The Open Scholarship Initiative (OSI) is a diverse, inclusive, global network of high level experts working together to develop the future of open scholarship.
@Looptopper No. To the contrary, a number of studies showed no connection and even harm (via a flood of preprint garbage amplified by the media). It’s certainly legitimate to cite increased data sharing, but these sharing networks are separate, and not OA-related. Happy to email details.
In research, we know there are many types of open outcomes and solutions. A flexible approach to creating open policies that embraces and learns from this diversity will better meet researchers’ needs, and will also help us reduce unintended consequences. https://t.co/hQZEAsVYGQ
@jasonpriem Maybe call it something else? No one considers citations or publishing activity (or budget, or personnel, etc) to be a measure or impact, importance, productivity, etc. But many organizations (e.g., RCUK) attempt to consider many of these metrics together to measure “impact.”
@AmeetDoshi@RickyPo@AsensioResearch @matteozullo_mz @LSEImpactBlog Two other points: (1) Nice work and congrats. Your study may not directly describe OA use as the term is commonly used today, but it is still very helpful: and (2) For-profits aren’t the bad guys (non-profits make money too). Our common challenge is to help all improve access.
@AmeetDoshi@RickyPo@AsensioResearch @matteozullo_mz @LSEImpactBlog It is indeed, but all too often, policy makers, advocates and analysts end up speaking past each other on this topic because they’re each envisioning a different form of open. Gratis is kind of a no-brainer; it’s the more specific forms (e.g, as in Plan S) that raise debate.
@AmeetDoshi@RickyPo@AsensioResearch @matteozullo_mz @LSEImpactBlog In 2011, the National Academies Press made its reports free to download (prior to 2011, these reports were only free in developing countries). Free to download is not the same as open access. In fact, you’ll notice that many reports from this period carry a copyright notice.
@AmeetDoshi@RickyPo@AsensioResearch @matteozullo_mz @LSEImpactBlog Unfortunately there is no universal definition of OA—hence the problem with many analyses of the state of OA. In general, in this field, it refers to work that is free to access, immediate, and CC-BY licensed (or close to it). Simply free to read is generally not considered OA.
SciELO in Perspective: "Scholarly publishing and electric cars: A comment on 'The big idea: should we get rid of the scientific paper?'" by @hampson_glenn of @SciComInstitute and @OSIUnited#ScholComm#DisseminationOfInformation
https://t.co/9sjEEmVGY2
.@OSIUnited has launched a survey to understand researchers' opinions on communication practices and their interest in joining a team developing new policies for communication. Plus, there's a chance to win a $100 gift card!
To fill in the survey, visit https://t.co/VTGA2snegn.
⚡️FBF: "A journal’s impact factor is simply an average of the citations that papers published in the previous 2 years attracted that year. In the majority of journals indexed in 2016, some 70% of papers were cited less times than their average."
Read more: https://t.co/6VdUTKBRqB
#GERMANY: @CISPA offering internships to 🇺🇦computer science students with an interest in cybersecurity, privacy, cryptography, or artificial intelligence. They are also happy to help them and their families find accommodation. More info: https://t.co/q31MvoET4J
#ScienceForUkraine
The open letter from Russian scientists and science journalists against the war with Ukraine currently lists more than 7.400 signatures:
https://t.co/jBeknp2v1A
Original letter: https://t.co/8Vh1EvdUDE
Attention all researchers! OSI would like to hear from you! Please take this important 10 minute survey (https://t.co/WcP112WyWv) and get entered into a drawing to win a $100 Amazon gift card (three winners will be chosen at random)!