At ALA 2014, academic librarians working as publishers gathered to discuss the state of their partnerships and what needs to happen to move the budding library publishing industry forward at the panel “Libraries in the Publishing Game: New Roles from Content to Access.” Melinda Dermody, head of access and sharing at Syracuse University libraries, moderated the panel, which included Catherine Mitchell, director of the Access & Publishing group at the California Digital Library (CDL), Rebecca Kennison Director of the Center for Digital Research and Scholarship at Columbia University, and Cyril Oberlander, library director at the State University of New York (SUNY) Geneseo.
I’ve written before about what I called the two cultures that sometimes clash, the commercial culture of a lot of scientific publishing and the gift culture of academia. In addition to clashes of culture, there are clashes of values. Thanks to the recent brouhaha surrounding the Taylor & Francis journal Prometheus: Critical Studies in Innovation, another clash of values has emerged, that of academics editing a journal to encourage debate and that of commercial publishers trying to stifle debate about their methods.
Journal price data is important for budget management processes, but price alone is not the sole factor determining value. Some metrics, like Impact Factor, have become important in assessing value, and similar value metrics will only increase in importance in the future. The implementation of the Counter 4 during 2014 will expand the availability of usage data from journals, databases, ebooks, and multimedia to support better decision-making. Building upon COUNTER (Counting Online Usage of Networked Electronic Resources) and working with the digital object identifier (DOI) and ORCID (open researcher and contributor ID) identifier, the PIRUS (Publisher and Institutional Repository Usage Statistics) Code of Practice is designed to provide usage data at the individual article level, consolidating usage across platforms.
The birth of the World Wide Web 25 years ago was the big bang event that spurred more change in the serials and scholarly publishing world than seen in the century that preceded it. Since that time, we have rapidly evolved from the print world to that of e-journals, e-journal packages, and open access (OA). But in the serials ecosystem, as in nature, not all things evolve at the same rate, and the cumulative impact of subtle steps can bring about profound change over time. Despite some notable events, such as the purchase of Mendeley by Elsevier, the sale of Springer to BC Partners, and the launch of SCOAP 3, there was no major disruption in the serials world during 2013.
How do you judge how much a scientific study or academic article has been used? You can see how frequently it’s cited, but since researchers and academics read and are influenced by plenty of things that don’t get formally checked in their work, that doesn’t tell the whole story. Researcher Philip Davis is trying to provide some new answers to that question by taking a look at ‘usage half-life,’ in an effort to learn more about the academic publishing life cycle.
Vendor relations are a mixed bag. They can range from mutual respect and support to contempt and contentiousness. Academic librarians need to exchange experiences and information, but it will really help if someone is listening.
As more and more countries embrace policies that drive government funded research into Open Access publishing, an Open Access standard in the future is looking less like a possibility and more like an inevitability. But in a paper released earlier this week, Dr. Richard Wellen of York University, Toronto, argues that an Open Access future in practice could be very different from what it looks like on paper.
The stock market has hit record highs, and unemployment has reached the lowest level since the recession began. Despite this good news, the library economic environment has not seen commensurate improvement. There continues to be a struggle to find the resources needed to support library collections and services, and conditions remain highly unsettled.
When a small college has to cut subscriptions because they’re too expensive, it’s not usually news. But when Jenica Rogers, library director at SUNY Potsdam, blogged about cancelling subscriptions to the American Chemical Society (ACS)’s journals because they alone would have used up 10 percent of the library’s acquisitions budget, it struck a chord with many.
Scientific journal publisher Elsevier launched a pilot project testing peer review transparency as part of its ongoing Content Innovation project, the company announced on April 2. Review reports for articles in Elsevier’s Agricultural and Forest Meteorology will be published alongside the article on SciVerse ScienceDirect throughout 2012, provided they meet quality standards. If successful, the […]