Scholarly publishing started as personal letters • Moved to serials published by scholarly societies (Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 1665) • Nature (1865), Science (1880), Elsevier (1880)...Christopher Wren • A series of mergers and acquisitions (1960s onwards) concentrated journals into the hands of a few giants • Elsevier, Springer, Wiley: 42% of articles published1 • Monopolistic power: price increases, huge profits • In 1986, libraries spent 44% of their budgets on books compared with 56% on journals; in 1998, the ratio had skewed to 28% and 72% – recently even worse • The rise of alternatives (such as PLoS) and increasing protests culminated in the “academic spring” of 2011 1http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/ aug/29/academic-publishers-murdoch-socialist
  • 4. The academic spring• Research Works Act (RWA) in US congress (Dec 16, 2011) • Prohibit open access for Fed funded research (ie. NIH) • Large donations to bill sponsors from Elsevier... • Strong backlash in the blogosphere and media • Blog post by Fields medalist Timothy Gowers (Jan 21)1 • Boycott site thecostofknowledge.com (Jan 23) • Reporting by The Guardian, The Economist2, NYT, etc... • Elsevier withdraws support from RWA (Feb 27) • Hours later bill sponsors drop it • Activists happy, but want much more change • UK: minister David Willets, Finch report, RCUK • EU: open access for Horizon 2020 (80 B€)1http://gowers.wordpress.com/2012/01/21/elsevier-my-part-in-its-downfall2http://www.economist.com/node/21545974
  • 5. Yliopisto 5/2012 Tiedetoimittaja 2/2012 http://www.tiedetoimittajat.fi/lehdet/Tiedetoimittaja2_12.pdf                 /     Jani Kotakoski, Toma Susi Tiedejulkaisemisen noidankehää murtamassa Arabikevään mukaan nimetty akateeminen kevät -protestiliike alkoi matemaa- tikkojen Elsevier-kustantajaa vastaan suunnattuna protestina. Tutkijat kamppai- levat entistä riippumattomamman tieteellisen julkaisemisen puolesta kaupallis- ten kustantajien ylivaltaa vastaan. Arabikevään mukaan nimetty akatee- kustantajien välit tulehdutti suurim- yli 12 000 allekirjoitusta, eikä suinkaan minen kevät -protestiliike on jäänyt man tieteellisten lehtien kaupallisen pelkästään matemaatikoilta. suomalaisessa mediassa varsin vähäl- kustantajan Elsevierin tuki Yhdysval- le huomiolle. Muualla maailmassa se tain edustajainhuoneen Research Works on herättänyt kiinnostusta myös ei- Act (RWA) -lakialoitteelle, joka pyrki Kustantajat keräävät akateemisille suunnatuissa julkaisuis- estämään liittovaltion – eli veronmak- taloudellisen hyödyn sa, esimerkiksi aihetta laajasti käsitel- sajien – rahoittaman tutkimuksen avoi- leessä englantilaisessa The Guardian men julkaisemisen. Tutkijoiden ja kustannusyhtiöiden -lehdessä. Sosiaalisen median kataly- Itse protesti sai alkunsa kun Cam- huonojen välien perimmäinen syy on soiman liikkeen saama julkisuus on bridgen professori ja Fields-mitalisti tutkimusartikkelien päätyminen kus- nopeasti lisännyt kansalaisten ja päät- Timothy Gowers toivoi tammikuisessa tantajien yksityisomistukseen huo- täjien tietoisuutta tieteellisen julkaise- blogissaan sivustoa, jonka kautta ma- limatta siitä, että tieteentekijät tuke- misen ongelmista, mikä näyttäisi joh- temaatikot voisivat irtisanoutua työs- vat työtä merkittävällä ilmaisella työ- tavan muutoksiin kansainvälisessä tie- kentelemästä Elsevierin hyväksi. New panoksella. Tutkijathan paitsi tekevät depolitiikassa. Yorkin yliopiston tohtoriopiskelija Ty- tutkimukset myös vertaisarvioivat ar- Liikkeen tavoite on tuoda tutkimus- ler Neylon toteutti pian Gowersin toi- tikkelit ja usein vielä toimittavat jul- tulokset kaikkien saataville, kun jul- veen, ja vain kaksi päivää myöhemmin kaisut. Yliopistokirjastot puolestaan kaisutoiminta tällä hetkellä keskittyy thecostofknowledge.com alkoi kerätä tut- joutuvat ostamaan kustantajalta sato- voittoa tavoitteleville yrityksille. Vii- kijoiden nimiä boikottiin. Nyt kesä- jen lehtien niputettuja tilauksia, joten meksi liikettä tukevien tutkijoiden ja kuun alussa sivustolle on kertynyt jo lehtiin uppoaa vuosi vuodelta kasvava Akateeminen kevät -kampanja sai alkunsa Cambridgen professori Timothy Gowersin tammikuisesta blogista. Protesti ei ole ensimmäinen laatuaan.Signum 6/2012: Toma Susi & Jani Kotakoski:Kohti tutkimuksen avointa verkkojulkaisemista—hinnalla millä hyvänsä?
  • 6. A Very Brief Introduction to Open Accessby Peter Suberhttp://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/brief.htmOpen-access (OA) literature is digital, online, free of charge, and free ofmost copyright and licensing restrictions. What makes it possible is theinternet and the consent of the author or copyright-holder.OA is entirely compatible with peer review, and all the major OA initiativesfor scientific and scholarly literature insist on its importance. Just asauthors of journal articles donate their labor, so do most journal editorsand referees participating in peer review. OpenOA literature is not free to produce, even if it is less expensive to producethan conventionally published literature. The question is not whetherscholarly literature can be made costless, but whether there are better Accessways to pay the bills than by charging readers and creating access barriers.Business models for paying the bills depend on how OA is delivered.There are two primary vehiclesWeek 2012 materials to research articles: Open Access for delivering OAOA journals and OA (http://openaccessweek.org/) archives or repositories.OA Journals: OA Archives or repostories:OA journals perform peer review and then make the OA archives or repositories do not perform peerapproved contents freely available to the world. Their review, but simply make their contents freely availableexpenses consist of peer review, manuscript preparation, to the world. They may contain unrefereed preprints,
  • 7. A Very Brief Introduction to Open Accessby Peter Suberhttp://www.earlham.edu/~peters/fos/brief.htmOpen-access (OA) literature is digital, online, free of charge, and free ofmost copyright and licensing restrictions. What makes it possible is theinternet and the consent of the author or copyright-holder.OA is entirely compatible with peer review, and all the major OA initiativesfor scientific and scholarly literature insist on its importance. Just asauthors of journal articles donate their labor, so do most journal editorsand referees participating in peer review. OpenOA literature is not free to produce, even if it is less expensive to producethan conventionally published literature. The question is not whetherscholarly literature can be made costless, but whether there are better Accessways to pay the bills than by charging readers and creating access barriers.Business models for paying the bills depend on how OA is delivered.There are two primary vehiclesWeek 2012 materials to research articles: Open Access for delivering OAOA journals and OA (http://openaccessweek.org/) archives or repositories.OA Journals: Open Access Explained OA Archives or repostories: (http://www.slideshare.net/UQSPADS/)OA journals perform peer review and then make the OA archives or repositories do not perform peerapproved contents freely available to the world. Their review, but simply make their contents freely availableexpenses consist of peer review, manuscript preparation, to the world. They may contain unrefereed preprints,
  • 8. Some statistics • >8500 open access journals, >3 added per day (Directory of Open Access Journals, www.doaj.org) • >36 million documents, +2 million in last 3 months (BASE, http://www.base-search.net) • PubMedCentral: 3.5 million fulltexts (17% of total) • arXiv: 750 000, RePEC: 1 million, SSRN: 350 000 Laasko & Björk, BMC Medicine 2012, 10:124 up to 17% of research papershttp://poeticeconomics.blogspot.ca now going to open access journals!1 1http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/occams-corner/2012/ oct/22/inexorable-rise-open-access-scientific-publishing
  • 9. @bmcmatt: “A striking example of a society journal improving its impact factor radically following a move to #openaccess”Matthew Cockerill (co-founder of BMC)(http://twitpic.com/a1vdy3)
  • 10. Open access impact (selected articles) • Lawrence, S. 2001. Free online availability substantially increases a papers impact. Nature 411:521 • Xia, J. and Nakanishi, K. 2012. Self-selection and the citation advantage of open access articles. Online Information Review 36:40-51 • Xia, J., Myers, R. L., and Wilhoite, S. K. 2011. Multiple open access availability and citation impact. Journal of Information Science 37:19-28 • Riera, M. and Aibar, E. 2012. Does open access publishing increase the impact of scientific articles? an empirical study in the field of intensive care medicine. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.medin.2012.04.002 • Norris, M., Oppenheim, C., and Rowland, F. 2008. The citation advantage of open-access articles. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. 59:1963-1972 • Eysenbach, G. 2006. Citation advantage of open access articles. PLoS Biol 4:e157+ • Hajjem, C., Harnad, S., and Gingras, Y. 2006. Ten-Year Cross- Disciplinary comparison of the growth of open access and how it increases research citation impact. http://arxiv.org/abs/cs.DL/0606079 • Gargouri, Y., Hajjem, C., Larivière, V., Gingras, Y., Carr, L., Brody, T., and Harnad, S. 2010. Self-Selected or mandated, open access increases citation impact for higher quality research. PLoS ONE 5:e13636+ • Bjork, B. C. and Solomon, D. 2012. Open access versus subscription journals: a comparison of scientific impact. BMC Medicine 10:73+Thanks to Ross Mounce (http://rossmounce.co.uk/)More at http://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.html
  • 11. driven transition to free access for all 1989–1990 1995–1996 articles in all journals is possible. % of articles freely available online 1991–1992 1997–1998 ESA’s business plan is simple: it will 100 1993–1994 1999–2000 provide immediate free web access, at a fair price, to authors who want it. As the cost of 80 offering this rises (because of subscription 60 cancellations), the price will increase. No author will be required to purchase it, and 40 sales of subscriptions to the journals will continue as long as they are profitable. The 20 endpoint of this plan is uncertain, but it may lead to the demise of paper publication 0 Open access ~doubles and subscriptions, as authors and the 1 27 3 7 3 1 15 –3 institutions that support them embrace –6 4– 2– –1 8– 16 32 the number of citations! In 2001, Lawrence found that articles in computer science that were openly accessible (OA) on the 64 Figure 2: (a): Open Accessaccess and strivemorereduce costs.werewe used 1,307,038 articles (OA+N OA), Number of citations Web were cited substantially to than those that Discipline. Total replicated this effect in free Citation Impact Advantage by physics. To further test its cross-disciplinary generality, not. We have since articles published across Direct costs in 10 disciplinespercentage OA citation advantage: ((OA − N OA of the present system age OA: (OA/(OA + 12 OA)) articles, black bars; (Biology, Psychology, Sociology, Health, Political Science, N years (1992-2003) Economics, printingLaw, Business, Management). Comparing OA and NOA articles in the same include Education, paper issues, limitingAnalysis of 119,924 conference articles inaveraged across 1992-2003 and ranked by total citations, theAll disciplines from 25%-250% bycitatThe mean number of citations of openly available computerscience conference papers was 256% whitehigher than non- bars, journal/year, OA articles have consistently more articles. advantage varying show an OAcomputer science and related disciplines. Citationdiscipline andelectronicC., Harnad, S., and Gingras, Y. 2006. Ten-Year Cross-Disciplinary comparison ofopen. (Lawrence, S. 2001. Free online availability substantially Open Access access to year. Hajjem, versions, and making Impact Advantage by Country. Total articles (gray curve), percent OA articlincreases a papers impact. Nature 411:521) the growth of open access and how it increases research citation impact. http://arxiv.org/abs/cs.DL/0606079)The actual percentage of articles available past and present volumes accessible in percent OA citation advantage (white bars); averaged across all disciplines and years 1992-2003; rankOf a sample of owing to limitations ing i s t i c r g r e s shundreds, of T h i s r e s e alibraries.i Indirect Articles whose curve), percent OA articl research r h x a m n s t h eonline is greater,4,633 articles OpenoAccess eCitation Impact Advantagec bye Year.eTotal articles (gray authors have supplemented (c): I n a l the ion model percentarticles compared to non-OA articles access impact of articles and publishers version by self-archiving their from online potential costs are reduced (OA)between multiple openexamined, 2,280 (49%) were OA andextraction of article informationcontrolling citation advantage (white bars): 1992-2003, journal s uacrosst iall - disciplines.s sNo yearlyhad a mean citation count of 9.04 OA OA for confounders, relationship availability of averaged bscrip on based acce to thewhereas the mean for TA articles was locating twice as likely to be cited restricted and the citation advantage in final draft to make it accessible free for severely articles access by researchers owndocuments and limitations in size of the OA citation advantage, but %OA is growing from year to year (see Table 1). Note t remained in5.76. There appears to be a clear the the first 4–10 mo after publication, with by collecting data of OA copies and all on the web (OA) are cited significantlyarticles on the web. Only points with greater make the to 2.9 growth citation numbersin developing more than articles in the same journal andcitation advantage for those articleslogarithmic ratio increasing smaller institutions and in 20 top library the odds (to OA 10–16 visible).than 100 articles are computed. mo an immediate OA article on the Nonetheless,correlation journals. year that havegreater formade more The OAthat are OA as opposed to those thatare TA. This advantage, however, as countries. and discover a many stakeholders after publication. Articles published We information science between advantage is not been the OA. citablevaries between disciplines, with journal site have higher impact than the two variables; namely, multiple articles, not because of a quality bias fromsociology having the highest citation (Figure 3.b) which means that within each citation range,a the percentage ofwhat to makethat but O self-archived or otherwise openly © 2001 Macmillan Magazines LtdOA articles. We found strong OA availability of an article has authors self-selecting articles OA, are 521advantage, but the lowest number of accessible positive impact on its citation because of a quality advantage, from usersOA articles, from the sample taken, than the percentage of articles that are The statistical analysis are all positive and very freed by Tab evidence that, even in a journal that is count. NOA (correlations self-selecting what to use and cite, high,and ecology having the highest widely available in research libraries, reveals that for every increase in OA from the constraints of selectiveindividual citation count for OA differential also increases with the citation range, being lowest for uncited articles(Gargouri, OA articles are more immediately the availability of OA articles, accessibility to subscribers only. and higharticles, but the smallest citation recognized and cited by peers than non- citation numbers increase by 2.348. Y., Hajjem, C., Larivière, V., Gingras, Y., Carr,advantage. (Norris, M., Oppenheim, C., over sixteen citations. This confirms J., Myers, R. L., and Wilhoite, S. for computer science articlesSelf- [15 OA articles published in the same (Xia, the pattern reported L., Brody, T., and Harnad, S. 2010. byand Rowland, F. 2008. The citationadvantage of open-access articles. J. If we look at our total sample of 1,307,038 articles across allmandated, open quality increases w journal. (Eysenbach, G. 2006. Citation advantage of open access articles. PLoS K. 2011. Multiple open access availability and citation impact. Journal Selected or access disciplines and years, citation impact for higher research.Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. 59:1963-1972) Biol 4:e157+) of Information Science 37:19-28) PLoS ONE 5:e13636+) (61%) of them are uncited; of the remaining 513544 (39%), 155265 (12%) have 1 citation, (4%) with 16+ citations (Figure 4, gray curve). 156845 (12%) of the total articles are OA
  • 12. Finland and Aalto • A good overview1 in Signum 4/2012 • Academy of Finland “recommends” open access • No unified national policy • University of Helsinki open access policy (2010) • Fulltexts of ALL articles should be deposited to Uni database • Not known, not followed, violates copyright (?) • Aalto preparing open access policy • A strategic tool to increase research impact (and make it to the top 100?) • Aalto Open Data very ambitious21http://ojs.tsv.fi/index.php/signum/article/view/6967/55872http://sci.aalto.fi/en/current/news/view/2012-11-07-003/
  • 13. Social media for research– a real tool or just for fun?
  • 14. Data from October 2011http://inspiredm.com/current-state-of-social-media-the-big-four-exclusive-infographic/
  • 15. Started Aug 29, 2012. Took a couple of hours to set up and tweak. 38 posts (~10 / month) ~2000 views (busiest day: 112) ResearchGate: 40 followers, following 47 peopleAll article fulltexts available, 140 downloads Google+ account: Became active in Dec 2011. ~1 post / day, mostly science topics ~4400 have me in their circles
  • 16. (Eysenbach, G. 2012. Can tweets predict citations? metrics of socialimpact based on twitter and correlation with traditional metrics ofscientific impact. Journal of Medical Internet Research 13.)
  • 17. Social media impact (selected articles) • Eysenbach, G. 2012. Can tweets predict citations? metrics of social impact based on twitter and correlation with traditional metrics of scientific impact. Journal of Medical Internet Research 13(4):e123. http://dx.doi.org/10.2196/jmir.2012 • Bar-Ilan, J., Haustein, S., Peters, I., Priem, J., Shema, H., and Terliesner, J. 2012. Beyond citations: Scholars visibility on the social web. http://arxiv.org/abs/1205.5611 • Priem, J., Piwowar, H. A., and Hemminger, B. M. 2012. Altmetrics in the wild: Using social media to explore scholarly impact. http://arxiv.org/abs/1203.4745 • Kelly, B. and Delasalle, J., 2012. Can LinkedIn and Academia.edu Enhance Access to Open Repositories? In: OR2012: the 7th International Conference on Open Repositories, Edinburgh, Scotland http://opus.bath.ac.uk/30227/1/or12-136-final.pdf • Not much solid research yet, a LOT more sure to follow...Thanks to Ross Mounce (http://rossmounce.co.uk/)
  • 18. A linear multivariate model with time and tweets as significant predictors (P < .001)could explain 27% of the variation of citations. Highly tweeted articles were 11 timesmore likely to be highly cited than less-tweeted articles (9/12 or 75% of highly tweetedarticle were highly cited, while only 3/43 or 7% of less-tweeted articles were highlycited; rate ratio 0.75/0.07 = 10.75, 95% confidence interval, 3.4–33.6). Top-cited articlescan be predicted from top-tweeted articles with 93% specificity and 75% sensitivity.(Eysenbach, G. 2012. Can tweets predict citations? metrics of social impact based on twitter Altmetrics and citations track forms of impact that are distinct, but related;and correlation with traditional metrics of scientific impact. Journal of Medical Internet neither approach is able to describe the complete picture of scholarly useResearch 13.) alone. There are moderate correlations between Mendeley and Web of Science citation (comparable to that between Web of Science and Scopus), but many altmetric indicators seem mostly orthogonal to citation. Third, articles cluster in ways that suggest several different impact “flavors,” that capture impacts on different audiences and of different types; for instance some articles (cluster B) may be heavily read and saved by scholars but seldom cited. (Priem, J., Piwowar, H. A., and Hemminger, B. M. 2012. Altmetrics in the wild: Using social media to explore scholarly impact. arXiv) No clear picture yet.
  • 19. Summary• Public pays for research – public should have access • Reporters, independent scholars, patient groups... • Stop bleeding libraries dry: price competition • >60% of EU funded research open by 2016• Citation advantage is real and tangible • Citations are the career currency... • ...and citations are 20-32.5% of Uni ranking!• How about social media? • Science outreach and public engagement • Natural for younger researchers? • Networking, contacts; citation advantage?Thank you.